Credit US District Judge Mark Wolf with courage for being the first federal judge to order a taxpayer-funded sex change operation for a transsexual prisoner. But don’t credit him with a wise decision.
Wolf has been wrestling with this issue for more than a decade. In 2002, he ruled that inmate Michelle Kosilek (formerly Robert) was entitled to treatment for a gender identity disorder, a psychiatric illness characterized by anguish over one’s sex. He left it up to medical professionals to figure out a course of treatment. Shortly thereafter, Kosilek began a regimen of female hormone treatment and psychotherapy. That seemed like a humane solution. The case should have stopped there.
Comments
When Medicare rejects some of my simple, common sense tests that are doctor approved, I will forward the rejections to Judge Wolf. Hope it doesn't take him 10 years to change the rejection status!
This is another in growing list of decisions by judges, including some from the Supreme Court, which are nothing short of egregiously lacking in sound judgment. That the legal system is broken is beyond dispute. What to do about it is another conversation. To the extent that a judge can invoke 126 pages of legalese to support this judgment is only a reflection of the pathological inbred thinking that has metastasized in the legal profession, and is further evidence of the need for change. Congratulations to the legislators who have the good sense and courage to challenge this totally inappropriate decision.
Amen! What planet is the Judge from that he rejects the argument that the sex change would present a management nightmare for prison administration?
Would "she" be transferred to Framingham?
Or to whatever planet the judge inhabits?
Sorry, but first and foremost I question the medical judgement of a psychiatrist who would determine that gender reassignment surgery is a legitimate medical necessity.
As a prisoner he should have access to decent medical care...just like those of us who haven't resorted to murder. However, a face lift, hair transplants, teeth whitening...to say nothing of sex changes are procedures we pay out of pocket. Does he have any money? No...well tough cookies. If I rob a bank, get caught and put in for 10 years perhaps I can get a chin lift! Hmmmmm.
StarrLunardi's comment comes closest to the question this column raised for me. If a law-abiding citizen suffers Gender Identity Disorder on par with Kosilek, but lacks the means to treat it, should the government step in to foot the bill for treatment? If not, does Wolf's ruling implicitly set up a "penalty" for being law-abiding and socially responsible? (The situation is even more "Orwellian" if the law-abiding citizen is paying taxes which help defray the cost of the convict's surgery.)
Well, Cogito-et Scribo, the law abiding citizen is supposedly able to work and get insurance most of time (and, if not, I do think that the surgery should be paid for by the government), but this inmate is not able to make money or carry insurance. There's the difference.
Harmon's "common sense" has nothing to do with the rights of citizens. Got news for you and the haters posting: all born or naturalized ARE citizens, even if you hate them. How simple does this stuff get and why is this discussed as if we are all on a grammar school playground, letting the moralistic bullies dictate the outcome REGARDLESS of the law of citizenship.
Dont you all want citizens to be the basis of this republican democracy? Well kick your butts and do a little thinking, like another columnist has done, brilliantly. Grow up and stop confusing prejudice with the rights of ALL citizens.
Interesting idea. You might be just right.
What's next for inmates? Treatment for erectile dysfunction? Time for this judge to consider retirement.
How is this argument any different thanchanging out government provided cell phones to welfare recipients?
I didn't know that welfare recipients are all also convicted criminals, lissaabb!
Inmates should be required to buy the states Romneycare like everyone else. If they don't but it--then give them nothing but bread and water. If they die --so be it!!!!!
Is this person competent to make this decision? I hope this individual doesn't turn around and sue the state after such drastic surgery.