Wednesday, October 02, 2024

Medical Necessity?

Power was finally restored on Monday afternoon, and we are cleaning up from the damage done by hurricane Helene. We are still waiting for the flood waters to recede. Estimates are that things should be back to normal levels by October 9. 

Meanwhile, the rest of the world remains upside down as trans craziness continues.

From Fox News,

A federal judge has ruled that it would be unconstitutional for an Indiana prison to deny a transgender inmate sex reassignment surgery following the inmate's lawsuit against the facility.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sued the Indiana Department of Corrections last year on behalf of a transgender inmate, Jonathan C. Richardson, also known as Autumn Cordellionè, who was convicted of strangling his 11-month-old stepdaughter to death in 2001.

Indiana law, however, prohibits the Department of Corrections from using taxpayer dollars to fund sex reassignment surgeries for inmates. However, the ACLU argues in the lawsuit, filed on Aug. 28, 2023, that the law is a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment."

The surgery for Richardson, who is serving out a 55-year prison sentence for reckless homicide, "is a medical necessity," according to the ACLU lawsuit.

Judge Richard Young agreed with the ACLU's claims and ruled in favor of Cordellioné last week.

"Specifically, Ms. Cordellioné has shown that her gender dysphoria is a serious medical need, and that, despite other treatments Defendant has provided her to treat her gender dysphoria, she requires gender-affirming surgery to prevent a risk of serious bodily and psychological harm," the ruling states.

The DOC must now take "all reasonable actions" to ensure Cordellioné undergoes sex surgery, according to the order.

Since when is a "gender-affirming" surgery a medical necessity? 

The Medicare definition of medically necessary is, 

Health care services or supplies needed to diagnose or treat an illness, injury, condition, disease or its symptoms and that meet accepted standards of medicine. 

 The insurance company Cigna is more specific,

  • "Medically Necessary" or "Medical Necessity" means health care services that a physician, exercising prudent clinical judgment, would provide to a patient. The service must be:
  • For the purpose of evaluating, diagnosing, or treating an illness, injury, disease, or its symptoms
  • In accordance with the generally accepted standards of medical practice
  • Clinically appropriate, in terms of type, frequency, extent, site, and duration, and considered effective for the patient's illness, injury, or disease
  • Not primarily for the convenience of the patient, health care provider, or other physicians or health care providers
  • Not more costly than an alternative service or sequence of services at least as likely to produce equivalent therapeutic or diagnostic results as to the diagnosis or treatment of that patient's illness, injury, or disease

For these purposes, "generally accepted standards of medical practice" means:

  • Standards that are based on credible scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed, medical literature generally recognized by the relevant medical community
  • Physician Specialty Society recommendations
  • The views of physicians practicing in the relevant clinical area
  • Any other relevant factors

I know there are physicians who would testify that this man's surgery meets the Medicare definition, but an equal or greater number would argue that it does not. 

Cigna would turn him down because of the lack of 

"credible scientific evidence published in peer-reviewed, medical literature..."

This murderer may get away with murder at the expense of the taxpayers. 

I guess if it keeps him from impregnating any female prisoners if he is in a (female prison) then it might be reasonable. 

But if he is in a male prison..

I don't want to think about that.

2 comments:

  1. Katherine5:17 PM

    The male-to-female "sex reassignment" surgery is so horrifying that in and of itself it constitutes "serious bodily harm." No taxpayer funds should be used to mutilate people, convicts or otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. I have also witnessed the fact that these people's mental issues are not fixed by these operations.

      Delete