Video Interview, Tom Petrillo and Bill Reamy, June 6, 2012
- KEVIN INDOVINO: These are from my checks a week ago.
- Just give us the correct spelling
- of your first and last name.
- WILLIAM REAMY: First name is William, W-I-L-L-I-A-M.
- Last name is Reamy, R-E-A-M as in music, Y.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And, can I call you Bill?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Yes.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: When I put your name on a screen,
- what particular title would like me to put under it?
- Psychologist, psychiatrist?
- Do you want a title like that?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, you could put psychiatrist
- or you could put MD after my name.
- Please don't use psychologist.
- I'm not a psychologist, and I've never taken
- a psychology course in my life.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: OK.
- And Tom, first thing how do you want to be identified?
- And correct spelling of first and last name?
- TOM PETRILLO: Then for me it's Tom, T-O-M Petrillo,
- P-E-T-R-I-L-L-O, attorney.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Attorney.
- OK.
- Simply just attorney?
- Not attorney at law?
- TOM PETRILLO: That's fine.
- WILLIAM REAMY: Yeah, so you could use M.D. And then
- psychiatrist underneath.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: So yeah, Bill, let's start with you first.
- General question, because in the 1970s
- you were attending the U of R?
- Was that correct?
- Or no, you came to Strong for residency?
- WILLIAM REAMY: I came to Strong for my psychiatric residency
- late June of 1973.
- And I'd like to say that back then being gay
- was illegal, immoral, and sick.
- And now it's only immoral.
- And it's not even immoral any more
- in certain places, like the church where
- Tom and I got married.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: So let's talk about life
- as a gay man in the 1970s.
- What was it like?
- Two things, where were you socializing?
- But more so, where were you finding information
- about being gay?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Let me think about that.
- Are you talking about--
- KEVIN INDOVINO: It was unfair for me
- to ask you two different questions all in one.
- Just talk to me about being a gay man in the 1970s.
- What was it like?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Scary.
- I was feeling very closeted back then and being--
- training for the medical profession,
- I was very, very protective of my privacy.
- I worried a lot about people finding out.
- So it was very constricting back then.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Being at the university
- at the time that the Gay Liberation Front was also
- pretty much getting started up, did
- you get involved with the GLF at all?
- WILLIAM REAMY: No, not really.
- When I came to Rochester, I started
- into my psychiatric residency which was very intense.
- So to some extent I was very oblivious to the outside world.
- Trying to socialize was difficult.
- I think I came to Rochester with a gay guy that
- told me about a couple of bars in the area.
- And eventually I learned about the Gay Alliance
- and about the Empty Closet, which
- I thought was a really neat name for a newspaper.
- But in Rochester basically, you met people
- by meeting other people.
- There really weren't places to go to meet people.
- And going to a bar was really a place where you drank.
- You really, really couldn't meet people there.
- And that was a little scary.
- After all, Tom will tell you about that about police raids
- at bars.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Talk to me about residency
- in the field of psychiatry as a gay man
- where this was a view that still designated homosexuality
- as an illness.
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, to tell you about my residency at Strong,
- I really have to start out in Richmond, Virginia, which
- is where I did my medical school training and my internship.
- And I kind of had the idea when I came to Rochester
- that in some ways Rochester was actually
- more conservative than Richmond, Virginia was.
- I'd had a rather frightening experience.
- After I was accepted for my residency up here in Rochester,
- I got a call from the people at the Department of Psychiatry
- saying they wanted me to come up and talk again,
- because someone had called them up
- and told them that I was gay, and that I had caused a patient
- to commit suicide.
- And it was a person who I had dated and had
- stopped dating because they found him
- to be a rather angry person.
- So I came up to Rochester and I said to them, "Well, I am gay.
- But I didn't cause my patient to commit suicide."
- And they said, "Fine.
- You're welcome to go through the residency here,
- but don't tell anyone else in the department
- about your being gay, because they may not feel the same
- about it as the way we did."
- So they kind of set the tone for my being up here.
- To his credit, the chairman of the Department
- of Psychiatry at the Medical College of Virginia
- said to me, "Well, if they don't want to take you,
- you're welcome down here."
- So I did have the advantage of having someone down in Richmond
- who was supportive.
- So I did my residency.
- And I didn't talk about things.
- So there really was no one who would give me
- guidance about how to deal with gay patients.
- It's not that there was any sort of malevolence involved.
- I didn't really hear anyone making bad comments.
- But it reminded me a bit of a cartoon
- I once saw in Christopher Street magazine
- where there's a little boy kneeling by the side of the bed
- saying his prayers, saying "And God bless Uncle
- Jack and his roommate Bill, whom we don't talk about."
- So it's not that people were saying bad things,
- but there really was no one around to affirm
- me and my personhood or to counteract
- the opinion of myself that I had as a result of what psychiatry
- around me was saying.
- And I think it certainly did affect my ability
- to deal with gay patients.
- Because it made it more difficult for me
- to affirm them and help them feel comfortable
- about themselves.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And we'll touch upon that just a little bit
- more.
- Expand on it a little bit.
- Here you are, a gay man who's a psychiatrist treating clients,
- who probably some are coming to you because of their issues
- with being gay.
- You still have on the books that EMS classifications of gayness
- being a mental illness.
- How did you deal with all of that?
- Was there a conflict of interest in there at all?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, the DSM II, which
- is what we went by when I first came to Rochester,
- was a very general listing of mental disorders.
- It had not become the Bible that the DSM III and the DSM IV
- had become later on.
- Homosexuality was listed under the perversions.
- It was not a personality disorder.
- But it was lumped in with the personality disorders.
- I even looked it up in my old DSM II last night.
- It was code 302.0.
- That was homosexuality.
- Basically perversions were anything that for the object
- of which was not vaginal intercourse.
- So anything except the missionary position
- was a perversion, basically.
- What struck me is that the diagnosis really
- concentrated only on sex.
- It said nothing about affection, or caring, or love,
- which is entirely different from the way we understand it today.
- So it was basically a physical type diagnosis.
- So I basically just ignored that diagnosis.
- I never diagnosed anyone as being homosexual.
- I didn't see any need for it.
- I could diagnose people as being depressed or anxious.
- For myself, as a psychiatrist, there was this conflict
- of how could I be a psychiatrist if I
- had a psychiatric disorder, if I were sick?
- And that kind of stuck in the back of my head.
- There were a few people who kind of helped me out with that.
- A friend that I knew from Philadelphia who said, "Oh no,
- I know plenty of gay psychiatrists."
- And the chairman of the Department
- of Psychiatry at the Medical College of Virginia
- who talked more about sexuality than anyone
- at the University of Rochester did,
- and who was very supportive.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Just for my own reference,
- when was the DSM II implemented?
- Do you remember?
- WILLIAM REAMY: The DSM II?
- A long time ago.
- When I started medical school in 1968,
- the DSM II was already in existence.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: I got to do a little research on that, then.
- WILLIAM REAMY: There was a DSM I before that.
- but I don't know when it was revised.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And then eventually there
- was a three and a four.
- WILLIAM REAMY: That's correct.
- That's correct.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: You already kind of touched upon this,
- but I just kind of want to ask again.
- About your residence at Strong, homosexuality really
- wasn't talked very much about.
- WILLIAM REAMY: No, it really wasn't talked much about.
- I had the feeling that people really didn't understand it,
- did not understand the gay culture,
- had stereotyped ideas about homosexuality.
- I can give you a couple of examples.
- I was looking through a summary that a resident
- had written about a patient who was in a lesbian relationship.
- And one of his comments was she literally
- wore the pants in the family.
- And I thought that was kind of a stereotyped idea
- of gay relationships.
- Another experience I had was the residents
- would regularly get together at the home
- of a rather esteemed psychiatrist and professor
- to discuss various works of Freud.
- And someone had remarked that they had heard a radio
- program featuring gay music.
- Back in those days, there was a program
- on Thursday nights entitled Green Thursday.
- And the professor remarked, "what in the world
- is gay music?"
- and kind of poopooed it.
- And I thought it meant he really didn't
- understand that there is this whole world over there,
- and that there were other people who
- think about things in a certain way
- and have a certain affiliation.
- So I think it was more ignorance than malevolence.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And obviously, without revealing names
- or any specific case, but when a client would come to you
- and it really was coming down to the issue
- that he or she was having problems with their gayness,
- how did you counsel those people?
- What were you telling them?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, when I was a resident,
- no one came to me telling me that they were
- having problems with being gay.
- And I think that came later on, when I was in private practice
- and was really more comfortable with myself.
- I think back in those days, people just
- didn't talk to psychiatrists that much about it.
- I had one patient who was a female to male transsexual.
- And he and I had some very good conversations.
- And it was not difficult talking about that at all.
- As a matter of fact, one of my supervisors
- was just astounded that I wasn't floored by that.
- Like, I should have been.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: When did you see things starting
- to change in regards to attitudes within the psychiatry
- field toward what homosexuality really is?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, I think it was a very gradual thing.
- Of course there was the removal of homosexuality from the DSM.
- And that would have been in December of 1973.
- I don't think there was much of a change in attitudes
- back then.
- And there were a lot of people who said well, this
- is just a political thing.
- You don't change a diagnosis by a vote of the membership.
- Nevertheless, the majority of the members of the American
- Psychiatric Association voted to remove it from the list.
- Probably, I would not say that there was a change in attitudes
- until the early eighties gradually becoming greater
- and greater and greater.
- I suspect that this had something
- to do at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic and gay people
- being more in the news.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: I want to talk a little bit more on the DSM
- because I don't want to just brush over it.
- WILLIAM REAMY: OK.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Can you talk to me about really
- how significant it was for the DSM designation
- to be taken off the books?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, I think it was
- very significant for gay people no longer to be stigmatized.
- As I said, it was a gradual process.
- The fact that it was taken off the books
- didn't mean that there weren't psychiatrists who still kept it
- in their minds as a diagnosis and who
- were absolutely convinced that gay people were
- stunted in their development.
- Also there remained on the books for a short period of time
- the diagnosis of ego-dystonic homosexuality.
- Ego-dystonic just means I don't like the way I am.
- So it was if you were gay, but you were
- uncomfortable with being gay.
- I remember once I had finished my residency,
- but I was working for another agency,
- I interviewed a patient.
- I evaluated the patient who had already been seen
- by a non-physicianed counselor.
- The counselor had written down a diagnosis
- of ego-dystonic homosexuality.
- I wrote in my notes yes, this man is homosexual.
- But there's nothing ego dystonic about it.
- He's perfectly comfortable with it.
- People were looking for diagnoses.
- That would have been in the late seventies early eighties.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: You've made an interesting point there.
- People looking for a diagnosis, trying
- to somehow pick an answer about why people are gay.
- Is that still true today?
- Are they still trying to figure it out ?
- Or how have things changed?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, I think people are much looser about it
- today.
- I don't think people are really looking
- for reasons at this point.
- There is curiosity about it.
- There is research.
- There's been research into whether there's
- a genetic basis for being gay.
- But for the most part, people are a lot more
- relaxed about it.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: At some point you
- eventually started seeking out gay pyschiatrist groups.
- Or did you even try to form one?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, I was very lonely
- and I would have loved to have met other gay psychiatrists.
- Not that there weren't others in Rochester,
- but they really, really had no interest in affiliating.
- There were a couple of times when I put out notices
- or I put out--
- I don't know what paper it was.
- Maybe it was the Empty Closet trying to form a group,
- but I couldn't get people to come together.
- Eventually, I did find a group.
- The one that eventually became the Association
- of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists,
- which formed through the American Psychiatric
- Association.
- I've got to be careful not to say APA,
- because the psychologists have their American Psychological
- Association.
- In probably 1976, I was feeling very much alone.
- I went back to Washington, DC.
- I grew up in that area.
- I was visiting, and I called Franklin Kameny.
- Franklin Kameny was the co-founder of the Washington
- Mattachine Society.
- Franklin Kameny was also one of the people who
- organized a takeover of the APA meeting in Washington in 1971,
- and kind of co-opted the microphone, which eventually
- led two years later to the repeal of homosexuality
- as a diagnosis.
- He was a rather irascible type person,
- not prone to soft emotions.
- But I asked to talk with him.
- And I actually went to his place and I told him
- that I was seeking other groups of psychiatrists.
- And he said, "Well, I know of some people I
- can put into contact with you."
- It seemed that there were groups of gay psychiatrists
- who had met informally at APA meetings,
- would get together in bars, would talk to each other.
- They referred to themselves as the GayPA.
- And so I went to my first APA meeting in Toronto and 1977
- and met up with some of these people.
- And the group eventually was formalized the next year
- in Atlanta, Georgia.
- It had a long title to begin with,
- but it eventually became the AGLP, the Association of Gay
- and Lesbian Psychiatrists.
- And so that played a strong role in helping me feel better
- about myself, being affiliated with a group
- of intelligent normal gay people who were interested in not only
- providing support, but in doing serious research
- and also organizing within the APA.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: I was going to ask you
- after attending the meetings like that
- and finding a gay psychiatry support group, what
- did you bring back with you to Rochester that you could then
- share within your own residency or your own practice?
- What impact did it have on you and your practice?
- WILLIAM REAMY: I was no longer resident at that time.
- And I think the impact it had on me
- was greater confidence in myself and as a gay person.
- And eventually I think it helped me to work better
- with gay patients because I could exude that confidence
- and help them feel better about themselves.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Tom, before you fall asleep there,
- we'll go over to you.
- TOM PETRILLO: I learned some things I didn't know.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: You talk a lot about the mental health
- field the journey of gayness through that.
- The whole realm of things legally that gay people
- have to deal with for decades.
- I don't know where to start actually.
- Let's just start very generally.
- What initially- and I know some of these are still actually
- issues - but as a gay person, what are some of those legal
- issues that they're faced with in their daily lives,
- in their relationships, estates planning, all of that.
- Just describe some of the biggest challenges--
- TOM PETRILLO: Are you talking about now
- or starting the sixties going--
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Starting in the sixties.
- Yeah, we'll work back and bring it up to today.
- TOM PETRILLO: In the sixties and seventies,
- the law did not reflect the nuances of a gay relationship.
- For example, if two people lived together
- in a long term relationship, they
- were treated as "business partners."
- If something happened to the relationship--
- and I can tell you some very interesting stories about that
- if you'd like them--
- the court would say no, the fact that there
- is affection, the fact that there
- is a different type of relationship
- is totally irrelevant.
- This is a business relationship.
- And that's how assets would be distributed.
- That's how a relationship would be dissolved.
- In the estate area, things became more difficult
- than if you were in a heterosexual relationship
- because there was always the threat--
- and it occurred several times with clients of mine--
- where one partner would die, leave everything
- to the other partner, as we would expect.
- And then a family member would step in and challenge the will.
- And the theory that they used back in particularly
- in the late sixties, seventies, and even early eighties was
- one of the ways you could set aside someone's will
- is to show undue influence.
- And there were some judges who took
- the-- around the state-- who took
- the position that the very nature
- of this sexual relationship was in and of itself
- proof of undue influence.
- So that there were times when wills were set aside.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Try not to rub your shoes together.
- I know you're doing it subconsciously,
- but the microphone might be picking it up.
- I'm sorry I interrupted you.
- Did you have more to say on that?
- Good.
- Before we get into the way things
- are now, I'm going to examine a little bit more
- about the sixties and seventies and where things were at.
- In your practice back then, you were
- dealing with some police harassment, police raids,
- harassment, situations with gay people.
- Were you dealing with them as clients or were you
- dealing with mostly the police department?
- TOM PETRILLO: Both.
- Initially, when I graduated in law school in 1965,
- I became an attorney in the City Law Office
- that's the chief law department for the City of Rochester.
- And one of my tasks was to be a liaison with the police
- department.
- And that was partly because so many
- of the things that went on with legal disputes
- involved the police.
- They could be witnesses, they could be parties to it.
- And so I would deal with the police
- on a fairly regular basis.
- And through that, I learned some very interesting things.
- I guess I was very naive.
- I remember being in a meeting when there was probably
- four or five policemen.
- And when you get that number together,
- they all talk, talk, talk about what's going on.
- And I picked up something about a raid that had taken place.
- And I curious.
- And I asked what they were talking about.
- And they told me about a raid that
- had taken place at a bar on Stone Street here in the city.
- And I pressed them for information.
- And I admit I was being a bit devious.
- I acted like I was really interested.
- Tell me all about it.
- I'd love to know.
- And they told me how they had raided this bar
- and that these homos and queers had gone running,
- and how they had threatened to arrest the couple.
- And they had told them well, you could avoid arrest
- if you give us a little oral sex here today.
- That had taken place.
- And they were talking about how funny that was
- and how great it was.
- And I remember saying to them well,
- "Are you really comfortable with that?
- Aren't you breaking the law?"
- And they all laughed.
- And they thought I was joking.
- And they said, "You're so naive."
- And that was the beginning of my understanding
- of how the police were acting at that time.
- I was uncomfortable with it.
- And I went to my boss who was the corporation
- counselor of the city.
- And I told him about it.
- He seemed concerned about it too.
- He said he would talk to the police chief.
- That was William Lombard.
- And about a week later he got back to me
- and he said "Back off.
- You need those police to be cooperative.
- If you're going to try your cases, if you're
- going to use them as witnesses.
- Back off.
- The chief says these are not sanctioned raids,
- but his guys have to let off a little steam once in a while."
- So that was what I was told as to that issue.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And obviously at this time
- you're not an out gay man.
- TOM PETRILLO: At this time, I was not--
- No, I should tell you.
- If you asked me in the sixties or fifties, sixties, seventies,
- I would have laughed if you thought I might someday become
- part of the gay community.
- I did not know I was gay at that time.
- It wasn't until late seventies that I had any clue
- that I might be gay.
- So I was seeing this really, from the point
- of view of a straight person.
- And probably had I identified myself as gay,
- I might have tried to do more, but I was told to back off.
- The city was just coming off of dealing with the riots the year
- before and there were all kinds of issues going on.
- So I left it alone.
- I left after two years, went into private practice.
- And then my dealing with issues was totally different.
- I was dealing from the point of view of protecting a client.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: So then you got into private practice.
- Back in the late sixties, early seventies,
- were you starting to get involved in gay related cases?
- TOM PETRILLO: I have been in private practice
- no more than a few months, and I had a case come into me.
- And it was two women, I believe.
- And one had died.
- They had been together twenty years, something like that.
- And the family had barred the surviving partner
- from the funeral home and from the service.
- The newspaper said it was a private service
- and they had someone at the door of the funeral home
- to make sure she did not come in.
- And she came to me and said the funeral
- is going to be in two days.
- What can I do?
- In truth, under the law, she could do nothing.
- I called the funeral director to see
- if she could at least come in after hours and pay a visit.
- I talked to a member of the family
- who I thought might be a little more cooperative
- than the elderly parents.
- This was a younger sibling.
- No one was interested in doing anything about it.
- So what we did was we formulated a different way to handle this.
- I said hold your own funeral.
- So she put in a notice in the newspaper
- that there would be a funeral service on a particular day.
- And then all of the friends were able to come
- and able to grieve together.
- But there wasn't a legal solution.
- It wasn't more than six or eight months after that,
- I had the second case come in to me related to a gay issue.
- And it was a couple that one of the partners
- was in the hospital.
- Had serious surgery, was not doing very well.
- But the family again had barred the other partner
- from going into the hospital.
- They told the hospital staff this person was not
- to be admitted.
- And the hospital staff agreed to that.
- And they were very careful not to let this person in.
- I call the hospital.
- I try to negotiate with them.
- Got nowhere.
- Tried to call the family.
- They weren't even interested in talking about it.
- So I called the surgeon who had performed the surgery.
- And I put it in terms of you want your patient to get better
- don't you?
- Well, don't you think that relationship means something
- to them.
- That maybe that person would heal
- better if they knew their partner was with them.
- And interestingly enough, it was a woman physician, surgeon.
- And she said, "You're right."
- She said, "I will be at the hospital."
- She gave me a time and place.
- "Have your client there."
- But we're not to tell anybody.
- And so my client got in to see the partner.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: When did you start seeing things change?
- But I want to ask it differently.
- When did you start making things change?
- TOM PETRILLO: Well, there were disputes
- that arose with my clients in the estate area.
- Disputes that arose with my clients
- over relationships that had gone sour and had to be dissolved.
- And that caused me to do some creative thinking of how
- to draft wills for people, how to put together
- property agreements for people.
- And finally, I came to the conclusion
- that you could do some things that would normally not
- be permitted if you carefully drafted documents
- for a gay, lesbian, or bisexual person.
- A will that I would draw for a gay client for example,
- would look nothing like what I would
- draw for a straight client.
- Totally different protective provisions in there.
- And if somebody looked at it, they wonder why the heck
- some of those provisions were in there.
- They are there for a purpose.
- And a couple of times it was challenged
- and we were successful.
- The same way with property agreements.
- Couples were getting together, buying houses together,
- and then down the line things go sour
- and you try to dispose of the issues.
- Terrible situation, business partnership.
- But you could define your relationship
- in agreements property agreements.
- You could set out the rules that were
- to be used if the relationship were to be dissolved.
- And so I created those kinds of documents.
- And matter of fact GAGV sponsored a couple of seminars
- that I spoke to people about the need for these specialized
- provisions.
- I also became a resource for other lawyers.
- They would call me and say, "I have a good client.
- This is the situation.
- What should I do?
- I'm doing a will for them.
- Any special things I should provide?"
- And I would then try to educate them.
- And those two things I think were important.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: You also got involved in some employment
- cases, people being fired.
- TOM PETRILLO: Yes.
- One that I can think of in particular
- involves our old friend Eastman Kodak.
- I had a man who was in his early fifties.
- He had been with Kodak a good twenty-five years.
- Yeah, twenty-five years.
- He was in research.
- And doing some very sophisticated work
- and research on new photographic techniques.
- He had received yearly, very glowing positive reports.
- He had also received some awards within Kodak for his work.
- And this resulted in a promotion.
- The problem with the promotion was he now had a new boss.
- And within a couple of weeks, his new boss said to him,
- "Are you one of those fairies?"
- And he responded by saying, "My personal life
- is really no one's business."
- He was fired within a week.
- Now New York was an appointment at will state, and it still is.
- And you could fire someone for any reason you wanted.
- Being gay or having a sexual orientation of any kind
- was not a protected class.
- So there was nothing to do that.
- I called Kodak's chief attorney, chief counsel.
- And we talked about it.
- He said it was a terrible, terrible situation,
- should never have happened, blah, blah, blah.
- But, he said "If I allow this person to return to work,
- it will set a dangerous precedent.
- Fired people then can try to get their jobs back.
- And if we set that precedent--" we had a bit of a discussion.
- And my client never returned to work there.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Can you kind of put it
- in context for me about what year this was?
- TOM PETRILLO: That would have been in mid-seventies.
- A similar case I thought it was going
- to be easier, because the client came in and said they'd
- been fired.
- Somebody had made some anti-gay remarks
- and he responded to them.
- And they fired him.
- But he was covered by a union.
- So I expected that all we needed to do
- was to charge up the union to protect him.
- The union would not protect him.
- I thought they would at least put forth some possible claims
- on his behalf.
- They weren't even willing to do that.
- They weren't interested in even talking to him or to me
- about it.
- So he did not regain his--
- KEVIN INDOVINO: So eventually things changed at those places.
- TOM PETRILLO: It was like that in the seventies
- and early eighties.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: I mentioned interviewing Gordon Urlacher
- earlier.
- You had a chance to work with him?
- TOM PETRILLO: As a private attorney,
- occasionally would have some contact with the police, yes.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Him being the quote, unquote "police liaison"
- for the LGBT community, what were your impressions of him
- and the things he was trying to do?
- TOM PETRILLO: My impression was that he
- tried very hard to change the tone of things.
- And when you change the tone of things at the top,
- things filter down.
- And I do think that just being the liaison
- had a lot to do with some changing
- attitudes within the police department, that later on you
- saw come to fruition.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: So let's move thirty, forty years ahead here.
- Yeah, we got gay marriage passed here in New York state.
- But there's still a lot of legal challenges out there
- that need to be addressed.
- Can you talk to me about some of the things
- that still particularly in federal level again,
- estate planning, health care, all that stuff.
- We're not out of the water yet.
- TOM PETRILLO: No.
- I would be happy to address that,
- but I would like to go back if I may and you asked about areas
- difficult for gay people.
- Custody issues, estate issues.
- I talked about the estate issues.
- Custody issues became dueling points for lawyers.
- The threat that you're going to tell
- the court, the threat you're going to tell others
- that one of the individuals involved in the marital dispute
- was gay or lesbian.
- Lesbians in particular were very fearful of losing
- custody of their children.
- And rightfully so, because there were some cases where
- the very nature of their lesbian relationship
- was enough for a judge to deny them continued custody.
- A lawyer would frequently make that implied threat
- to the other lawyer who represented
- the gay client, that you really want
- to keep these things quiet.
- You really don't want everyone to know why you and your wife
- broke up do you?
- Well then, agree to this financial settlement.
- So that was part of it.
- The other part of custody came in visitation rights
- for gay fathers in particular.
- In the early seventies, I recall a case
- where a man was accused by his wife of being
- not a trustworthy person.
- The basis of it was because he was gay and was cheated on her
- during the marriage.
- And she took the position that because he was untrustful
- that he should not have visitation
- with the children at all.
- She wanted no visitation.
- The argument was made this is totally ridiculous.
- He has rights.
- But the judge, being very old, being
- older and very conservative gave him only
- scheduled supervised visitation rights with his children.
- A very terrible way to try to be a good father to your kids.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Actually, before I jump ahead,
- there are two other questions that just came to mind here.
- Late seventies you start coming to terms
- with your own gay feelings.
- But you certainly be open about it, not in the courts.
- TOM PETRILLO: Certainly not in the late sixties,
- early seventies.
- Probably the best way to illustrate
- how the courts reacted towards gay lawyers
- was to tell you about a particular case.
- I didn't know the person well at all.
- I didn't know they were even a gay lawyer.
- But I was in court one day.
- There were about thirty-five lawyers.
- There was a calendar call in the morning where
- everybody shows up, and lawyers are coming in and out.
- And it's not unusual for someone to be late.
- And they just call the case at the end.
- They call this particular case, the lawyer wasn't there.
- And he showed up a little later perfectly
- normal acceptable procedure.
- And the judge greeted him with "Mr. So-and-so,
- were you out late last night?
- Were you out with the boys?"
- And everybody in the courtroom just broke up and laughed.
- And he tried to maintain some dignity.
- But obviously, it was a terrible situation.
- He later left town.
- He later moved out of town.
- I understand he moved to the Midwest.
- That kind of overt anti-gay attitude was not that common.
- But there was a general understanding
- that it's best if the court didn't see you as a gay lawyer.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: (unintelligible).
- You at some point became the lawyer for the gay community.
- And quite a lot of notoriety about it.
- If you were gay and you had a legal problem,
- you had to go see Tom Petrillo.
- Talk to me about how did that come about, but also want
- drove you to be there for the gay community?
- TOM PETRILLO: Initially I saw it as just representing
- people who needed help and who were being treated terribly
- and unfairly.
- Later on it became an issue of I was gay,
- and I wanted to be sure I helped protect the gay community.
- But it became word of mouth sort of thing.
- One person would tell another go see Tom Petrillo.
- And that really generated a lot of people.
- But there was also one individual.
- I don't know if you've heard the name Tony Green.
- Tony Green was everybody's gay friend.
- He was the bartender at the Forum.
- And one day I get--
- KEVIN INDOVINO: (unintelligible) I'm going to correct you there.
- We're going to take it back.
- Tony Green was the bartender at Friar's.
- TOM PETRILLO: Friar's.
- I'm sorry.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Let's just start that over.
- TOM PETRILLO: Yeah, all right.
- Tony Green was everybody's friend who was a bartender
- at Friar's.
- And he, for some reason, he was the kind of person everybody
- told their problems to.
- He knew everybody in the gay community
- and what their problems were.
- And one day I find on my appointment schedule,
- there's someone by the name of Jim Smith on my ledger to see.
- And he came in.
- I didn't know who he was.
- And he outlined this legal problem.
- Really, I couldn't quite understand
- why he felt he needed a lawyer.
- So we talked about it.
- And then he said "I'm really not.
- I'm really Tony Green."
- He said, "And I wanted to see how
- you would treat me because I understand you
- treat gay people very well."
- And he said, "I frequently find myself
- at a loss to know who to tell people to come to see."
- And Tony Green referred a lot of gay people to me.
- We became good friends later on.
- And so that is how my practice grew.
- The seminars at GAGV--
- there were a lot of people who were there,
- and who understood that I knew some
- of the nuances of how you can get around
- some of the legal provisions.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Which brings up another question
- that you can address.
- With the whole AIDS epidemic hitting us,
- a lot of legal issues came rising from that, particularly
- against estate planning, wills, and all that stuff.
- Talk to me about the AIDS pandemic
- and how the legal issues even got even more complex.
- TOM PETRILLO: One issue comes to mind.
- I had a client who needed surgery
- at one of the hospitals.
- And they were refusing to operate on him because they
- didn't have the right protective uniforms,
- the protective covering thing needed.
- And they were afraid to do the surgery without this.
- It was just a total lack of understanding.
- But that was everybody's lack of understanding
- in the gay community as well as the straight community.
- Issues like that would come up from time to time.
- People would be thrown out of their apartments
- because they were living together with another man
- and someone would assume they're gay
- and the landlord didn't want them in their apartment.
- Who knows what it would leave behind when they left.
- This sort of issue.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: (unintelligible)
- TOM PETRILLO: You can hear it.
- Sorry.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Let me just look over my notes here.
- (unintelligible).
- WILLIAM REAMY: I believe that one
- of the people who couldn't get surgery
- was someone you referred to me.
- TOM PETRILLO: Yes.
- From time to time, we would refer clients back and back
- and forth.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Sure.
- So let's jump to today.
- These are questions I ask.
- The issues that are still out there
- that still to be addressed, that still
- need to be addressed legally.
- For people who are in gay relationships
- or just gay people who own property or have to have health
- care proxies or whatever?
- TOM PETRILLO: Well, if they're not married--
- CREW: I'm sorry can we start over please?
- TOM PETRILLO: If they're not married then
- they face some of the same issues that we've always faced.
- And that is their relationship is not defined.
- And so business principles are going
- to apply to up to dissolutions.
- You have less of the attitude from the courts, because you
- have a younger, a little more liberal judiciary
- now than we had back in the sixties and seventies
- and eighties.
- And so the attitude problem is not there as much anymore.
- Of course, everybody got all excited about marriage
- in New York.
- But marriage in New York gave us a few benefits.
- Bill and I have taken advantage of those.
- But there's still about one thousand other--
- and I really mean that.
- About one thousand other rights and responsibilities out there
- that come through the federal government.
- And because the federal government
- doesn't recognize marriage or doesn't
- recognize gay relationships or civil unions, those are denied.
- Social security is the big one.
- And it's not just getting a social security benefit.
- It's social security benefit.
- It's getting a child who may need
- extra health through social security,
- those kinds of issues.
- Immigration is a big thing.
- You can't-- let me go back.
- Immigration is a big issue.
- One partner, unlike a heterosexual person,
- cannot petition to bring your partner in from another country
- and become a citizen here.
- Can't do that.
- Veteran's benefits are extensive for heterosexual couples.
- But if you're not in a committed relationship
- that the federal government respects and honors,
- then you don't get those benefits either.
- There's income tax benefits, tremendous income tax benefits.
- There's benefits for setting up partnerships,
- certain kinds of partnerships where
- you can put your assets together with your spouse
- and save taxes down the line when people die.
- It's all part of a sophisticated estate planning sort of thing.
- And gay people, let's be honest, have substantial assets.
- Many of them don't have children.
- Though some of course do.
- And they develop substantial assets
- that could take advantage of many
- of these provisions in the federal law.
- They can't.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: (unintelligible).
- We're going to get a little personal here.
- WILLIAM REAMY: I thought of a couple of other things
- that had to do with my psychiatric training
- and how the silence affected it.
- One of the biggest problems for me was I
- had no supervision regarding my gay patients.
- I could not talk with anyone about how I felt as a gay man
- about certain things that were going on with my patients.
- I had a patient once who was very closeted,
- and was in a profession where he could not come out.
- And he was trapped and he committed suicide.
- And I was powerless to save him.
- But I had no out, and I had no way of discussing this.
- I had a supervisor once who I learned who was gay.
- And I told him that.
- And he was alarmed.
- And we never talked about it.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Back to the patient,
- how would you handle it today?
- TOM PETRILLO: Well, it's a lot different today because people
- don't have to be as closeted.
- And people don't have to be as secretive.
- And they're not going to be arrested in a police raid.
- But yes, I would have talked with him
- openly about the predicament that he found himself in
- and ways that he could express himself or be with more
- affirming people or get himself into a situation
- where he did not feel this conflict that he had.
- I think I would have been much more relaxed about it
- rather than dealing with someone who was in the same predicament
- that I felt myself in.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: OK.
- (unintelligible).
- TOM PETRILLO: Bill and I found ourselves
- over the years sharing clients and patients.
- Someone might come to me, I recognize that their problem--
- strike that.
- People with clients would come to me,
- and I would recognize that in addition to the legal problem,
- there might be a psychological problem that
- was not being dealt with.
- And initially, I would say go see a good psychiatrist.
- I was very hesitant to recommend Bill
- because I felt that someone might see that
- as a conflict of interest.
- But I began to realize that there weren't
- a lot of gay psychiatrists out there that people knew about
- and who they wanted to go to.
- So I would recommend him.
- I would never tell the client that he was gay.
- That's something we decided a long time ago.
- We did not share that information.
- I could share it with you.
- But he could not share with you.
- And so it was kind of like one of those things
- that you say underneath everything.
- You don't really come out and say it,
- but people understood that they were
- going to find someone who was comfortable with their being
- gay.
- But then they figured it out after they talked.
- I suspect a lot of them did not.
- But some certainly may have.
- WILLIAM REAMY: Oh, I think a lot of them did.
- And a number of my patients were aware
- that Tom and I had a relationship, which
- I think was very helpful because the two of us
- could model a healthy relationship.
- And even to the end of my private practice,
- I had people who would ask me about Tom.
- TOM PETRILLO: I started--
- when Bill and I first began living together,
- we were somewhere and we had a picture taken of the two of us.
- So I always kept that on my desk in my office.
- And people's reactions were quite interesting.
- Gay people would very frequently say, "Are you gay?
- Do you have a partner?"
- And I would I would respond with what
- I thought it was appropriate for that particular situation.
- Straight people would ask the same thing.
- I lost a couple of clients who made the conclusion that I
- must be gay because I had a picture of that person.
- And they never came back and I had no reason
- to understand why they wouldn't, except for that.
- But there were a lot of straight people who simply didn't care.
- WILLIAM REAMY: I only lost one patient because I was gay.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Talk to me about the decision
- of getting married.
- Particularly you coming from a legal standpoint,
- and a lot of things to deal with up front.
- TOM PETRILLO: Interestingly enough, we never really
- talked about it beforehand.
- Because we never expected in our lifetime to see it.
- And I think we've said that over and over.
- We never expected it in our lifetime to see it.
- I thought down the road, young people, things would change.
- But once the bill passed, it took us what?
- An hour to decide?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Suddenly, the realization burst upon us,
- we can do this?
- TOM PETRILLO: Yes.
- WILLIAM REAMY: No, I don't think we have
- any trouble at all deciding.
- TOM PETRILLO: We did not focus on
- whether there would be a lot of benefits for example, income
- tax wise.
- To us, there was a greater issue than income tax benefits
- and social security benefits and things like that.
- It was an issue of commitment, an issue of being publicly
- affirmed in your relationship.
- We belong to a very liberal church
- that had been affirming gay relationships for years,
- had different gay ministers since the fifites,
- the Unitarian Church.
- And so we were very looking forward
- to having our relationship celebrated publicly.
- And so it was really easy decision.
- Now you asked about the consequences?
- We got a check back for the first time ever
- from New York State because we jointly filed our income tax.
- So there is some benefits, you see.
- WILLIAM REAMY: But I never could have predicted
- the feeling that came from expressing
- our commitment in public.
- It really was a great feeling.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Years from now, when history looks back
- at the two of you--
- I'm going to ask this to both of you individually.
- Tom, we'll start with you.
- What do you want people to look back at you?
- How do you want history to reflect upon you?
- What do you want people to know about who you were
- and what you did to make Rochester
- a better place for lesbians and gays to make this their home?
- TOM PETRILLO: I would like them simply
- to remember that I was a good lawyer, open with people
- of all kinds, particularly helpful to gay,
- lesbian, bisexual, and transgender clients
- and their legal matters.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: And similar question, almost the same.
- And this could be from your legal profession,
- social activism, whatever.
- Again, looking back at all those year and everything
- you've done, what are you most proud of?
- TOM PETRILLO: I think I'm most proud of having waged
- some battles on behalf of some gay clients
- where there really wasn't a chance in hell
- that we were going to win.
- But we've waged them any way.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Bill, same kind of question.
- How do you want history to reflect upon you
- for what you've done?
- WILLIAM REAMY: Well, when I decided
- to close down my private practice last year
- and told people about it, I received a lot of eulogies
- from people.
- It was kind of like having a seven month long funeral.
- And people told me--
- I think some of the things that I
- liked the best were they told me that I was caring
- and that I was non-judgmental.
- I see what I have done more in terms of personal terms.
- I'm not a public person.
- I haven't gotten out and led a charge.
- I've just done my bit day by day to help people.
- So I'd like to think that I was there
- as someone who understood and was there
- as a mooring for people, someone people could hold on
- to and carry something home with them, carry something with them
- after they left me.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: One more question comes to mind.
- This is kind of a point of view question for each of you.
- Bill, he's on you so I'll start with you.
- In everything that we have here in Rochester
- for gay resources, the Gay Alliance,
- we have things like ImageOut film festival.
- We've got people like you who, you
- were championing the rights for gays and lesbians.
- We have a history of being a champion for the underdogs.
- What is it in your opinion about Rochester,
- a city the size of of Rochester and why
- we are so much at the forefront of, I would just
- say in general, civil rights?
- Particularly, when you look at the history of gay activism
- across the country, Rochester is right there at the forefront.
- TOM PETRILLO: Susan B. Anthony is there,
- Frederick Douglass is there as part of our history.
- And they have created their work way back then,
- it has created a culture that's pervades pretty much all
- of Rochester in terms of helping other people,
- in terms of stepping up when you need to step up.
- Volunteerism for example, in the city
- is very high rate compared to other cities.
- And we're also a fairly well educated population.
- And that makes a difference.
- I didn't mean to interrupt.
- WILLIAM REAMY: No that's OK.
- I'm not sure I can do any better than that.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Well, thank you both.
- It was a pleasure.
- TOM PETRILLO: OK.
- Had fun.
- KEVIN INDOVINO: Brian's going to get those microphones off
- of you.
- TOM PETRILLO: Yep.