A U.S. court of appeals in Richmond rejected the argument to exclude transgender people from gender-confirming surgeries.
It became the first to rule in favor of it, saying this could pose discrimination against gender rights and access to healthcare services. The decision is a win for the transgender community.
The attorney general of West Virginia, Patrick Morrisey, who is currently running for governor, says he would escalate the decision to the Supreme Court and get victory. Although the ruling is still within the circuit court, the Supreme Court would not interfere except on the grounds of argument within the court.
In a report, Judge Jay Richardson stated that there was no guide involving the Supreme Court dictating which treatment to cover for healthcare providers. The ruling stirred up a split between Democrats and Republicans, with most Democrats supporting the ideology while Republicans opposed it.
Richardson further added that despite the ruling that led to the disagreement, not every battle is to be escalated, and what matters most is that the trans patient will also have access to health benefits as others.
He added that coverage is accorded for different diagnoses, and each state, through medical judgment and efficacy, can decide to render services based on necessity.
POLL—Do You Support a Single-Payer Healthcare System (Medicare for All)?
In some states, treatment for hormonal issues and surgeries for trans patients who are minors is banned. Some have taken it further by restricting care to trans adults. The insurance laws that cover trans-related treatment vary from state to state.
The current administration has moved further with regulations to protect the trans community, which include access to care and fair treatment like everyone else.
A trans-Medicaid user in West Virginia challenged the state’s program that banned transsexual surgeries. Some state employees in North Carolina also challenged exclusions like surgical treatment from their health care coverage.
ALSO READ: Healthcare Providers Fume Over Medicare Advantage Plans
While some may think this is a discrimination act against trans patients, the two states attributed their exclusion to cost. Trans patients, like every other patient, are entitled to care once the necessary benchmark is met, but not in the case of specialized care.
In an oral argument, an advocate for trans patients stated that the cost as a reason for the exclusion from specialized care is not justified, as trans patients only constitute a minority of the population. Attorney Tara Borelli added that even if the cost was a burden, it shouldn’t be placed on the minority.
21 Democrats requested the court rule against the claimant, while 17 Republicans in the Columbia district asked the court to rule in favor of it. The bottom line still stands. Everyone deserves access to health care coverage and protection.
You Might Also Like:
New York Removes Millions of Residents From Their Health Care Plan
Renowned NYC TikTok Star Eva Evans Dies at 29
Authorities Confirm at Least Four Dead in Devastating Oklahoma Tornadoes
New Study Says the Age at Which You’re Old Has Changed
These Healthcare Companies Have Filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy