Skip to main content

View Diary: Pfc. Manning Statement Re: Gender Identity on Today Show (137 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Whoa. Hold up a second. (0+ / 0-)
    If she were suffering from cancer, would you say we shouldn't waste money on her?  Maybe you would, but I don't think that's what we stand for as Democrats here at DK.
    That's very self-righteous of you to put it that way, but needing treatment for cancer and wanting hormone therapy are not quite the same thing.

    Of course prisoners deserve medical care (they get it easier than I do on the outside), but frankly, I'm not sure if I'm okay with taxpayers picking up the tab for her hormone therapy.

    Banking on the American people to be able to sort all this out and declare the adult in the room the winner is a very big bet. -Digby

    by Boogalord on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 10:53:43 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  But why? Cancer treatment is more important than (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      aitchdee

      hormone therapy only if our bodies are more important than our minds and our souls.



      Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

      by Wee Mama on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 11:14:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Right. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Wee Mama, aitchdee, kcc

      Because a third of transpeople having attempted suicide in their lives shows that being trans is just some little trivial cosmetic issue.

      The rate of trans regret for hormones and SRS is a tiny fraction of the rate of regret for taking chemotherapy or undergoing heart surgery.  It's a profound difference in their life.  And it literally saves lives.

      And you say you don't want your money going toward it.  Well, guess what?  Whatever medical condition you and yours have, trans people have been paying for them with their taxes and copays and the like.  Should they have a right to declare the medical conditions of you and yours to be not needy enough of taxpayer money?  

      Speak up, what's your real objection to trans people getting treatment?  I mean, if a level of suffering that leads to one in three trying to kill themselves isn't enough for you (and over 90% to have considered it), then what is?

      Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

      by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 11:16:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And heck... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wee Mama, aitchdee

        in the long run, I'm not even sure that treating a transperson actually costs money - it could overall save money.  Manning will be infertile (all child-related costs are huge), be have a nearly-eliminated risk of prostate cancer and a completely eliminated risk of testicular cancer.  The breast cancer risk will be similar to that of other women, of course, but she won't have the risks of uterine, cervical, or ovarian cancer like other women.  We're talking an overall reduction in huge expenses; I wouldn't be surprised if the long-term cost picture is lower, probably significantly

        But nah, better to let 'em suffer, right?

        Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

        by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 11:20:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And another thing... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wee Mama, aitchdee

        You talk about cancer.  As if health insurance is just about cancer.  But of course that's not true, now isn't it?  Health insurance covers pretty much bloody everything except trans issues.  Many if noth most health plans even cover stuff like viagra.  I mean, for crying out loud, that is considered essential but a condition that causes a third of its suffererers to try to kill itself is cosmetic?  Going in and having a wart frozen off?  Essential!  Not feeling so uncomfortable in your body that it's not unknown for people to literally take up knives and try to do the job themselves?  Cosmetic!

        That's the US medical system for you.  Is that what you support?

        Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

        by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 11:23:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Again, hold up a second. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        aitchdee
        Because a third of transpeople having attempted suicide in their lives shows that being trans is just some little trivial cosmetic issue.
        I never said that. Keep trying to demonize me but I have absolutely no problem with transgender people undergoing treatment to suit their own needs.
        The rate of trans regret for hormones and SRS is a tiny fraction of the rate of regret for taking chemotherapy or undergoing heart surgery.
        What? When did I say anything about regret? I'm not some asshole trying to make the point that transgender people are blundering into a spontaneous mistake that they will regret later. As for people who "regret" chemo... I'm just confused. People get chemo treatment for deadly diseases. Do they "regret" getting the disease? Do the ones that refuse treatment "regret" dying? I'm just not seeing the relevance here.
        Speak up, what's your real objection to trans people getting treatment?
        I have no objection to trans people getting treatment, but thanks for phrasing that in a misleading way.

        My issue is with people getting hormone therapy in prison, and that therapy being paid for by taxpayer dollars. Because that's not the same thing as needing treatment for cancer.

        Speaking frankly, my thought is "Well, if you're a transgender person and you want hormone therapy... Don't go to prison?"

        In all honesty, this is the first time I've considered the question. If you noticed above, I didn't say I was opposed to it, I said I wasn't sure. I do not want to downplay things like hormone therapy and its relation to the well-being of trans people, nor the uniquely vulnerable position trans people hold in society. But in a prison setting, where the medical care is given through taxpayer dollars, I believe that care should be given only out of physical necessity.

        But again, although a transgender person's hormone therapy is not the same thing as needing chemo for cancer, it's also not the same as a female prisoner wanting a boob job. It's a gray area.

        ......

        I can't imagine what it'd be like to be a transgender person. I know the suicide statistics, and I know that transgender people generally have it way tougher than I do. In light of that, I'd be okay with someone like Manning receiving hormone therapy in prison. Is such hormone therapy a true "necessity" for a transgender person? That's the essential question, and who am I (straight white male) to say?

        And yes, I guess I did just go from "wavering" to "support" over the course of one comment.

        Banking on the American people to be able to sort all this out and declare the adult in the room the winner is a very big bet. -Digby

        by Boogalord on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 11:58:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "given only out of physical necessity'? So (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AaronInSanDiego, antimony, aitchdee, Rei

          depression should not be treated? or anxiety? If the condition is mental or psychological then the treatment needs to be also.



          Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary? . . . and respect the dignity of every human being.

          by Wee Mama on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:02:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Re (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          antimony
          Because a third of transpeople having attempted suicide in their lives shows that being trans is just some little trivial cosmetic issue.
          I never said that. Keep trying to demonize me but I have absolutely no problem with transgender people undergoing treatment to suit their own needs.
          Either you admit the seriousness of it, and thus support that it should be covered, or play down that it's not serious, wherein you and I have some very big disagreements.  Which is it?  Or is there some third option I'm not seeing here?
          As for people who "regret" chemo... I'm just confused. People get chemo treatment for deadly diseases. Do they "regret" getting the disease?
          They regret chemo because chemo is an utterly miserable experience and it's not a guarantee you won't die anyway, and can sometimes kill you faster than the disease alone.
          My issue is with people getting hormone therapy in prison, and that therapy being paid for by taxpayer dollars. Because that's not the same thing as needing treatment for cancer.
          Do I have to repeat my whole previous posts?  

          1) Trans people pay for your medical conditions with their taxes and copays and such.  Why should they have to pay for your medical conditions but not vice versa?  Why should prisons cover everyone's medical conditions except transpeoples?  Especially if you acknowledge the seriousness of it.

          2) Mentioning cancer is not simply wrong from the percent of people who don't regret the treatment and think it improved there lives versus treatment for trans people - but wrong from the perspective that prisoners aren't offered "cancer care insurance", they're offered general medical care.  An inmate can get a freaking wart removed at taxpayer expense.  You think that's more serious than a medical condition that leads to a third of its sufferers trying to kill themselves?

          Speaking frankly, my thought is "Well, if you're a transgender person and you want hormone therapy... Don't go to prison?"
          Hey, while we're being so supportive of denying prisoners medical care, why not give them medical conditions to suffer even more!  
          I do not want to downplay things like hormone therapy and its relation to the well-being of trans people
          No, certainly not, you just support carving out an gaping exception in prisoner medical coverage specifically for transpeople.  That's in no way playing it down, of course not.
          But in a prison setting, where the medical care is given through taxpayer dollars, I believe that care should be given only out of physical necessity.
          Right.  Wart?  Necessary.  Condition that leads to high rate of suicide?  Pish....

          Look... I'm probably being too hard on you... you say you haven't thought much about it before, and I understand.  The important element to take away here is, it's a giant hole carved out of insurance policies for a serious condition, and the only reason it's carved out is bigotry.  There's no medically justifiable reason for this hole.  The AMA and the APA support the treatment of transpeople.  

          Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

          by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:10:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hrm. (0+ / 0-)
            They regret chemo because chemo is an utterly miserable experience and it's not a guarantee you won't die anyway, and can sometimes kill you faster than the disease alone.
            I'm quite aware of that. Sometimes people who take chemo actually see their cancer go into remission, too. Again, I'm not seeing how "regret" factors into this discussion or cancer treatments.
            prisoners aren't offered "cancer care insurance", they're offered general medical care.  An inmate can get a freaking wart removed at taxpayer expense.
            If that's true, then I betray my own ignorance. I was under the impression penal medical care was provided only for potentially life-threatening problems. Thanks for correcting me.

            If you can get a wart removed in prison, then sure, I don't see why hormonal therapy shouldn't be covered.

            Banking on the American people to be able to sort all this out and declare the adult in the room the winner is a very big bet. -Digby

            by Boogalord on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 02:25:06 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  If it was so dire (0+ / 0-)

        why is Manning waiting till he gets in prison to do it?  

        I think if Manning want the procedure - go ahead - just don't make the taxpayers pay the bill - that's what family, friends - advocates (hint hint) are for.

        Start a fund if you really are that passionate about it.

        The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

        by ctexrep on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 12:11:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Are you even capable of referring to Chelsea (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Wee Mama, aitchdee, antimony

          Manning by using the correct pronoun?  Is it that difficult for you to at least do that much?

          Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan

          by sjburnman on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 12:29:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm taking about a procedure (0+ / 0-)

            being performed and if it should be paid for by taxpayers....if referring to Manning as Chelsea makes you happy, then I would say, I don't think Chelsea should have the procedure paid for by Taxpayers....actually, I should refer to taxpayers as suckers - because that's what we really are -  paying for all of our Government's shenanigans.
             

            The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

            by ctexrep on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 12:47:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So lets get this straight. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aitchdee

              Prisoner A has a wart.  Gets removed at taxpayer expense.
              Prisoner B has a medical condition that leads 1/3rd of its sufferers to try to kill themselves.  The concept of covering it seems ridiculous to you.

              Um, could you please explain why?

              And in case you didn't know, trans people pay for other peoples medical conditions with their taxes and copays.  But they don't get it back.  Despite the fact that the AMA and APA both say that they should be covered.

              Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

              by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:12:23 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Simple (0+ / 0-)

                a wart can spread - it can be transferred to others.  It can crack and bleed, exposing the general population to bodily fluids that could potentially harm them.

                If Chelsea is determined to be a hazard to herself, then she while be kept in a manner that will not allow her to try and commit suicide.

                A question for you - did the AMA suggest this treatment should be covered by taxpayers or did they say it should be covered under private insurance and is it covered?

                Also - FYI - everyone pays for others medical conditions who are insured - that's how it works - so no one is denying a transgender person medical care for having your example - a wart removed....so they do get it back.  The example you use isn't valid.  If you are a male, your insurance goes to paying females OBGYN visits - but males don't get it back?  Of course they do - when they go to the doctor - they get it back.

                The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

                by ctexrep on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 02:04:29 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Fine. Want something non-contageous? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  aitchdee

                  A granuloma.  Why's it covered?  I could go down a list of about a thousand noncontageous conditions that are a million times less significant to an individual's well being than treatment for being trans.

                  Oh great - so the solution to a person having a severe - but treatable - condition that can cause a person to be suicidal is... not to treat them, but to "not allow them to commit suicide"!  Brilliant!

                  A question for you - did the AMA suggest this treatment should be covered by taxpayers or did they say it should be covered under private insurance and is it covered?
                  It says private and public, and says there should be no exceptions
                  Whereas, The American Medical Association opposes discrimination on the basis of gender identity and

                  Whereas, Gender Identity Disorder (GID) is a serious medical condition recognized as such in both the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Ed., Text Revision) (DSM-IV-TR) and the International Classification of Diseases (10th Revision), and is characterized in the DSM-IV-TR as a persistent discomfort with one’s assigned sex and with one’s primary and secondary sex characteristics, which causes intense
                  emotional pain and suffering; and

                  Whereas, GID, if left untreated, can result in clinically significant psychological distress, dysfunction, debilitating depression and, for some people without access to appropriate medical care and treatment, suicidality and death; and

                  Whereas, The World Professional Association For Transgender Health, Inc. (“WPATH”) is the leading international, interdisciplinary professional organization devoted to the understanding and treatment of gender identity disorders, and has established internationally accepted Standards of Care for providing medical treatment for people with GID, including mental health care, hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery, which are designed to promote the health and welfare of persons with GID and are recognized within the medical community to be the standard of care for treating people with GID; and

                  Whereas, An established body of medical research demonstrates the effectiveness and medical necessity of mental health care,  hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery as forms of therapeutic treatment for many people diagnosed with GID;  and

                  Whereas, Health experts in GID, including WPATH, have rejected the myth that such treatments are “cosmetic” or “experimental” and have recognized that these treatments can provide safe and effective treatment for a serious health condition; and

                  Whereas, Physicians treating persons with GID must be able to provide the correct treatment necessary for a patient in order to achieve genuine and lasting comfort with his or her gender, based on the person’s individual needs and medical history; and

                  Whereas, The AMA opposes limitations placed on patient care by third-party payers when such care is based upon sound scientific evidence and sound medical opinion; and

                  Whereas, Many health insurance plans categorically exclude coverage of mental health, medical, and surgical treatments for GID, even though many of these same treatments, such as psychotherapy, hormone therapy, breast augmentation and removal, hysterectomy, oophorectomy, orchiectomy, and salpingectomy, are often covered for other medical conditions; and

                  Whereas, The denial of these otherwise covered benefits for patients suffering from GID represents discrimination based solely on a patient’s gender identity; and Whereas, Delaying treatment for GID can cause and/or aggravate additional serious and expensive health problems, such as stress-related physical illnesses, depression, and substance abuse problems, which further endanger patients’ health and strain the health care system;

                  therefore be it RESOLVED

                  That the AMA support public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender identity disorder (Directive to Take Action);

                  and be it further RESOLVED,

                  That the AMA oppose categorical exclusions of coverage for treatment of gender identity disorder when prescribed by a physician (Directive to Take Action).

                  Fiscal Note: No significant fiscal impact.

                  But hey, I guess you know more than the AMA.
                  Also - FYI - everyone pays for others medical conditions who are insured - that's how it works
                  Oh for crying out loud, you really don't see the unfairness in people with one serious medical condition paying for everyone elses but not getting that condition treated, with the justification that, "hey, it's fair, because you could get something you don't have treated?"  That's the exact same BS argument used by opponents of same sex marriage that, hey, it's fair because a gay man can still marry a woman.

                  Coverage For Someone Else's Condition Does Not Make Up For Prohibition Of Coverage Of Yours.

                  If you are a male, your insurance goes to paying females OBGYN visits - but males don't get it back?
                  Because mens' medical conditions are covered to!  Seriously, what aren't you getting here?  It's fair right up until the point that you say, for a medically-unjustifiable reason, that Group A (and only group A) doesn't get coverage for their condition.  Despite the AMA itself saying that they should.  And it's especially bad when that group is widely recognized as a target of discrimination to begin with.

                  Já þýðir já. Nei þýðir nei. Hvað er svona erfitt við það?

                  by Rei on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 02:31:05 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  As for the procedure, her lawyer said his client (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aitchdee

              had not signaled an interest in gender-reassignment surgery, but if you want to talk about it anyway, that's fine, comment away.

              I'm just asking that you refer to Chelsea Manning as you would any woman by using the appropriate pronouns as a sign of respect for the transgender community as a whole, regardless of your feelings toward Ms. Manning.

              Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense. Carl Sagan

              by sjburnman on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:16:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I have nothing against Chelsea (0+ / 0-)

                quite frankly - I don't even think she should be in jail....that's not what I'm talking about.  As I have be very clear in explaining - I'm not against a person choosing or having said treatments done - IMHO - it's courageous.  It's my opinion that this is a procedure that should not be covered by taxpayers - that's it.  Chelsea isn't dying to become a woman - she wants to become a woman.  Medical treatment for any incarcerated person should be limited to something that is actually wrong - for example an eye infection, cancer, the flu etc.  

                The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

                by ctexrep on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 01:55:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  how about meds that treat for (0+ / 0-)

                  depression? Is that insufficiently bodily for you? Too nebulously hormone-y and thus elective? If you can't see it with the naked eye and treat it with sutures and splints, it ain't a genuine medical problem, eh?

                  God bless our tinfoil hearts.

                  by aitchdee on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 03:13:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  if you are in jail (0+ / 0-)

                    you should be depressed,  Its beyond a pill fix.

                    The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

                    by ctexrep on Thu Aug 22, 2013 at 06:07:54 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site