Federal Judge Orders State to Pay for Sex Change

[jimboston]

(Reuters) - A federal judge has ordered Massachusetts officials to pay for a convicted murderer's sex change operation, ruling that the state had violated the inmate's constitutional rights in denying the procedure.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/ ... V820120905

How frickin' ridiculous is this?

Please don't bother trying to tell me it's a justified medical expense. It will just prove to me that you are more idiotic than this judge.

Honestly... how is this possible? Why are we not frickin' outraged?

[Woodruff]

(Reuters) - A federal judge has ordered Massachusetts officials to pay for a convicted murderer's sex change operation, ruling that the state had violated the inmate's constitutional rights in denying the procedure.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/ ... V820120905

How frickin' ridiculous is this?

Please don't bother trying to tell me it's a justified medical expense. It will just prove to me that you are more idiotic than this judge.

Honestly... how is this possible? Why are we not frickin' outraged?

It seems to me that while someone is incarcerated, their basic necessities should be taken care of, which of course includes medical care. But this isn't. I mean...diagnosed with cancer, take care of the cancer treatment, of course. So yeah...bad decision, in my view.

[jonesthecurl]

I'd have thought that cutting off a criminal's meat and two veg would fit right in with a lot of right-wingers' preferences...

[jimboston]

I'd have thought that cutting off a criminal's meat and two veg would fit right in with a lot of right-wingers' preferences...

LOL

Depending on the crimes yes!

but not...
1) if the offender WANTS that.
2) if we have to "reconstruct" things down there after.

[jimboston]

Interesting that there are not more comments.

At least no one has voted to say this was/is a reasonable medical expense.

[Symmetry]

Interesting that there are not more comments.

At least no one has voted to say this was/is a reasonable medical expense.

Why wouldn't it be? It's unusual, sure, but the ruling was pretty explicit, and it's pretty much a standard procedure for the condition his doctors diagnosed him with.

In a 126-page order issued in Boston, U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf found in favor of Michelle Kosilek, who sued the Massachusetts Department of Correction 12 years ago to force it to provide him the surgery while imprisoned.

Wolf said senior corrections officials engaged in patterns of "pretense, pretext and prevarication" to deny Kosilek the treatment he was entitled to and which had been recommended by department medical staff. The court had previously ruled in 2002 that Kosilek should at least be evaluated for the surgery.

Although Kosilek legally changed his name -- he was formerly Robert Kosilek -- and has been taking hormones that have caused his breasts to grow, the judge used male pronouns throughout the order. He is incarcerated in a state prison for male inmates.

Kosilek, according to court records, has suffered from gender identity disorder since he was a small child. He married a counselor he met while in drug rehabilitation, but murdered her in 1990 after she caught him wearing her clothes.

He was convicted in 1992 and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

"In this case Kosilek has proven that he still has a severe gender identity disorder. Although female hormones have helped somewhat, he continues to suffer intense mental anguish because of his sincere and enduring belief that he is a female trapped in a male body," Wolf wrote, citing the U.S. Constitution's Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishments.

Being a murderer requires punishment, but denying her medical treatment prescribed by doctors treating her ain't one of them, however uncommon.

[BigBallinStalin]

Who would be paying the doctors for the operation? "The Massachusetts Department of Correction."

Do the doctors have an incentive to urge that the surgery is necessary?

[Symmetry]

Who would be paying the doctors for the operation? "The Massachusetts Department of Correction."

Do the doctors have an incentive to urge that the surgery is necessary?

Not really, the doctors diagnosing the problem would not be paid for the surgery, surely?

[BigBallinStalin]

Who would be paying the doctors for the operation? "The Massachusetts Department of Correction."

Do the doctors have an incentive to urge that the surgery is necessary?

Not really, the doctors diagnosing the problem would not be paid for the surgery, surely?

I'm not sure, but their service rendered would justify their current salary--assuming they aren't paid per surgery.

Wolf said senior corrections officials engaged in patterns of "pretense, pretext and prevarication" to deny Kosilek the treatment he was entitled to and which had been recommended by department medical staff.

Doesn't that sound like a conflict of interests to you?

Let's ask TGD!

[Symmetry]

Who would be paying the doctors for the operation? "The Massachusetts Department of Correction."

Do the doctors have an incentive to urge that the surgery is necessary?

Not really, the doctors diagnosing the problem would not be paid for the surgery, surely?

I'm not sure, but their service rendered would justify their current salary--assuming they aren't paid per surgery.

Wolf said senior corrections officials engaged in patterns of "pretense, pretext and prevarication" to deny Kosilek the treatment he was entitled to and which had been recommended by department medical staff.

Doesn't that sound like a conflict of interests to you?

Let's ask TGD!

Wolf noted that the corrections department had fired a doctor who recommended that Kosilek receive the surgery and had hired a social worker who was known to consistently recommend that inmates did not have the procedure.

Would seem to indicate that doctors recommending the treatment faced dismissal, rather than any kind of personal profit.

What would be the conflict of interest?

[BigBallinStalin]

Oooh, conflicts of interest all around!

[Symmetry]

Oooh, conflicts of interest all around!

I'm still not getting the conflict of interest in recommending a surgery.

[BigBallinStalin]

Oooh, conflicts of interest all around!

I'm still not getting the conflict of interest in recommending a surgery.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177873&view=unread#p3886077

[Symmetry]

Oooh, conflicts of interest all around!

I'm still not getting the conflict of interest in recommending a surgery.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177873&view=unread#p3886077

Quoting yourself? Sign of a diseased mind. Why would the doctors involved be paid for a surgical procedure not performed by them at an as yet undecided hospital?

Where's the conflict of interest?

[BigBallinStalin]

Oooh, conflicts of interest all around!

I'm still not getting the conflict of interest in recommending a surgery.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=177873&view=unread#p3886077

Quoting yourself? Sign of a diseased mind. Why would the doctors involved be paid for a surgical procedure not performed by them at an as yet undecided hospital?

Where's the conflict of interest?

Judging from the abortion thread I created, you seem to have a significant problem with reading other people's words. Maybe you could try rereading my post in that link again?