The Case of Michelle Kosilek... Is This Good?

Comment by Rachel King on September 6, 2012 at 6:46am

Scary isn't it.

Heres these nice respectable people who, blog and comment, after blog and comment, want to know why their very reasonable( to them) demand for free GRS is met with deaf ears by a self-interested Insurance mob.

So now we have the answer.

All you have to do is kill somebody who has pissed you off big-time and "Bob's your Uncle", well Auntie, soon.

Easy isn't it.

I remember reading some time back, that this is the policy in the Land of Oztralia, I also remember thinking, that's a bloody hard way to get a vagina, which unless you get more lucky (sic) and transferred to a woman's prison, your vagina won't get a look-in and if you do get transferred to a woman's prison, your vagina will get worn out before you get released.

It gives a whole new meaning to, "you're sitting on a gold mine," doesn't it.

Comment by Julia Giannopoulos on September 6, 2012 at 8:30am

I find it both deplorable and disgusting that this " person " is still living let alone having SRS.

We should have put this " person " to death years ago but no, we have had to house, provide medical care and feed this piece of garbage.

This diseased animal is causing a massive disservice to the TS community by demanding SRS to be performed whereas we should have operated on the body after execution in order to gain further understanding into the minds of animals such as this.  

Comment by Caroline Grace on September 6, 2012 at 9:33am

To see why the courts would want to assure TS prisoners get proper medical treatment one should see the case of the federal court striking down the State of Wisconsin's law prohibiting hormones and surgery for transgender prisoners. (Fields v Smith?). Basically, it went like this:

1) Hormones and surgery are standard treatments for TS patients (according to AMA  and WPATH who filed Amicus brief , the association of prison doctors, and others).

2) Being TS is a serious medical condition and physicians need to determine healthcare needs for prisoners, not politicians.

3) Harm was being done to patients / prisoners.

What the court decided affects all TS people when they found that:

1) that being TS is a medical condition that should be treated using the convential or standard treatments

2) Therapy, HRT, and Surgery are the standards of care and should be available to all prisoners when deemed necessary by their physicians

3) That witholding medically necessary treatments when it is obviously harming the prisoners was "torture".

I consider this a landmark case for many reasons. State law overturned by federal court. First court's decision was appealed and federal circuit appeals court support for therapy, hormones, surgery supported as medically necessary.  This is now the law in many states in the circuit. I am not 100% certain of this but I believe this was appealed to Supreme Court would said that they saw no reason to review the case since the federal appeals court had done things right.

Since this case was openly supported by the AMA in a friends of the court brief, everyone now knows where they stand - in full support of giving all of proper treatment.

It is yet another ruling that our surgeries are medically necessary and in my opinion will help bolster the case that these should be included in everyone's medical insurance policies.  The logic is,"If it is torture to withold these treatments from prisoners, why should any employer torture their employees?  Or should why should they treat their employees less than prisoners are treated?"

So this case has had huge legal impacts for us.

Now to the case for treating prisoners. 

Would you withhold cancer treatments from prisoners? Diabetes medicines? High blood pressure medications? Surgery that is the standard treatments for other medical needs such as breast cancer, glaucoma, etc?  Prisoners are entitled to standard medical treatments.  Being TS is no different. It has standard medical treatments. They are not elective or cosmetic and I am most thankful for the official position taken by the ACLU, the AMA, both APAs, NASW, WPATH and hundreds of other organizations that say such.

I wish the groundbreaking cases didn't involve prisoners because it clouds the mains issues of medical condition and its proper treatment with sideshow antics. Now imagine you were CeCe and going with your "she's innocent" position, shouldn't she have her medical condition properly treated since authorities won't allow her to work for her surgery or even to travel to those who she deems would be the best to treat her?

To those who think we should withold SRS, does that also include any other medically necessary surgeries, too?

As for the general population, I would like to point out that for some SRS is a life saving treatment, for others it eliminates a harsh and intense suffering that needn't be. Is it medically necessary for them?  You bet it is... as I know it is for me, too.

 

 

Comment by Dal Maxwell on September 6, 2012 at 10:28am

I have to throw my opinion in with the serious WTF! crowd.  I am actually in an e-mail dialog with the Judge's office manager about this, and the reasons why the Jusge was incorrect in his decision.

1 - One of the critical factors in qualifying for SRS in the first place is stability; the capacity to sustain onesself, to be able to maintain an emotional as well as environmental continuity.  Having attempted suicide AND self-mutilation (possibly more than once) this absolutely fails the litmus test for sane and stable.

2 - We have worked fairly tirelessly behind the scenes for years trying to change the minds of legislators and insurers as to the rights of trans people.  Insurance companies set their own coverage parameters; their client companies only pick which ones they want to carry; like dental, vision, or SRS.  When I was 17, in the late 60's, those exclusionary clauses were in there, and they are in there still.  If companies with wide-ranging diversity policies had access to them from insurers, they would have been in more policies long before now.  San Francisco led the charge in becoming their own health insurer, thus allowing covered members of its own policy to get SRS.

3 - THIS PERSON IS A CONVICTED FELON!  There are plenty of free citizens roaming the streets; being productive, living legal lives, doing no harm!  I am so offended that, of all people to dedicate a ruling like this to, a U.S. Judge issues the say-so for a convicted felon who took a life!  What medical condition exactly will kill this convict if THEY don't get SRS?  How about Lisa, Gwen or myself; do WE need to commit an equally heinous crime and then exhibit severe signs of instability before someone takes seriously that SRS is important to us?

I'd like to think that I am liberal in many things but this is just a miscarriage of justice.  I don't care if this prisoners mutilates themselves to death; it is no more their right than any of us who have never commited a misdemeanor let alone a grave felony.  A convicted felon with no chance for parole; is THAT the model of why SRS is important to us we want seen by a non-understanding public?

Comment by Dal Maxwell on September 6, 2012 at 10:40am

One last thing; SRS is not THE only option; give the prisoner an orchiectomy if you have to cater to the desires of a convicted murderer but PLEASE don't tell me that the killer's rights are more compelling than mine.

Comment by lissa michelle on September 6, 2012 at 11:06am

I am troubled by the intolerance of others including those of us who hope to one day follow this journey through. Let me separate the issue.
First, this was a horrific case, with no excuse and punishment to fit the crime. I do not believe in capital punishment, and I believe that Michelle must be punished with life in prison.

That said, we are faced with the gender identity issue. It is my understanding that this request is not on a whim or a way to forsake the action of what she did.We live in the USA and we are the greatest nation on earth because we strive to be tolerant and understanding.I believe SRS and the prescription for appropriate medications should be covered for all, even if you are a convicted murderer. The transgender community has made great strides in the past few years. Let's keep moving forward!

Comment by Julia Giannopoulos on September 6, 2012 at 11:46am

I consider myself kind, loving and moderately liberal when it comes to most things like universal health care and protections for the TS/IS community.

What I am angry about is the fact that someone can commit a violent felony,  in this case murder , and can have SRS paid for by those that cannot afford SRS.

In the TS/IS community  the majority cannot afford SRS. This is statistically proven and is valid.

However if one of us commits murder we then become eligible for SRS with costs rectified by the working public. If you have an intellect you have to see the absurdity in all of this.

There  are those amongst us with genital dysphoria so severe that they cut their genitalia and are still denied SRS due to the costs of such yet we provide the surgery to a murderer? 

To those that are " troubled " by perceived intolerance towards a murderer listen;  I am troubled by your lack of logic, common sense and compassion for for those that cannot afford SRS yet continue to live their lives every day in mental anguish. 

This " person " being given SRS is vile, is disgusting and sets our community back concerning the overall perception by the general public. 

The judge has done us a horrible disservice.

Comment by Chelle Munroe on September 6, 2012 at 7:19pm

You do bring up some very valid points and you are right that this is a very touchy subject due to the fact that a murder had been committed by Michelle (then Robert).  The good is that it will at least bring trans people to the forefront that we do exist; that we have legitimate medical and psychological needs; and that we should not be excluded from or by the insurance companies. It is going to be an uphill battle no matter what.

In regards to where she will be housed, that is another issue. Yes, she will be subject to being a victim in a men's prison, but on the other hand, she murdered a woman so how can she not be a possible threat to women in a woman's prison. She has not been a disciplinary problem so that makes it difficult to confine her to  the protective custody block where inmates have limited access to everything the regular prisoners do.

There are no easy answers or solutions to this situation but one thing is definite, it has generated some major discussions all over the world about transgender people and the rights we should be afforded. It is most definitely going to be interesting to see all the fallout from this one decision.

Comment by Michelle Wolf on September 6, 2012 at 8:09pm

Hi All,

I know, I've been truly horrible about responding to comments lately, and it's been way more about the state of my life than anything else (though to be honest, I hate how the banner ads here lock up my browser unless I keep killing the plug-in process). I really, really have appreciated all the discussion on this. I don't have anything new to add yet, but you have all given me a lot to think about. This is tough nut, pun intended. Love you all and thank you, and I do promise to be a better PE citizen once my life allows more than an occasional mental barf of my latest thought process. :-)

Comment by Jacqueline Waters on September 7, 2012 at 4:28am

The media is a trip to say the least. For one thing it is no longer considered a disorder to have Gender Dysphoria although certain things are definitely out of order, it is our bodies not our minds that need adjusting. 

I think it is absurd to be quite honest. If someone is doing LIFE in prison how is their quality of life any different post surgery in this case? They are going to die right there, and perhaps rightfully so. I really do not know the details of the case but apparently a jury found this person to be guilty.

I still find it interesting as well that somehow taxpayers feel like the are being burdened by the prison system, they are not...most prisons are FOR PROFIT and run by private companies these days. So not only does it not cost taxpayers but it contributes. Those taxpayers who believe their money is being used to support prisoners are the same ones that believe war is peace. Hell in this country you can get a peace prize for starting wars...go figure. There are profits being made....granted you may not be the recipient of them but its not on your dime. 

Now should this person be able to get SRS while in prison? No, I don't think so. Prison is not summer camp. It is not supposed to be comfortable and you are not supposed to enjoy the privileges that are available to the rest of society let alone receive extra consideration. 

If this person who is already convicted for LIFE with no parole then I propose that if they cannot live in their body one more day in their biological gender perhaps they should be given the option to choose extermination.  That is the one choice I think we should grant to all those who get life.....I don't see the point of living if locked up. If I did something that got me life, I would not spend it trying to get comfortable with my life in prison, I would find a way to end it. Seriously, what is the point? That's not a life at all so what exactly is the point in a Life sentence? 

There are consequences for actions and this person should have considered them before taking those actions. This sends the wrong message to people who live with our condition. If you lack funds just commit a crime and your financial woes are solved. Sure, makes sense to me! NOT.

Then again much of my journey has me discovering a ton of things that make no sense. The whole WPATH thing although seems to be a good cause makes no sense to me either. I can become a lizzard person, change my name to a symbol, fork my tongue, tattoo my entire body, put rods and pins through my face and put spikey plastic transdermal bumps on my head, file my teeth and get fangs and pretty much do anything I want.....but the moment I attempt to change my gender suddenly I need some people in white coats to agree and make me jump through hoops toward wellness? How does that make sense?

Comment