When it comes to prisoners, there seems to be a different standard. I know I remember hearing that the Supreme Court ruled that prisoners were not "entitled" to organ transplants that may be medically necessary. The Court however ruled that the State was under no obligation to "prolong" life. If a person's organs failed, that is a "natural" death.
The question with prisoners is not, is it medically necessary to have SRS, it's is the state obligated to provide it? Because SRS was no available in the US until 30 years ago, I could see the courts ruling that if one dies from not having SRS, that also would be a natural death and the state has no further obligation. I mean, if it's just depression, guess what? Going to prison causes depression. I am sure they would be willing to give a person some anti-depressants.
It will be interesting to see if this makes it to the Supreme Court. I know a lot of taxpayers will be very upset if they have to start paying for SRS. That will beg the question, do they also have to pay for FFS? And what about Breast Augmentation? Then do they have to give Breast Augmentation to women prisoners who have a loss of self esteem from having small breasts and it's causing depression?
How do we determine what is "medically necessary"? Is it what we need to live a happy life or just what we need to stay breathing and our heart beating? What is appropriate for those we are punishing? I mean, if they rule they have to give SRS to transsexuals in prison, I could see people who will go to prison because they can't do it any other way. I mean if the choice is kill myself or go to prison where I will get SRS, that don't sound nearly as bad as being dead.
I think we need some legal definitions. I believe insurance companies should have to pay, including medicare. For prisoners, I would let them transition if they can afford it. I mean, they are being punished. Call it another reason not to go to jail.
Love always,
Elizabeth
