Shelly R
05-05-2007, 01:27 PM
This article was printed by the Argus, a Bay Area local paper.
"Berkeley employees may receive sex-change benefits"
The article can be found at: http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/ci_5825997
Even though this pertains to Berkeley, CA. there are some statements in the article that are worth noting for future reference.
The opnions stated by spokespeople at both Health Net, and Kaiser, are worth thinking about. Both companies do not cover sex-change surgery under their group benefits, but will add these benefits if a company, municipality, or group asks for these benefits. Some of the reasons stated by the Kaiser spokesperson why these benefits are not offered were that society still views this as a psychiatric issue, not viewed the same way as a birth defect. It's between the psychiatrist and the patient to decide whether it is medically necessary.
This is something serious for us to think about. That the opnions of two health care insurers agree the companies and municipalities have only to ask that this benefit be added. Could we not push for change at the business, county, and city levels? The indications are that the health care industry views are changing for the better.
Other note: There is an article at the Transgender Law Center web site about California Medi-Cal coverage of sex-change care and surgery.
Go to: www.transgenderlawcenter.org
Article: http://www.transgenderlawcenter.org/pdf/MediCal%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
I remember there was a thread here recently about this same issue.
I thought this might be of interest to us all.
"Berkeley employees may receive sex-change benefits"
The article can be found at: http://www.insidebayarea.com/argus/ci_5825997
Even though this pertains to Berkeley, CA. there are some statements in the article that are worth noting for future reference.
The opnions stated by spokespeople at both Health Net, and Kaiser, are worth thinking about. Both companies do not cover sex-change surgery under their group benefits, but will add these benefits if a company, municipality, or group asks for these benefits. Some of the reasons stated by the Kaiser spokesperson why these benefits are not offered were that society still views this as a psychiatric issue, not viewed the same way as a birth defect. It's between the psychiatrist and the patient to decide whether it is medically necessary.
This is something serious for us to think about. That the opnions of two health care insurers agree the companies and municipalities have only to ask that this benefit be added. Could we not push for change at the business, county, and city levels? The indications are that the health care industry views are changing for the better.
Other note: There is an article at the Transgender Law Center web site about California Medi-Cal coverage of sex-change care and surgery.
Go to: www.transgenderlawcenter.org
Article: http://www.transgenderlawcenter.org/pdf/MediCal%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf
I remember there was a thread here recently about this same issue.
I thought this might be of interest to us all.