When asked by Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT) whether President Obama’s proposed socialized healthcare plan will mandate taxpayer funded abortion, Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) admitted that it will require “any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate.” It now appears that the plan’s “medically appropriate” umbrella is far more expansive than most Americans could have imagined.
In addition to abortion on demand, the weight of the evidence indicates that cosmetic “gender reassignment” surgeries for both U.S. citizens and illegal immigrants who suffer from APA recognized “Gender Identity Disorder” (GID) may also be provided – free of charge – courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer. The current price tag for such a procedure can exceed $50,000.
Page 972 of the House version of the bill (H.R. 3200) provides for “standards, as appropriate, for the collection of accurate data on health and health care” based on “sex, sexual orientation [and] gender identity.” The Senate draft indicates that the government will “detect and monitor trends in health disparities,” requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to “develop standards for the measurement of gender.” (i.e., officially recognize subjectively self-determined “transgender” or “transsexual” gender identities). It further mandates ‘‘participation in the institutions’ programs of individuals and groups from…different genders and sexual orientations.”
Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action commented: “There’s a gulf of difference between what Obama and liberals in Congress, and the American people deem ‘medically appropriate;’ especially when it’s ‘we the people’ footing the bill. To force Americans, against their conscience, to fund abortion on demand and to facilitate gender confusion by subsidizing the elective practice of genital ‘sex-change’ mutilation is unconscionable.
“After hearing Sen. Mikulski’s ‘any service deemed…medically appropriate’ admission, I was prompted to dig a little deeper. I contacted the offices of Sen. Harry Reid, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Rep. Barney Frank and the House Subcommittee on Health. I asked, very simply, for ‘an assurance that the proposed healthcare plan will not allow taxpayer funded gender reassignment surgeries or hormone therapies.’ When faced with the bill’s relevant language, every staffer I spoke with either declined to answer or would neither confirm nor deny that such procedures would be covered.
Here's my reply:
I doubt sex reassignment will be included, too controversial.
It would make financial sense of course, we have the figures to prove it, but too many people find it all too icky.
Yes, it makes far more sense for taxpayers to not pay the 2c per year once for sex reassignment surgery, and to continue to pay 0.3-0.5c per year for 20, 30, or 50 years for all the drugs and psychotherapy to deal with the misery caused by not having it. Not financial sense, mind you, but it's a cost many are willing to pay.
Oh yes, and foregoing the additional tax revenue from having a functional, productive citizen, rather than a miserable, dysfunctional and desperately unhappy one. That's far more significant from a financial viewpoint, if we're talking about government-run healthcare.
OK, so it costs the taxpayer or insurance policy holder more over 5 years just in direct costs, and far more in foregone revenue. But there are significant savings in aged care, as so many die before they reach old age if they don't have it. It doesn't cost that much to ensure that trans people die, and many consider it a bargain at a few dollars a year in taxes, and a few cents in health insurance.
Every medical condition, from heart disease to hangnails, has a "Standard of Care", a "Best practice". Here's what the SOC for transsexuality says about genital reconstruction:
"Such a therapeutic regimen, when prescribed or recommended by qualified practitioners, is medically indicated and medically necessary. Sex reassignment is not "experimental," "investigational," "elective," "cosmetic," or optional in any meaningful sense.
Medically necessary. Not cosmetic. Not elective. Not optional.
But they're just medical specialists, what do they know?