TG Prison News Revisited

Jun 28, 2007 20:43

After discussing with my partner, who is a second year law student, I have changed my mind on the issue in favor of Kosilek, mainly for legal reasons.  No, I don't find her to be a good poster-child for the trans community, nor do I agree with the actions she took against her wife.  However, that is in NO WAY a part of her lawsuit.  I know it's ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

lin_transman June 30 2007, 04:47:19 UTC
I can see yur point. I'm sorry, but it took me over 35 years to be able to have the chest reconstruction surgery because of the cost factor. I had a heart attack 12 years ago - and went bankrupt from the financial problems that resulted from it. I owned a small business at the time - and lost it, just when I had been planning to expand. All of my hard work was finally about to pay off, but I ended up with nothing but my car, my dog and the clothes on my back.

I have a lot of resentment that taxpayers might have to foot the bill for this, when I fought so hard to make things work and just couldn't pull it off for such a long period of time - and then lost everything I had because of a mediacl emergency and the way our health care system is set up.

I wouldn't have the problem with it that I do if *everyone* could receive the health care that they need in this country. People struggle so hard to make ends meet and can't get that care when they are fighting tooth and nail for it. Our seniors and those who are disabled often have to decide if they are going to eat or buy their meds. That shouldn't happen. We are, by far, the wealthiest country in the world. We shouldn't have homeless people wandering the streets. We shouldn't have children without enough food. And we shouldn't have people who can't get the health care they need - anywhere. That includes in prison. However, I think that it's more important to fight to get blanket coverage for everyone than it is to fight for one specific person.

I am well aware of the increased risk of suicide in preop trans folks. In fact, I've given workshops on the topic. I know this is an important issue, but there are a lot of things that need to change. I'm just not sure this is the best place to rally. Yes, we may have a vested interest in the outcome of the case, but it is the entire system that needs to be changed to address the needs of all the citizens of this country - not just those with a particular diagnosis.

Reply

aimlesswander July 3 2007, 18:00:17 UTC
I can see how you are conflicted on this issue, since your statements support my viewpoint yet you continue to argue against me. I think you are allowing your bitterness (over waiting so long & paying out of pocket for surgery) overshadow the real point of this issue. If the court rules that SRS is "medically necessary" and Kosilek gets treatment, then that landmark decision will affect ALL prisoners in U.S. correctional facilities, NOT just one specific person, as you say. Your biggest beef is that Kosilek would be getting something for free that you had to work so hard for, but the fact of the matter is that as a free citizen in a country without universal healthcare, you are responsible for your own care. You can use your own money to select the doctor you want to see and go to the hospital you want (yes, I understand this works better in theory b/c a lot of people cannot financially afford healthcare, but bear with me). On the other side of the coin, the government is responsible for the healthcare prisoners receive. Prisoners have absolutely no way to provide for their own healthcare because they are confined to prison. This means that if you needed a heart transplant but couldn't afford one, you wouldn't get it. If a prisoner needed one, that prisoner would receive it. It doesn't matter if you think you deserve the heart transplant more than the prisoner. Since the U.S. has already declared that we will not treat prisoners cruelly and unusually, the government undertakes the burden of care for prisoners. By siding against Kosilek's petition that SRS is medically necessary, you are only bolstering the same position that health insurance companies have taken against transpeople. You are stating that a transperson does not need to medically transition. Again, if this is your belief, you should come out and say it instead of skirting the issue. On this point, you and I clearly disagree.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up