Visitation directive

President Obama won plaudits from Human Rights Campaign for attempting to use federal health care funding to reverse one of the most concrete consequences of the absence of same-sex marriage, the lack of visitation rights for gay and lesbian partners.

But the lens of the gay rights movement is, increasingly, full marriage equality, putting a limit on the credit Obama can win for incremental steps.

HRC called the move an "important step," with this statement from its chief, Joe Solmonese:

Discrimination touches every facet of the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, including at times of crisis and illness, when we need our loved ones with us more than ever. No one should experience what befell the Pond-Langbehn family, and the President’s action today will help ensure that the indignities Janice and her children faced do not happen to another family.

Freedom to Marry's Evan Wolfson makes the reservations more explicit:

The President's directive is a small, but welcome step forward. It addresses one of the many ways same-sex couples and their loved ones are made vulnerable and harmed by the denial of marriage and the safety-net of protections marriage brings - in this case, the assurance that a spouse can be by a loved one's hospital bedside and participate in medical decision-making at a time of great need. The Administration's step today, though small, will mean a lot to many people in harm's way. The President's memo is particularly noteworthy in its acknowledgment of how same-sex couples are uniquely affected by marriage discrimination and are thus in need of this kind of remedial presidential directive. Of course, the real cure is to end exclusion from marriage, pass the federal Respective for Marriage Act, and provide all families the full measure of protections. Piecemeal steps, addressing one protection at a time, will take up a lot more time than either the Administration or American families can afford.