Should the public pay for sexual organ realignment?

[renocat]

California has agreed to pay for a $25,000 operation to change a guy to a gal.  He is in prison for life without parole for murder. Rodneyshiloh is suffering mental anguish as a man and as such prison is inhumane.  Sheesh!!   Medicaid is next.

[steve dave]

that seems unbelievably cheap for an operation like that. I'd be more concerned about the quality of the surgeon at those cut rates.

[star seed 7]

I don't care either way

[sys]

trust california to give a murderer a rapist's sentence, amirite, renocat?  imrite.

[AbeFroman]

that seems unbelievably cheap for an operation like that. I'd be more concerned about the quality of the surgeon at those cut rates.

Could probably get even better rates if they drove him down to Tijuana.

[slobber]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

[Mrs. Gooch]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

[michigancat]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

[Rage Against the McKee]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

If the state chooses to perform the surgery, doesn't it then have to pay for ongoing hormone treatments? Is there any data to support a lower risk of suicide with post-op trans people compared to pre-op?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

We should leave the decision up to the murder victim's family.

[Rage Against the McKee]

We should leave the decision up to the murder victim's family.

I don't think they'd be able to view the situation rationally.

[michigancat]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

If the state chooses to perform the surgery, doesn't it then have to pay for ongoing hormone treatments? Is there any data to support a lower risk of suicide with post-op trans people compared to pre-op?

I don't know the answers to either of those questions, but I'm guessing there would be some level of ongoing hormone treatments either way. Just another side to consider.

[sys]

all prisoners should receive a medical fund when they enter prison that they can use for whatever medical care they need, including elective surgeries.  they can receive 10% of the unused total on release.  if they die in prison, they can bequeath it to an heir.

[michigancat]

all prisoners should receive a medical fund when they enter prison that they can use for whatever medical care they need, including elective surgeries.  they can receive 10% of the unused total on release.  if they die in prison, they can bequeath it to an heir.

what if the state is responsible for health problems that go beyond their fund?

[sys]

if they die, they die (but other inmates could donate to their care from their funds)

[Mrs. Gooch]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

Well I would say the state has some sort of responsibility to keep the prisoner safe.....so if they are injured while in the prison (and not their own fault) then the state should pay for the recovery costs. But then do you have to have a trial to see if it was their fault or not? IDK. But I don't see the gender reassignment surgery as the state's responsibility because they didn't cause the prisoner to be the wrong gender.

[Mrs. Gooch]

all prisoners should receive a medical fund when they enter prison that they can use for whatever medical care they need, including elective surgeries.  they can receive 10% of the unused total on release.  if they die in prison, they can bequeath it to an heir.

So we are paying people (in medical care) for getting a prison sentence? Is the amount based on how long you are serving? So if you commit murder you get a bigger medical fund than someone on drug charges (presumably).

[michigancat]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

Well I would say the state has some sort of responsibility to keep the prisoner safe.....so if they are injured while in the prison (and not their own fault) then the state should pay for the recovery costs. But then do you have to have a trial to see if it was their fault or not? IDK. But I don't see the gender reassignment surgery as the state's responsibility because they didn't cause the prisoner to be the wrong gender.

what if a prisoner trips and falls through no one's fault and breaks their arm? A prisoner should just have to suck suck it up?

[Mrs. Gooch]

I am trying to equate this to a different required surgery, but I can't. Any help?


Gonna win 'em all!

Yeah, my first thought is well if you are in prison then you shouldn't be able to get whatever you want, because that is the whole point of prison is that your life is restricted.....but I guess I need a "similar to" type of situation to compare this to.

My first thought is (perhaps insensitively) "how much would it cost to do nothing?"

I mean I suppose possible that this person could be a victim of more abuse, require certain medication and therapy, try to take his/her own life, etc., which could end up costing the state more than $25k.

You also have to ask, where do you draw the line? Let's say a prisoner breaks a finger and it costs $2k for x-rays and treatment. Should the state pay for it? why or why not? They don't necessarily NEED to use that finger, why should the state pay to fix it? Should the state pay for any prisoner care other than life-threatening ailments?

Well I would say the state has some sort of responsibility to keep the prisoner safe.....so if they are injured while in the prison (and not their own fault) then the state should pay for the recovery costs. But then do you have to have a trial to see if it was their fault or not? IDK. But I don't see the gender reassignment surgery as the state's responsibility because they didn't cause the prisoner to be the wrong gender.

what if a prisoner trips and falls through no one's fault and breaks their arm? A prisoner should just have to suck suck it up?

Maybe they could ask their family to pay for it?

But also if it is no one's fault then that is not the prisoner's fault so they get care....BUT if the prisoner starts a fight and in the process gets shanked then he has to live (or not) with it.

[Rage Against the McKee]

They should have a prison work program for people interested in medicine and those other inmates should set the broken bone free of charge.

[420seriouscat69]

Sounds ridiculous.

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

LOL at prisoners getting elective surgery paid for with tax money.

[Mrs. Gooch]

They should have a prison work program for people interested in medicine and those other inmates should set the broken bone free of charge.

If there are doctors in the prison they should just let them do the medical work...even if their license has been revoked due to whatever got them into prison....and maybe there should be a prison exchange program where they move the doctor prisoners to wherever they are needed....I wonder if that would be more expensive than providing traditional care.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I mean it's just a broken bone. It's kind of hard to mess that one up. Just have some prisoners line the bones up so there isn't a big lump sticking out and wrap a cast around it.

[renocat]

Bones ok.  Reverse boner,no.