Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Should gender reassignment surgery be covered by health insurance providers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't know if 'but everyone is in some danger' is really relevant to the rights of transgender individuals? That's the also very vague 'but everyone is insecure about their bodies' argument. It simply isn't equivalent.

You're right, there isn't surgery to change your skin colour - I would argue that would be an unethical bandaid over a broken leg of an issue. Of course you could choose to apply this idea to the concept of transgenderism, that some or all (unlikely to be all) transgenderism could be attributed to a dysfunctional society with incomplete and suffocating concepts and repurcussions of gender roles, gender binarism and how your gender and sex effects your value and safety in the world.

I can assure you that having the power to change oneself reasonably to reduce danger to oneself is not a folly of a pursuit. It's not 'how they should look'- I encourage you to investigate the realistic expectations and often limiting reality of genital reconstruction surgery. For MTF folk it tends to be an easier pursuit - reasons possibly being that it is easier to 'change something already there, and reducing and rearranging stuff' as opposed to 'making something out of nothing, harvesting skin and hoping it doesn't get rejected by the body as foreign tissue, hoping urethra tracts don't collapse, hoping you retain sensitivity, etc etc etc.

The reality is that many people are committing suicide because of their stigmatisation, their trauma and psychological instability of their body maps not matching the reality of their physical form and inability to access care and support through legal, social and medical means.

You might want to argue that transgenderism is a privileged issue and that to desire expensive surgery or else you'd kill yourself a very first world issue. On that, I cannot offer you much contradicting data as I am not educated in the exact practises and statistics of transgenderism in second and third world countries, and the suicide rates therein. However it is a very well established fact that being an oppressed minority of some kind (racial, gender, sexuality, disability) can and has and will push people to suicide and other destructive behaviours in a prolonged period of time.

There IS evidence somewhere out there (no source rn, I encourage you to google) of very real non-binary gender culture across the world in non-western countries. Native Americans, for example, have a cultural phenomenon of Two Spirit people. In Middle Eastern and Southwest Asian nations, non gender binary cultural identities such as the Hirja exist. In Judaism, there were neutral gender folk. This is not limited to cultures of wealth, privilege or a particular social or economic climate. Right now in the Middle East there are transgender individuals trying to flee their home nations to avoid the ritual execution of transgender people, who are probably considered to be unholy, heresy, or wrong in the eyes of god/s. These people sometimes live in societies or areas torn asunder by war, political and military conflict, but being transgender doesn't get put under the carpet for when things are just a little less rough.

Also, I would consider 'you can hide yourself a bit better' to be a poor, crude choice of words. I can assure you many transgender people do not intend or like to be regarded as 'hiding' as this encourages the stigma of having something to hide. They're forced to '''hide''' so not to be put at risk by society and its individuals. The very fact that 'shes a trap!' and 'UGH I thought you were XYZ, you LIED to me!' is even a thing is because of this misconception and specific normativity around the gender binary.

That said, there are many transgender people who would not consider their bodies to be 'the wrong ones'- they simply do not match up to their internal map. They may believe there is nothing inherently wrong with their physical form in principle, but it is not accurate to whom they are, whom they are to be perceived to be. They may fight the stigma that being trans is somehow shameful, dirty, freaky or fucked up. They may be activists for this attitude, who are open about their transgenderism or transsexual history as a means of communication, education and awareness.

I'm afraid 'they might not commit suicide' just doesn't seem an empathetic, progressive or understanding argument for a subculture of people where REPORTED suicide is as least as high as 40% and many parents of transgender children have reported their children have attempted or considered grievous bodily self harm or mutilation to 'fix' an issue they cannot even fully emotionally grasp. I'm talking children in single digits being caught using a nail clipper to remove a certain protrusion.

Of course this brings up the idea again, full circle, that with enough therapy and support, they can be cured of this disorderly behaviour. But so can brainwashing, emotional abuse and manipulation tbh, so that's barely kosher.

I'd also like to add that as a UK person, I've watched maaannyyy US documentarys on individuals who are transgender, from children to adults, and its really quite disgusting and distasteful. Even the children are baited with inappropriate questions, misgendering and invalidation is rampant, and the focus is usually on how very strange it all is. There is a specific genre of documentaries that profit from atypical lifestyles and people, and take advantage of exhibiting them, very quietly and unsaid, as freaks.

HOWEVER many dozens if not hundreds of people I have seen HIGHLY recommend 'The T Word', I believe narrated or driven by Laverne Cox. So I can't recommend it highly enough for a more appropriate and accurate narrative of trans folk.
 
Also I don't know exactly what kind of philosophy 'they might not hurt themselves' is even useful in any subject of support, mental and physical health care. Like I can't even wrap my head around the motivation or instigation of that kind of social philosophy. Is the idea that otherwise any treatment is an unnecessary expense? I mean it's completely mindboggling to me especially because in the US giving birth is something you have to pay for, whereas in the UK is it a free open-source process to all people in the country who is a national/resident. I can't even imagine someone having to give birth and then owe a hospital $20k.

Where does this curious cultural opinion that, 'well fuck em', come from? In the UK we manage very fine with free health care for all, free mental health services, free trauma therapy, free education up to the age of 19, and we aren't all starving to death because we can't afford to buy food due to ALL THE DAMNN TAXES.

It really can't be all that difficult to accommodate when the cost would be spread out over so many millions of people chipping in a few cents. Of course I recognise this is a debate of 'but why should we'. Though I do recognise that private healthcare should be an additional option- private healthcare pioneers medical and surgical techniques, helps the study evolve and develop and improve, through competitive pricing and competitive practitioners.

Full stop I believe all manners of healthcare to a basic and foundation level should be open access to all civilians where logistically possible, but that sort of system could take a century to found and perfect in such a large nation as the US, especially with its wide variety of political leanings. It seems natural for a system of government to accommodate, assure and support those with disabilities, disorders, chronic or non-chronic illnesses or injuries, neuroatypicality, etc, but I guess I'm becoming a bit broad at this point.
 
I think you are misunderstanding my view as some sort of apathy towards transgender folk. I apologize for not going deeper into debate with you, as I previously mentioned I just wanted to hear peoples views and take them into consideration rather than debate since I don't have a side one way or another even now.

My point is(and this is a valid point in my country, it's probably hard for anyone outside of the US to grasp because our healthcare system is shit), why should this be mandatory for HPs to cover when there are other people out there suffering from ACTUAL 100 PERCENT life threatening diseases and aren't covered? How is the lack of coverage on sex changes more important than something like Obesity, something that isn't always life threatening but very well can be, and also one of the biggest problems in the country? I just don't understand why this is supposedly unfair towards the transgendered population when there are other things out there that aren't covered. Where is the logic in screaming inequality when there are people dying because they can't afford their HIV treatment or cancer treatment since their HPs don't cover the things that they should?

That was my original point.
 
That makes......no sense. So you're basically professing to say 'our healthcare system is shit'. That's your point here, right? And it is. It's fucking awful, and people are denied basic human rights of health and it's abhorrent and appalling and I couldn't agree more.

But how comes it's transgender people you're throwing under the bus....?

Surely the more pertinent question is 'How Can We Revolutionise Our Healthcare System So As To Provide Basic Human Healthcare and Support To All Residents And Nationals, Completely Across The Board, Inclusive Of Minority Subgroups'?

I'm afraid you're perspective just...it has loopholes. You're pulling one issue out of the hat of many, and choosing that to be a Y/N issue. It isn't about whittling down who deserves it more or less than others, and going by that. That's how shitty legislation is founded and not changed for centuries. By ALL MEANS, the more severe and life threatening or disabling a disease (or with a highly aggressive progression) the faster those people need appropriate medical support.

My best friend in the whole damn world lives in Florida. It's a fucking toilet in some places, my friend has been living with crippling chronic pain, untreated tumors, severe mental illness and is a survivor of trauma via law enforcement. My best friend of 5 years has powered through all that to be semi-independent, working 3 jobs, their own farm, and going to university. My god do I know that the American healthcare system is fucked up, but we both know while our problems and needs are separate, our ultimate goal is just to be emotionally, physically, financially stable enough to have a reasonable quality of life and support each other.

We don't compare. We constantly try to support one enough through our struggles as best as we can, realising they are both real and shitty and my friend is basically a superhero. That is a relationship of empathy- not of shady prioritisation.

America, where if you don't got the cash- fuck you, basically.

It's like someone starting a debate of 'Should Gays REALLY Be Allowed to Get Married? What about our national debt!!'

These are ALL relevant issues, that need to be dealt with as FAST as humanly and bureaucratically possible so as to preserve as much life and life quality as possible. Superpowers like America certainly HAVE the manpower- it's all down to logistics and whether the masses want to do it or not.

Instead of questioning why certain groups even really need help, how about civilians as a unit decide to steer their government and communities towards universal healthcare.
 
*just blinks several times over*

Since this has become rather derailed from the initial intent of the opening post of the thread and seems to just be going in circles, consider the thread closed. If people want to continue a similar discussion, then by all means do so, but create an appropriate thread with an appropriate opener for it. And please, lets try and stick to facts and support evidence where possible and to refrain from derogatory statements/innuendos towards our fellow members.

Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom