It’s even worse than that! I’ve got multi-decade firsthand experience AND ongoing medical education in the topic.
No. But then I generally get my patients after they’ve been on hormones for a while. Most dropouts happen in the early months. But it does happen later.
They are placed in housing that meets the institution’s needs for security and the inmate’s needs for safety. That’s decided on an individual basis. It may be a special management unit for inmates who are most likely to be preyed on (such as effeminate males regardless of their orientation/gender identity, former police officers or judges, etc) or perhaps just a minimum security unit with non-violent offenders, or many variations in between.
I concur. And it’s up to doctors to recommend treatment that based on science and evidence that the proposed intervention is safe, effective, and necessary.
Can I game the system? As a male, can I say that I feel like I’m a woman, but hey! I don’t want any drugs or surgery, I don’t believe in it. But treat me as a woman, and most importantly house me with the female inmates.
If I get caught having sex with one, then I’m simply a lesbian (I think) or whatever, just don’t judge me based on gender. Would it work?
**If anyone knows my posting history, you know my thoughts on this whole nonsense, so no need to repeat them.
Does Medicare, Medicaid and other goverment sponsored insurance cover hormone therapy and SRS for their consumers?
I think prisoners (well, I think EVERYONE), should receive comprehensive medical and mental health treatment, because it’s the right thing to do, and because, ultimately it is cheaper for the taxpayer than NOT providing it, IMO.
I don’t think that prisoners should receive a HIGHER level of medical care than people in society who are dependent on government sponsored insurance. That would seem to penalize people who obey the laws and choose not to commit crimes.
And it seems like gender identity issues should be looked at on a case-by-case basis and decided by the individual and his/her health care team. Its a far more complex issue than, say, diabetes or hypertension, where the standard is to prescribe a certain dosage of a certain medication and we can be reasonably sure that will fix the problem.
All our MtF transgendered (none have had surgery, just hormones) are housed in male institutions. Staff is encouraged to call them by their last name, and avoid gendered pronouns.
Sex between inmates is against the rules, even if consensual. No matter what genders are involved.
I just think providing SRS to prisoners is a can of worms. A citizen goes into prison with one set of equipment but comes out with another? ISTM there are a variety of ways that could blow up in the state’s face. Also, I can’t see how we could justify it to the taxpayers when there are so many services free people aren’t getting as it is. I can’t get my mind into the position where SRS is something the state provides to anybody, let alone prisoners. Of course I’m willing to be persuaded.
I would not object to hormone therapy or allowing a prisoner to live as their perceived gender though.
Who do you think provided the information for that column? Cecil looked at the evidence and chose to interpret it one way.
Here is a refutation of the column by the same person who provided the base evidence for the column. Googling shouldn’t end at the first link…
To the best of my knowledge, there is no state in which a pre-op transsexual can serve in the prison of their correct gender. In terms of post-op transsexuals, I believe most states allow that.
I agree. Ultimately you have two things going on- first, there are probably plenty of law-abiding transgender people out there who want hormone therapy and sex changes who can’t afford them. I see no reason whatsoever that an imprisoned transgender person should get that benefit on the government’s dime.
Second, I don’t give a flying fuck what gender a person thinks they are; if it’s a problem that requires the government to spend more money and effort to incarcerate them, I’m against it. If they’re born a man, they’re in with the men. If they’re born a woman, they’re in with the women.
I honestly don’t give much of a shit about prisoners; if they were members of society, they’d have obeyed the laws. As it is, they’re outside the community, and basically being warehoused for some period until it’s hoped that they can re-enter society and not be law-breaking assholes.
That’s not an argument for treating prisoners badly, it’s an argument for treating non-prisoners better.
Let’s break this down into a language we all can understand.
-
If you believe transgender people are folks who have a “legitimate” physical, mental, or other difference, then being transgender is a condition which needs treatment. Since it’s proven that transgender people who are untreated have a high suicide rate, depression rate, and overall high level of mental suffering, denying someone with a legitimate physical mental need is just as invalid as denying a person with a thyroid condition their pills.
-
If you believe transgender people are crazy for Cocoa Puffs, screwed up, mad as hatters, well, hormone treatment is recognized and proven to improve their quality of life and mental stability. Just like giving medication for any other psychological problem.
So whichever way one thinks of the transgendered, denying them medicine seems to be on shaky ground. Add to this the fact that estradiol without insurance is all of $10/month from Wal-Mart (it’s where I buy it)…where is this major cost? Even if they need spironolactone, without insurance that’s only about $40/month. This is small potatoes.
SRS is a whole other topic.
Please define “born a man” as I suspect we differ on this point.
This much is obvious.
This is what happens when you say things without thinking about them first.
What do you think costs the government more money? Housing a prisoner who was surgically changed from a man to a woman in a woman’s prison? Or housing that same prisoner, who is now a woman, in a man’s prison because they were “born a man”?
I agree. I don’t see any reasonable grounds for denying hormone treatments.
Medical science has demonstrated very conclusively that many if not most Gender Dysphoria patients have legitimate medical needs due to their diagnosis. Meeting those needs most commonly requires hormone treatment.
I took an oath to help my patients get their legitimate medical needs met.
Courts have ruled that inmates must have their legitimate medical needs met.
States which have passed laws restricting hormone therapy for Gender Dysphoria patients have had those laws struck down by the aforementioned courts.
Are there good studies that show that hormone treatment reduces suicide attempts?
Regards,
Shodan
I was under the impression that the thread wasn’t referring to post-op transgender people, but rather pre-op. So by that assumption, I’m saying that the prisoners should be sorted by genital type.
The problem I have with it isn’t some sort of hatefulness toward transgender people; it’s more of a general hatefulness toward prisoners. For whatever reason, I just don’t have much compassion, empathy or sympathy of any kind for them. It’s easy enough to stay out of prison- the vast majority of people do it without any problems, but we’re a nation of laws, and the rule of law is paramount in our society, and my feeling is that if you break the law, then you’ve pretty much vacated your privileges under those laws.
I realize that there is a reasonable standard of medical care for prisoners, and my thoughts on hormone treatment would be that I’m ok with it if it’s medically necessary and doesn’t cost the government too much.
If it’s just to make the person feel better or have a better quality of life, then I don’t really think it’s an appropriate use of government funds, however small. They’re not in prison to be happy or have a good quality of life; quite the opposite in fact.
There are over 40 million law-abiding citizens in the US who would like to be able to afford to go to a doctor, get preventive care, and have some assurance that if they needed a broken leg set or an emergency appendix removal they could get it done without bankruptcy and/or potentially harmful delay in securing treatment yet, because they don’t have health insurance and can’t afford to buy an individual policy they can’t get it.
By your reasoning, NO prisoner should get ANY health care until those 40 million are also provided for.
My question is why, if we can get healthcare to prisoners, and if every other civilized first world nation can manage at least basic coverage for their citizens, the allegedly great US a.k.a. wealthiest nation on Earth can’t manage it. Seems to me the injustice isn’t that prisoners can get medical care but that the law-abiding so often can’t.
In other words, you’d treat them about like stray dogs instead of human beings? OK, where you stand is noted for future reference.
I can’t say I have a LOT of sympathy for prisoners, but I’ve known far too many people in my life who screwed once, served several years in a prison, then went on to be law-abiding citizens for decades afterward. While there are some genuinely bad people out there, there are also a number of mostly decent folks who made a bad mistake at some point. They aren’t animals, they aren’t inherently evil, and I don’t see where making someone more miserable than necessary for years at a time is going to benefit anyone.
I don’t really care if prisoners are happy or miserable in prison. I mostly care if, after they get out, they’re going to break the law again or not. It seems to me that, if our attitude towards prisoners is we don’t care how much they suffer while in prison, they are much more likely to come out worse than they went in.