• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge orders California to pay for inmate's sex change

For what it's worth, the Supreme Court in Canada has ruled that inmates in federal or provincial prisons have a right to receive all essential healthcare services necessary. The key terms here are "essential" and "necessary".

From what little I know of the subject, it could be argued that the surgery is essential and necessary for the full and healthy life of such individuals. It could also be argued that a man who has lived 51 years of his life as a male does not require this surgery to live even if the surgery would improve his/her life going forward.

There are many law abiding citizens living with any number of diseases, disfigurations, and other complications to a full and enjoyable life who are unable to afford surgeries and treatments that would make their lives better. Seems odd, in a way, that someone who breaks the rules of society, murders someone, would receive better treatment than an upstanding, contributing citizen. But then, inmates often receive better healthcare in general than many in the general public.
 
For what it's worth, the Supreme Court in Canada has ruled that inmates in federal or provincial prisons have a right to receive all essential healthcare services necessary. The key terms here are "essential" and "necessary".

From what little I know of the subject, it could be argued that the surgery is essential and necessary for the full and healthy life of such individuals. It could also be argued that a man who has lived 51 years of his life as a male does not require this surgery to live even if the surgery would improve his/her life going forward.

There are many law abiding citizens living with any number of diseases, disfigurations, and other complications to a full and enjoyable life who are unable to afford surgeries and treatments that would make their lives better. Seems odd, in a way, that someone who breaks the rules of society, murders someone, would receive better treatment than an upstanding, contributing citizen. But then, inmates often receive better healthcare in general than many in the general public.

One more time... the inmate in question will NOT be receiving better healthcare than the general public, at least not the general public in California because even if he wasn't in prison, Medi-Cal has been paying for gender reassignment surgery for low/no income folks for a while.
 
Taxpayers would pay either way as Medi-Cal has been covering the cost for low income folks for quite a while, so taxpayer wise there is no actual difference,... well, as Diana pointed out above, it may actually cost less through the prison system than through doctors connected with private insurance or Medi-Cal

I'm afraid the concept of a prison doc performing that kinda surgery is, frankly scary.
 
I'm afraid the concept of a prison doc performing that kinda surgery is, frankly scary.

That is a whole different issue, and I seriously doubt the "prison doc" would do it.
 
That is a whole different issue, and I seriously doubt the "prison doc" would do it.

Hehe, just checking. "Hey doc, you know how to do this right?" - patient asks as they put her under.... last thing she sees is the doc holding up a book "Snip and tuck, the dummy's guide to GRS."

Oh man, that would be a funny prank!
 
Another reason california sux. The gov pays for frivolous crap and the citizens are like "no problem, we can just raise taxes"
 
Judge orders California to pay for inmate's sex change

So he's getting a free surgery, that, had he not been in prison, he'd have to pay for himself?

I don't see how this makes any sense.

I may be a social democrat and have very liberal views on a lot of issues but this? Hell no, the government should not have to pay his sex change operation. The state may not be able to forbid it (I am in two minds about that one) but paying for it, no, no, not a snowball's chance in hell that the state should pay.
 
"Medi-Cal, California's health care program for low-income residents, has covered the procedure for years."

Hey, GREAT idea Cali! Pay for all the poor mentally ill freaks to get their junk turned inside out. That is just SOOO productive for the state. :roll:

Let the freak rot as the man he was born as. Taxpayers shouldn't be paying for murderers to get cosmetic surgery.
 
It makes sense if he's been living as a woman for almost 30 years, has been taking hormones to develop breasts and female contours, and is being housed in an all-male prison. You can imagine the problems. As a physical female, she can be transferred to a woman's prison, where she will supposedly fit in more comfortably. I'm a Californian and I don't have a problem with this tax-supported surgery. Transgenders have enough problems just being who they are. They deserve a bit of empathy and whatever comfort the surgery can provide.


Since when is prison supposed to be comfortable?
 
Life isn't fair. :shrug: Certainly, transgenders are more aware of this than most.

That's right, it's not fair.

There are millions with handicaps and disabilities that cannot be 'fixed' and they must live with it.

IMO, so must a convict, because it is MORE unfair to the taxpayers.
 
Back
Top Bottom