Family Equality Council On FMLA: Protecting Our Families When They’re Most Vulnerable
This guest article is by Emily Hecht-McGowan, Director of Public Policy for Family Equality Council.
Today, we are celebrating the 20th anniversary of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the inclusion of our families in this important law. Since 1993, Americans have accessed benefits under FMLA over 100 million times, and we’ve worked hard as a community to make sure this protection extends to our lives and our families.
What is the Family & Medical Leave Act?
FMLA is the only federal law that allows workers to take leave without endangering their job. Eligible workers can take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for health conditions, to bond with a new child, or to care for an ill family member.
Because of our work with the US Department of Labor and our national coalition partners, the FMLA coverage was expanded in 2010 to allow non-legally recognized parents to take leave when their children are sick. In other words, due to this change many of our families now have access to this critical family benefit – including same-sex spouses or domestic partners who are unable to adopt or otherwise become legal parents to the children they are raising.
These provisions can make a tremendous difference for our families, especially when we live in states that don’t permit joint or second-parent adoptions.
What impact does this have on Families? Gina, Pauline, and Lily’s experience with FMLA
Gina Patterson and her wife Pauline were one of the first same-sex couples married in New York – and at the time Pauline was three months pregnant with their daughter Lily. Full of hope for their life together and excited to be welcoming a daughter into their lives, Gina and Pauline were grateful to be happy, healthy, and legally recognized as a family.
When Lily was finally born, Pauline, as Lily’s biological mother, was able to take 12 weeks of paid leave to care for Lily – much like mothers across the country do every day.
But as many new parents know, those 12 weeks go by quickly. Lily wasn’t nearly ready for daycare, and as two working Moms — Gina works for the New York state court system and Pauline is a music publisher – they were facing difficult decisions just as all new parents must.
Knowing that she hadn’t yet had the chance to spend time watching their baby grow and develop and caring for her, and since Gina, a lawyer, knew her options under the expanded FMLA coverage, she applied to take federal unpaid child care leave to care for Lily.
Unlike most opposite-sex couples, who have less trouble accessing these programs and services, Gina was asked for a note from Lily’s pediatrician saying that she should be able to take time off to care for her daughter.  The FMLA expansion that our community secured in 2010 ensured that Lily never lacked the love and nurturing of both her parents could provide.
Because of Gina’s background in the law she was prepared for the amount of advocacy she would need to do on her own behalf to access this coverage – and Lily benefited from Gina’s knowledge and experience.
This is a common experience for many LGBT parents, whether at the doctor’s office or at their child’s school, but not all families are as informed about the law or as prepared to take on this added burden of explaining to schools, doctors, and employers about the vagaries of the legal ties many of us have to our children.
Fortunately, Gina’s workplace was a welcoming one and once the HR department confirmed that Gina was eligible as a parent standing in loco parentis to take leave to care for Lily, and she was able to get the time off she needed.
While Gina, Pauline, & Lily’s story has a happy ending, and baby Lily was never denied having loving mothers when she needed them most, many families have been denied this vital protection.
Where do we go from here?
Many parents are unaware that this coverage exists and not all of these stories are as cut and dry.
Mothers and fathers all over the United States should be able to care for their families in their most vulnerable times without endangering their job. Because of FMLA – and specifically the inclusion of our families in it – many parents who are LGBT are covered, and can focus on the important task of caring for their family.
We are looking forward to building on our successes and to ensuring that our families are completely protected and included. However, there are still important changes to be made. Right now, same-sex spouses/partners are not currently covered under FMLA, in part because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). We are continuing to work with the Obama administration and our organizational partners to make sure this law includes us completely. We support the Family and Medical Leave Inclusion Act, which would expand the Family and Medical Leave Act to permit an employee to take up to twelve weeks of unpaid leave from work to care for their same-sex spouse/partner with a serious health condition.
We also support the Healthy Families Act, a bill that would provide paid sick leave for all workers to care for their families, including LGBT parents and same-sex spouses/partners.
For more information on these issues, please visit our the Family Equality Council’s Advocacy Center.
The Family Equality Council is on Facebook and Twitter.
Emily Hecht-McGowan is the Director of Public Policy for Family Equality Council. She previously served as the Legal Director for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network where she assisted service members impacted by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell†and related forms of discrimination. Prior to her time with SLDN, Emily was the Assistant Section Director for the American Bar Association’s Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities where she spearheaded the ABA’s civil rights, human rights and social justice policy work. Emily holds a BA in History from American University and a JD from the Columbus School of Law. She lives in Takoma Park, MD with her wife Sharon and their daughter Sadie and their trusty beagle, Ellie.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
|
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
