Americans: Your Tax Dollars at Work Toward Sex Change Operations

Michelle Kosilek (who legally changed his first name from "Robert" in 1993) is currently serving a life sentence in Massachusetts for killing his wife back in 1990. As you may have guessed from the name change, he would also like to have a sex change, which is now known by the more PC term: "sex reassignment surgery". He and some sympathetic doctors are claiming that he needs it to cure his depression and are demanding that it be provided by the state. Naturally, the Massachusetts Department of Corrections refused. So Mr. Kosilek filed a lawsuit. More than one, actually. Right now a judge is deliberating over his third request.

So the judge hasn't ruled and Kosilek hasn't gotten his sex change yet. So why does the headline say that tax dollars were supporting this?

Here's why - the charges for 10 medical expert witnesses alone in this farce so far have totalled $58,000, and that doesn't count court costs, attorney fees, Department of Correction fees, and of course, all the wasted time over this nonsense. Oh, and by the way - this is Kosilek's second lawsuit and third time in court over this issue.

The chance of the judge ruling favorably to Mr. Kosilek is very slim, and even if he did, the chances of it surviving an inevitable appeal are slimmer yet. Still, why on Earth did it even come this far? As one commenter On Newsday put it:

This 'case' shouldn't have gotten beyond the guard at the jail laughing when the prisoner asked. It should never have become anything more than an inside joke at the prison.

Incidentally, that Newsday article reads more than just a little friendly to the plaintiff. They point out that the money spent so far on fighting this action is far more than it would cost to give him the sex change (about $20,000), without adding in the fact that the real worry here is setting a precedent that will oblige the State to provide all kinds of elective procedures in the future. What's next, Nose jobs? Breast implants? Viagra? Hair transplants for the balding? As of right now, 10 inmates in Massachusetts are receiving hormone therapy, and two have already requested to get the surgery as well.

Some people seem to think all of the above:

But advocates say in some cases -- such as that of Kosilek, who has twice attempted suicide -- sex-change surgery is as much a medical necessity as treatment for diabetes or high blood pressure.
"The duty belongs to the prison to figure out how to fulfill its constitutional obligations to both provide adequate medical care and provide a fundamental security for all inmates," said Cole Thaler, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a gay- and transgender-rights group.

So the prison can be forced to do an inmate's bidding over suicide threats? And has anyone considered the possibility of Mr. Kosilek paying for this operation himself?

Overlawyered.com (with some great comments) pointed out Newsday's little disclaimer at the end of the article:

This version CORRECTS `himself' to `herself.'

Not only is this PC pandering at its worst, it is also incorrect, since Mr. Kosilek has not yet had the surgery and is still legally a man.

And there are other issues here besides money. Sex change operations aren't just done overnight. They require numerous psychiatric visits, hormone therapy, and doctors visits, all of which drain time and resources escorting this man to his appointments or providing medication which should instead be reserved for people who are really sick. Add to this the security problems during the procedure of having a man/woman in either a man's prison or woman's prison.

Massachusetts is not the only place that has struggled over this issue. Last year, Wisconsin's legislature tried to ban such surgeries and hormone therapies from their prisons, only to be sued by the ACLU. Several years ago, San Francisco decided to grant free sex-changes to city employees, and was not sued, since that city is rather on the fringe of American life.

But if you think this is ridiculous, just remember it could be worse. Take the UK for example. The NHS (National Health Service) in Britain has provided these operations for free (well not exactly free, but through public funds) since 1998, apparently even to jailed persons. Incredibly, even after paying for one such sex change on a 57 year old man, they also agreed to pay thousands of pounds worth of tattoo removal for him/her, because the tattoos were "unladylike" (never mind the fact that tattoos are very popular with women - that is, real women - all across Europe). This is not only nuts but terribly unfair, because, if the commenters are to be believed, the NHS will not fund tattoo removal for ordinary persons. And it gets even worse: in 2002, the UK was also forced by the European Court of Human Rights to allow transgendered persons to change their birth certificates. The reason is many need these certificates to get married in countries where same-sex marriages are illegal. But the problem is, this completely defies common sense. The sex you were born with is a medical fact, and you can't change the past with the stroke of a pen.

As a side note, believe it or not, these surgeries are legal in Iran, although not on the government's dime. At least one man-turned-woman had second thoughts after being forced to comply with Iran's restrictions on women.

One more thing. I hate to break it to many of these "experts" but sex-reassignment surgery does not actually turn a man into a woman, or visa versa. All it can do is make a person superficially appear as another gender, and changes their legal status on paper. But this is an illusion only. It does not change DNA or hormones (which must be supplied for life) and it does not allow a person to ever have children as a member of the new gender.



Like what you see? Click on any of the labels below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my  RSS Feed