Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

[Ole Jacobsen <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, 24 May 2016, Melinda Shore wrote:

> On 5/24/16 1:03 PM, John Levine wrote:
> > The answer to your question still seems to be we don't know, with a
> > great deal of variability based on the situation.  It's the same
> > answer I'd give in parts of the U.S., too.
> 
> I would not - in the US, there's recourse.
> 
> Melinda

Perhaps, but "recourse" might be just as painful and time consuming 
whether you are stuck in legal wranglings in Alabama or featured in 
the next episode of "Locked up Abroad". The pertinent question is 
still: Will the familial and parental rights of people in same-sex 
relationships be respected in Singapore?

Everything we have been told from folks in Singapore and frequent 
travelers thereto says "yes". With respect to any medical situation, 
it might be prudent to carry paperwork which documents the 
relationship. Singapore is a *major* medical destination for all of 
Asia and the IETF is by no means the first group that has had to deal 
with this issue.

Extra paperwork does indeed result in unequal treatment, but we 
already accept such inequality (which varies by destination) with 
respect to visas.

This does not mean that I am trying to change Ted's mind nor does
it mean that Singapore should or shouldn't be on our list of future
destinations. That is for the community to ultimately decide. For
now we're focused on what to do about IETF 100 specifically.


Ole