Canada's House of Commons Passes Transgender Rights Bill

  • metta

    Posts: 39104

    Feb 11, 2011 1:59 AM GMT
    Canada's House of Commons Passes Transgender Rights Bill

    http://instinctmagazine.com/blog/canada-s-house-of-commons-passes-transgender-rights-bill
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 3:06 AM GMT
    I live here and I never even heard about this... well yay for us I guess

    Just shows the stark contrast that has evolved between Canada and the US over the past 30 or so years when prior Canada was about as and sometimes even more puritanical than the US.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 4:48 AM GMT
    Interesting... rights is one thing, paying for the process of gender transformation is another. This reminded me of a report I heard on NPR a couple weeks back, about "a proposal to help city workers afford sex change operations" in Berkeley.

    Despite the liberal nature of that city, this proposal is controversial there. Issues regarding utilization of limited resources and benefits to society crop up with these types of proposals that request taxpayer funding of initiatives. On one hand, "The $20,000 would be available to any city employee on a first come, first served basis. To qualify, the employee has to have lived as an opposite-sex person for at least a year and already undergone hormone therapy." On the other hand, the relative benefits of gender reassignment surgery compared to those of routine medical and dental maintenance need to be considered.

    Given that California's Medicaid program does cover some aspects of gender reassignment surgery, it would be interesting to read others' opinions regarding whether a city's taxpayer dollars should be appropriated for this issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 4:52 AM GMT
    I have no problem with someone using their own money to do whatever they want with it when it comes to medicine. I do have a problem when it is tax payer dollars.. really does that do anything to provide for everyone?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 4:44 PM GMT
    This bill has nothing to do with paying for gender reassignment surgery (which is a matter decided by provicial governments, not the Federal government.)


    This bill could be defeated in the (now) Conservative-dominated Senate, If a Senator does not introduce it before an election is called (and we really do not expect the majority leader in the Senate will do so for the Conservative government) they send it to a committee, and THEN then vote on it then this Bill dies on the Order Paper. It will have to start over with the next Parliament (which might be a Conservative majority.)

    An election call is imminent.Parties are implementing election preparedness plans. nomination meetings have already been held in many Ridings.

    Passage of this Bill is by no means guaranteed during this Parliament.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 4:49 PM GMT
    flatstate2010 saidI have no problem with someone using their own money to do whatever they want with it when it comes to medicine. I do have a problem when it is tax payer dollars.. really does that do anything to provide for everyone?


    For the same reasons as how the availability to acute care and rehabilitative care after I had a freak stroke does anything to provide for everyone. icon_rolleyes.gif


    If you happened to be someone needing gender reassignment surgery, the system would pay for it. So your questioning its status as a "listed procedure" comes strictly from you not having that "birth defect" so you figure "fuck them?"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 4:56 PM GMT
    If this includes taxpayer funded sex changes, this is absurd and an outrage. I'm sure Meninlove is very happy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 5:12 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidIf this includes taxpayer funded sex changes, this is absurd and an outrage. I'm sure Meninlove is very happy.


    lol, now this is interesting, so Mock, do you reckon sex changes are just a cosmetic whim or for the fun, perhaps?

    Even the private sector finds you full of shit.

    http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/600_699/0615.html

    Up here, you don't just willy-nilly go in for a sex change for the lolz. You're screened carefully for medical necessity, similar to what AETNA has listed as criteria.

    -Doug

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 5:18 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie saidIf this includes taxpayer funded sex changes, this is absurd and an outrage. I'm sure Meninlove is very happy.


    lol, now this is interesting, so Mock, do you reckon sex changes are just a cosmetic whim or for the fun, perhaps?

    Even the private sector finds you full of shit.

    http://www.aetna.com/cpb/medical/data/600_699/0615.html

    Up here, you don't just willy-nilly go in for a sex change for the lolz. You're screened carefully for medical necessity, similar to what AETNA has listed as criteria.

    -Doug



    A sex change is not a medical necessity, it is a luxury. If someone has enough money for it, fine. Charging taxpayers for this would be beyond lunacy -- I can't even believe you would attempt to justify it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 5:24 PM GMT

    mocktwinkie said, "A sex change is not a medical necessity, it is a luxury."

    Oh did you ever just step into it rofl.

    Did you even bother to read AETNA's profiling of when it IS necessary? Probably not.

    You also forgot, our system is universal single payer health care.

    So let's see...who I should I believe when it comes to it being at times a medical necessity or not? You? Or the medical professionals?

    Oh gosh, I just don't know! O.o

    An unknown poster is much more credible than the medical profession, right? icon_rolleyes.gif

    icon_lol.gif


    And incidentally, if it's NOT deemed a medical necessity, the person wanting it pays for all of it themselves. lol, you crack me up.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 5:59 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie said, "A sex change is not a medical necessity, it is a luxury."

    Oh did you ever just step into it rofl.

    Did you even bother to read AETNA's profiling of when it IS necessary? Probably not.

    You also forgot, our system is universal single payer health care.

    So let's see...who I should I believe when it comes to it being at times a medical necessity or not? You? Or the medical professionals?

    Oh gosh, I just don't know! O.o

    An unknown poster is much more credible than the medical profession, right? icon_rolleyes.gif

    icon_lol.gif


    And incidentally, if it's NOT deemed a medical necessity, the person wanting it pays for all of it themselves. lol, you crack me up.


    There was nothing said in the "Aetna" profile that remotely provided a cogent reason for why someone "needs" a sex change.

    It was about as convincing as reading about why someone who is having a desire to rid themselves of any sexual organs whatsoever, because they are convinced of their asexuality (an opportunity to be rid of sinful temptation to engage in sexual practices?), "need" to have taxpayer funded genital removal.

    Give me a break. You are crazier than I could have possibly imagined.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 6:13 PM GMT
    "I'm having a midlife identity crisis and I am thoroughly convinced that I NEED a new porsche in order to feel sane again, so taxpayers, get your wallets out"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 6:46 PM GMT
    beneful1 saidI live here and I never even heard about this... well yay for us I guess


    How Canadian of you....lol, i didnt know that was happening either.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 6:47 PM GMT
    I'm beginning to think metta8 isn't a real person, more like an RSS feed. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 6:49 PM GMT
    wrestlervic saidI'm beginning to think metta8 isn't a real person, more like an RSS feed. icon_wink.gif


    I know, I never see any input ever, just a link to news. Kind of strange.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 8:42 PM GMT
    Just as a FYI, here are the diagnostic criteria for gender identity disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV), the consensus guide used by psychiatrists to diagnose various conditions:
    "A. A strong and persistent cross-gender identification (not merely a desire for any perceived cultural advantages of being the other sex). In children, the disturbance is manifested by four (or more) of the following:
    1 repeatedly stated desire to be, or insistence that he or she is, the other sex
    2 in boys, preference for cross-dressing or simulating female attire; in girls, insistence on wearing only stereotypical masculine clothing
    3 strong and persistent preferences for cross-sex roles in make-believe play or persistent fantasies of being the other sex
    4 intense desire to participate in the stereotypical games and pastimes of the other sex
    5 strong preference for playmates of the other sex
    B. Persistent discomfort with his or her sex or sense of inappropriateness in the gender role of that sex.
    C. The disturbance is not concurrent with a physical intersex condition.
    D. The disturbance causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning."

    Of course, the definition and incidence of gender identity disorder is controversial within even the medical community. This may contribute to the controversy regarding funding the operations to treat this condition.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 9:17 PM GMT
    I think it's great that those people are getting some recognition. They feel as though it's necessary, and generally have a hard time with things, friends, life.. have a high prostitution rate, and drug use.. I'm glad they are getting something, and I hope they use it correctly.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:04 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie said, "A sex change is not a medical necessity, it is a luxury."

    Oh did you ever just step into it rofl.

    Did you even bother to read AETNA's profiling of when it IS necessary? Probably not.

    You also forgot, our system is universal single payer health care.

    So let's see...who I should I believe when it comes to it being at times a medical necessity or not? You? Or the medical professionals?

    Oh gosh, I just don't know! O.o

    An unknown poster is much more credible than the medical profession, right? icon_rolleyes.gif

    icon_lol.gif


    And incidentally, if it's NOT deemed a medical necessity, the person wanting it pays for all of it themselves. lol, you crack me up.


    There was nothing said in the "Aetna" profile that remotely provided a cogent reason for why someone "needs" a sex change.

    It was about as convincing as reading about why someone who is having a desire to rid themselves of any sexual organs whatsoever, because they are convinced of their asexuality (an opportunity to be rid of sinful temptation to engage in sexual practices?), "need" to have taxpayer funded genital removal.

    Give me a break. You are crazier than I could have possibly imagined.



    And you are much more of a dead hearted bigot than either Bill or I could possibly have imagined. What fun.

    We suggest you send some time googling trans gender surgeries (gender reassignment) and the criteria for such before making further assinine statements from your completely uneducated understanding of it.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:14 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie said
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie said, "A sex change is not a medical necessity, it is a luxury."

    Oh did you ever just step into it rofl.

    Did you even bother to read AETNA's profiling of when it IS necessary? Probably not.

    You also forgot, our system is universal single payer health care.

    So let's see...who I should I believe when it comes to it being at times a medical necessity or not? You? Or the medical professionals?

    Oh gosh, I just don't know! O.o

    An unknown poster is much more credible than the medical profession, right? icon_rolleyes.gif

    icon_lol.gif


    And incidentally, if it's NOT deemed a medical necessity, the person wanting it pays for all of it themselves. lol, you crack me up.


    There was nothing said in the "Aetna" profile that remotely provided a cogent reason for why someone "needs" a sex change.

    It was about as convincing as reading about why someone who is having a desire to rid themselves of any sexual organs whatsoever, because they are convinced of their asexuality (an opportunity to be rid of sinful temptation to engage in sexual practices?), "need" to have taxpayer funded genital removal.

    Give me a break. You are crazier than I could have possibly imagined.



    And you are much more of a dead hearted bigot than either Bill or I could possibly have imagined. What fun.


    I'm a bigot because I believe that robbing taxpayers to pay for a procedure that is not necessary, is wrong? Can you please give me the distinction between the example I gave you and the supposedly "compelling" reasons why a sex change should be considered a "need"?

    Should being thoroughly self-convinced that I need something for my own well being be all that is necessary to require tax payers to fund something?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:28 PM GMT
    meninlove said You, Mock have decided and stated it is unnecessary under any circumstance which not only makes you a liar because you've done no medical research, but also a living example of what feeds bigotry; ignorance.

    Have you done any research? Did you know that a great number of psychiatric and medical specialists including your own tax courts think you're full of shit?





    I researched the Aetna profile you gave me already. There was nothing in there which posed any more of a convincing argument than the hypothetical example I gave you, and of which you would agree with me on as being utterly ridiculous.

    Give me the circumstance where it is necessary! Tell me one, I just want one. Is it when the person threatens to commit suicide?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:31 PM GMT
    You, Mock have decided and stated it is unnecessary under any circumstance which not only makes you a liar because you've done no medical research, but also a living example of what feeds bigotry; ignorance.

    Have you done any research? Did you know that a great number of psychiatric and medical specialists including your own tax courts think you're full of shit?

    Now you're a big boy but if you insist I'll begin with baby steps: here's wiki with links to sources.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_therapy


    Your problem (one of many) is that you can only think in extremes, that if there is a criteria for healthcare paying for a SPECIFICALLY medically identified necessity, by your befuddled logic anyone that asks for a sex change on a whim must be given one paid by healthcare or tax dollars. What an idiot.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:33 PM GMT
    meninlove saidYou, Mock have decided and stated it is unnecessary under any circumstance which not only makes you a liar because you've done no medical research, but also a living example of what feeds bigotry; ignorance.

    Have you done any research? Did you know that a great number of psychiatric and medical specialists including your own tax courts think you're full of shit?

    Now you're a big boy but if you insist I'll begin with baby steps: here's wiki with links to sources.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_therapy


    Your problem (one of many) is that you can only think in extremes, that if there is a criteria for healthcare paying for a SPECIFICALLY medically identified necessity, by your befuddled logic anyone that asks for a sex change on a whim must be given one paid by healthcare or tax dollars. What an idiot.



    So I told you to give me an example of when it would be necessary. The only thing provided in the Aeta outline is that the feeling of "need" and the level of wanting the identity of the opposite sex has to be extreme enough before finally somebody decides that it really is a need.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:35 PM GMT
    Here's another, wiki is much easier than posting all the links separately, which you can find by scrolling down the wiki page, in case you don't know how to find them.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:43 PM GMT
    We have the ability to "correct" a birth defect that occurs only rarely in fetal development as sex is differentiated out of synch with hormonally-triggered gender identification resulting in someone whose gender is a female is born with male genitals (or vice versa). It is not something people do on a whim, and we can correct the "birth defect" at far less cost than correcting a congenital heart defect, which we do without hesitation. The result is a productive citizen just like some person with a heart valve replacement or an organ transplant.


    We play God with patients all the time - deciding they shall not die from certain diseases - and who is to say it is a good thing for the species to pass on defective genes that without extraordinary intervention would have died out by natural selection?


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2011 10:51 PM GMT
    I do not see why you need someone to START the conversation for you or be told what to think about?

    You cannot just read the link and comment?


    It is enough for most of us that metta8 does a news roundup and presents links he thinks might interest us. We do not need further intructions to comment on the topic.


    There is a long tradition in respectable news dissemination of presenting stories without comment. . Comment is then left to the readers, so it is appropriate tthat metta8 allows others to have their say before making a summary statement that shows he has taken due consideration of the feedback.