Appeals court: Sex reassignment surgery must be provided
OliveOilMom wrote:
I support the state giving free gender reassignment surgery to convicts only after the state gives all the surgery that is needed to the people who aren't in prison. That includes surgery to fix things that cause uninsured people severe depression. Once they start doing that, then it's fine with me if they go into prisons and start doing it there. Wouldn't you get pissed if since you cant get the surgery you really feel that you need out here in the free world that the state was giving it to some killer?
The decision seems legit, but me and many other trans people have been thinking, If a convicted murderer can get SRS, then why can't I?
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
OliveOilMom
Veteran

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere
beneficii wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
I support the state giving free gender reassignment surgery to convicts only after the state gives all the surgery that is needed to the people who aren't in prison. That includes surgery to fix things that cause uninsured people severe depression. Once they start doing that, then it's fine with me if they go into prisons and start doing it there. Wouldn't you get pissed if since you cant get the surgery you really feel that you need out here in the free world that the state was giving it to some killer?
The decision seems legit, but me and many other trans people have been thinking, If a convicted murderer can get SRS, then why can't I?
Then why do you want them to get it???
_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA.

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com
OliveOilMom wrote:
beneficii wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
I support the state giving free gender reassignment surgery to convicts only after the state gives all the surgery that is needed to the people who aren't in prison. That includes surgery to fix things that cause uninsured people severe depression. Once they start doing that, then it's fine with me if they go into prisons and start doing it there. Wouldn't you get pissed if since you cant get the surgery you really feel that you need out here in the free world that the state was giving it to some killer?
The decision seems legit, but me and many other trans people have been thinking, If a convicted murderer can get SRS, then why can't I?
Then why do you want them to get it???
I think that if it is necessary care for them, then they should get it. It really isn't about any particular prisoner, though.
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
Here is a definition of medical necessity:
Quote:
SECTION 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS...
Medically Necessary - those services (1) which are reasonably calculated to prevent, diagnose, prevent the worsening of, alleviate, correct, or cure conditions in the Enrollee that endanger life, cause suffering or pain, cause physical deformity or malfunction, threaten to cause or to aggravate a disability, or result in illness or infirmity; and (2) for which there is no comparable medical service or site of service available or suitable for the Enrollee requesting the service that is more conservative or less costly; and (3) are of a quality that meets generally accepted standards of health care…" Massachusetts Contract, pages 6-13.
Medically Necessary - those services (1) which are reasonably calculated to prevent, diagnose, prevent the worsening of, alleviate, correct, or cure conditions in the Enrollee that endanger life, cause suffering or pain, cause physical deformity or malfunction, threaten to cause or to aggravate a disability, or result in illness or infirmity; and (2) for which there is no comparable medical service or site of service available or suitable for the Enrollee requesting the service that is more conservative or less costly; and (3) are of a quality that meets generally accepted standards of health care…" Massachusetts Contract, pages 6-13.
http://www.sphhs.gwumc.edu/departments/ ... sa121.html
It's a LOT broader, as I am sure you can tell, than the very narrow definition provided by OliveOilMom.
_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Struggles with certain foods after Gallbladder Surgery |
30 Mar 2025, 2:09 pm |
Court says Trump doesn't have the authority to set tariffs |
29 May 2025, 11:22 pm |
Judge says Trump administration violated court order |
21 May 2025, 9:47 pm |
Former Supreme Court Justice David Souter dies |
09 May 2025, 2:20 pm |