OBAMA JUDGE RULES MEDICAID MUST PAY FOR TRANSGENDER SEX REASSIGNMENT SURGERY

Obama Judge Rules Medicaid Must Pay For Transgender Sex Reassignment Surgery

Federal judge is forcing Wisconsin taxpayers to provide costly sex reassignment surgery and hormonal procedures for low-income transgender residents

JudicialWatch.org – AUGUST 23, 2019

An Obama-appointed federal judge is forcing Wisconsin taxpayers to provide costly sex reassignment surgery and hormonal procedures for low-income transgender residents who get free medical care from the government.

In a recently issued ruling U.S. District Judge William M. Conley writes that Medicaid, the publicly funded insurance that covers 65.7 million poor people, cannot deny the medical treatment needs of those suffering from “gender dysphoria.” Officials estimate it will cost up to $1.2 million annually to provide transgender Medicaid recipients in the Badger State with treatments such as “gender confirmation” surgery, including elective mastectomies, hysterectomies, genital reconstruction and breast augmentation. The intricate operations are typically done by plastic surgeons.

The ruling culminates a lawsuit filed more than a year ago by two transgender Wisconsinites, who accuse the federal and state-funded insurance program of providing them with disparate and inferior health care on the basis of sex. Cody Flack of Green Bay and Sara Makenzie of Baraboo say they suffer from severe gender dysphoria that requires costly surgery. Flack, a woman, claims to be ashamed of her breasts and wants to have them surgically removed as she transitions into a man’s body. To make a case for the government to pay for her surgery, she claims that she engages in “binding,” which flattens her breasts and causes sores, skin irritation and respiratory distress. Flack also has difficulty binding her breasts due to a disability, according to court documents. Makenzie, a man who legally changed his name to Sara and wears women’s clothing, says his “male-appearing genitalia” causes him “great distress” and negatively affects his sexuality and social life. Showering and seeing his body in a mirror is “painful,” court records state, and Makenzie fears someone will be able to see his “male genitals” through his clothing.

Last summer Judge Conley issued a preliminary injunction ordering Wisconsin to cover sex reassignment surgery for Flack and Makenzie while state health officials appealed. The permanent ruling directing the state-federal insurance for the poor to pay for all gender confirmation operations in the state was issued last week. To lay the foundation, Conley writes in the injunction that gender dysphoria is a serious medical condition, which if left untreated can cause adverse symptoms. “As a group, transgender individuals have been subjected to harassment and discrimination in virtually every aspect of their lives, including in housing, employment, education, and health care,” according to the document. “Their own families, acquaintances and larger communities can be sources of harassment. For some transgender individuals, though certainly not all, the dissonance between their gender identity and their naturally assigned sex can manifest itself in the form of gender dysphoria, a serious medical condition recognized by both sides’ experts and the larger medical community as a whole.”

Though Medicaid initially denied Flack’s chest reconstructive surgery, it was eventually completed at taxpayer expense after the judge’s injunction. A plastic surgeon performed a double mastectomy and male chest construction last fall. “Following the surgery, Cody’s gender dysphoria was greatly diminished,” according to Conley’s final ruling, because his “outward appearance matched his male gender” and he “would no longer be misgendered because of his breasts.” Makenzie got a bilateral orchiectomy and vaginoplasty to create “female appearing external genitalia” after the judge determined that the surgeries are medically necessary. Because Medicaid refused to cover chest reconstruction surgery prior to the lawsuit, Makenzie obtained a personal loan to pay a plastic surgeon at the University of Wisconsin Hospital for the operation in 2016. Court documents say Makenzie contends that the surgery helped alleviate his gender dysphoria.

In his decision, Judge Conley cites guidelines issued by the World Professional Association of Transgender Health to treat transsexual, transgender and gender nonconforming people. Treatments include psychotherapy, hormone therapy and “a number of surgical procedures” to eliminate the development of unwanted secondary sex characteristics of the assigned sex, develop secondary sex characteristics of the sex associated with the patient’s gender identity and enhance the patient’s ability to “pass” as the sex associated with the patient’s gender identity to decrease harassment, mistreatment and other forms of discrimination.

‘Arthur’ character comes out, FINALLY giving LGBT cartoon rat population representation on kid’s TV

CAP

A publicly-funded educational show for children 4-8 about an anthropomorphic aardvark took a turn for the even weirder, when it decided to teach kids the importance of accepting adult male-male inter-species love relationships.

Come on, if there was one thing kids’ TV programming was desperately crying out for, it was a gay cartoon rat getting married, teaching us all a timely lesson about “diversity.”

So, that’s exactly what the season premiere of the Public Broadcasting Service’s (PBS) “Arthur” cartoon delivered. The episode featured a surprise wedding between the titular aardvark’s humanoid rat teacher and his male partner who appears to also be an aardvark…as CNN put it, “leaving us all in happy tears.”

CAP

While many people seemed unsurprised that Mr. Ratburn, a ‘man’ whose principal interests include eating cake and bird-watching, turned out to be a homosexual, there were, nonetheless, heavy celebrations across social media post-nuptials.

Indeed, social justice warriors everywhere were hardly able to contain their glee over the inter-species, same-sex pairing up. If nothing else, the episode confirmed that even kids just barely out of toddlerhood can no longer avoid being pummelled with lessons about identity politics.

Arthur has been on the air for a whopping 22 SEASONS, making it the longest running children’s cartoon on television. So, perhaps we can chalk its success up to being so very in tune with the zeitgeist — and its willingness to take on responsibilities that might otherwise be left to parents. Like lessons about gay marriage, for example.

CAP

Should decisions of when and how to teach children about adult relationships really be made by television producers trying to impart their personal values onto everyone else’s kids? Regardless of whether the relationship is heterosexual or same-sex, marriage is hardly a topic many people would expect to be cropping up in a cartoon for four-year-olds.

What’s next? Are busy parents going to have to start vetting the shows their toddlers are watching and pick ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ ones depending on their own political persuasions? Can a parent not sit their child in front of a television show without wondering what wisdom and life lessons the friendly animated characters are going to be imparting next?

Of course, there’s no grave danger in a child learning about marriage and the basics of sexuality (some people are gay, some are straight, etc.), but are these topics really age-appropriate for the under-fives?

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Cartoons kill’: Kids’ movies show more death than adult ones, study finds

It’s not the first time that PBS has dealt with same-sex relationships in a supposedly child-friendly manner, either. The publicly-funded network ran an episode in 2005 which ambitiously featured two lesbian couples. Although, it appears on that occasion, “Arthur” was a bit ahead of its time and it was forced to pull the episode following parental complaints.

In a statement to People magazine, the network commented on the importance of accurately representing “the diversity of communities across the nation,” as well as the “wide array of adults in the lives of children who look to PBS KIDS every day.”

Social media reaction varied from extreme excitement that wedding bells were finally ringing for Mr. Ratburn to concern that PBS had taken their efforts to promote diversity and educate young kids a tad too far. Some were even downright angry that the channel had decided to “burden” children with thoughts of sexuality and adult relationships, homosexual or otherwise.

CAP

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑