I dont follow that person's comment whether it was meant towards covered ca, medi-Cal, state employees, or prisoners
My thinking on this:
A) any person who is in prison has there medical and/or covered ca cancelled at moment of incarceration. Their policy-therefore-changes.
I see this the same way as I see a person who changes the option to paid insurance levels (upgrading from silver bronze or gold...)
B) Medi-Cal patients -albeit usually quite poor or retired and on fixed incomes (usually means they are quite poor compared to people receiving regular paychecks)...have very little choices in their medi-cal options for surgeries...they must live within their means like other responsible human beings who pay bills (remember--the retirees already proved they are law abiding and worked 20+ years in order to receive their pensions...others on Medi-Cal because they are medically needing assistance that otherwise couldnt be possible.)
C) I see Prison medical expenses as necessary for preventative purposes in order to compel rehabilitation (mental health drugs), or to compel mass health and safety (shots-showers-nutritious meals, exercise)
What Im failing to see is the state mandate that prisoners medical needs are our responsibility because they want a sex change.
To me... it falls to reason that if sterilization is considered inhumane -- then other forms of sexual manipulation of organ parts should also be considered inhumane while a prison is in our custody.
Im not even talking about the brevity of many studies on prisoners that show their mental and emotional stability steeply declines while incarcerated. This then is grounds for a major lawsuit if a prisoner is ever released from custody and they then scream we took their sexuality from them--that it was known their mental health was not stable at time of request for surgery. Further... How do we know that they did not have a sudden decline in mental health prior to entering the "system", or that they are defrauding the government and committing crimes in order to get surgeries that otherwise a good and decent law abiding person would have to work tremendously hard in order to pay for what ever premiums their medical insurance company would not normally consider medicallly necessary?
So to go back to the above quote that Steve posted....
No, I do think that State workers should have that privilege just as any other employer sponsored insurance would pay for a sex change. For Medi-Cal too. They are playing by the states rules, being good citizens.... so if covered cal and medical is for indigent then they should have their own tier of medically necessary for sex changes, as well.
But prisoners...sex is illegal in prison. condoms are only there to discourage the reckless promulgation of STDs among criminals who are not gong to follow the rules anyway. But I don't see why we are paying for their sex change. What are they doing as employees of the state of California to earn the same medical insurance as law abiding citizens?
The inhumanity of this decision is the person on the streets who does follow the laws and cant get a sex change. That is insanely inhumane. The state need to stop punishing good people for bad people's choices.
