Should the taxpayer have 2 fund gender reassignment surgery?

[Memetic Sexgod]

Well I do live in Finland where "the taxpayers have to fund" just about everything so I'm definitely going to say yes.

There are other situations where the money could be saved. There are situations where it is obvious that a patient won't survive the treatment (an old, weak person isn't likely to survive cancer treatment, for example) yet the doctors practically have to do it and then we end up with people withering away in the hospitals, taking beds from those who will someday walk away from there but are in acute need of hospital care, and "wasting" money.
Politicians could also be paid much less.

Gender reassignment surgery is usually very, very important for the person who wants it. It's not just for the looks, it's so that the person can feel all right in their own body, which in turn can be pretty important for functioning properly in society/surviving daily life. Of course tax money should be used to (at least partially) fund the expenses.

[Owchy T_T]

Heck no!

[Raven Winter]

Taxpayers don't pay for things. The government pays for things, decided via vote, while the taxpayer pays for the government to exist, have a budget, and perform the functions of governance. You personally aren't paying for anyone's anything by simply paying your taxes, and even those aforementioned functions performed by taxation are only enabled by the cumulative sum of all citizens' taxes. Your taxes, on an individual basis, couldn't pay for anything.

Should the government pay for it, though? Man, I don't really care.

[I Jiggle Like Jello]

Well, considering that medication for mental disorders is not subsidized by the government (in most cases at least), I'm going to say nope.

[MegaTurkey]

Yes it should, as part of a fully comprehensive healthcare service free at the point of access, which is primarily funded by taxation.

Anyway, the number of people on here throwing around terms such as "elective" without any idea of what it means, let alone defining whether or not surgical treatment is necessary for undoubtably complex patients on a grossly uninformed whim... emotion_facepalm

[Brain Weasels]

deeluxe

the ******** i don't even











ain't my fault somebody feels like they were born in the wrong body
so unless the state funds my future fillers and over the hill breast lift i'ma say hell naw

[misheru105]

Since I live in the US where health-care is privatize, I would say no since we don't fund those who are getting cancer treatment. If we ever switched to universal health-care, my answer might change to we should probably cover at least some of it.

[ectogasm]

Brain Weasels

deeluxe

the ******** i don't even











ain't my fault somebody feels like they were born in the wrong body
so unless the state funds my future fillers and over the hill breast lift i'ma say hell naw

[Brain Weasels]

ectogasm

Brain Weasels

deeluxe

the ******** i don't even











ain't my fault somebody feels like they were born in the wrong body
so unless the state funds my future fillers and over the hill breast lift i'ma say hell naw

U tryin 2 copy me m8 mad

[ectogasm]

Brain Weasels

ectogasm

Brain Weasels

deeluxe

the ******** i don't even











ain't my fault somebody feels like they were born in the wrong body
so unless the state funds my future fillers and over the hill breast lift i'ma say hell naw

U tryin 2 copy me m8 mad

s**t ur on to me!

☠

[Obscurus]

Harley Jade Linnea

Obscurus

Nope. Last I checked, elective surgeries weren't covered by most insurance anyway, public or private.

Except that its not elective. It is necessary for the well being, mentally and physically, of the patient. I'll bet you'd be cool with denying an organ transplant too, or radiation or chemo to a cancer patient. You clearly have zero regard for others after all.

You aren't going to die if you don't have your d**k turned inside out. Stop trying to make it seem like your feels are on par with people dying from disease.

I have regard for others. That's precisely why I have a problem with you hyping your identity bullshit as being as important as saving someone's life.

In conclusion, you best be ******** trolling.

[LilPinkCandy]

misheru105

Since I live in the US where health-care is privatize, I would say no since we don't fund those who are getting cancer treatment. If we ever switched to universal health-care, my answer might change to we should probably cover at least some of it.

That was pretty much my response. I think that healthcare needs a major revamp and it should be universal. Even though ObamaCare was a fail, at least he tried addressing it. Hopefully someone else can fix it.

[Superbot34]

well if you actually have a government which uses taxpayer money on stuff that actually helps the people then yes, because there will be plenty of money to spend on normal medical due to not wasting it on wars or bribing politicians.

gender reassignment is a medical procedure. if the man feels like a women and has insurance he should be covered for it, or at least pay a significantly smaller cost. i could care less what weird thing someone wants to do with their body insurance should cover it but if you mean the US, that will never happen because we are all narcissistic idiots run by people who don't give a s**t.

[Alex_ororo]

Harley Jade Linnea

Alex_ororo

As much as I don't really mind people undergoing sex-change surgery, I believe that taxpayer money should go into life-saving procedures first. Then things like vaccination programs, public health, aiding the handicapped, treatment of infertility maybe. However, if there's actully money to spend from the public funds - the taxpayers are free to decide where their money goes.

Your bold jsut advocates tax payer money to fund SRS, or sex reassignment surgery, as it IS a life-threatening situation. Gender dysphoria can lead to a depression so profound that the one suffering from it will see no way out but through death. Denying them the medical treatments they need, including surgery, means denying them life saving care.

As much as I agree that issues regarding gender identity can lead to individuals feeling lost, unhappy and even depressed, I should clarify that by "life-saving procedures" I meant situations, in which the patient is facing death at a high level of certainty. By this I mean instances like pancreas cancer, advanced brain cancer, heart/kidney/liver transplantation, etc. Unfortunately, much of this depends on the financial state the country is in. Where I come from, treatment for the most severe cancer types is not state-funded, the reasoning being simple - it is wasteful to finance treatment of those, who might die anyway. And this actually saddens me greatly.
As you have pointed out, depression shouldn't be taken lightly, but it can still be treated by psychological therapy. Besides, I believe that people are much stronger than they may seem - with proper psychological care, determination, support from their peers and family they can become however they wish to be 3nodding

Please, forgive me for this lenghty rant. xd

Anyways, thank you for your contribution.