Members of LGBT community question U. insurance plan

The University's health-insurance policy may be in violation of its nondiscrimination policy, many members of the Penn community say.

Currently, the University employee-benefits program does not cover sexual reassignment surgery, but it is in direct violation of its nondiscrimination policy by not covering these procedures, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Center associate director Erin Cross wrote in an e-mail.

She likened it to not covering treatment for race-specific diseases.

Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, emphasized that gender reassignment amounts to far more than merely one surgery.

Rather, the process includes hormone injections and lab tests, and sometimes prosthetics, hair removal and mental-health services.

Each of these individual procedures falls under the term "transition-related care" and may be covered by health insurance, but not when one - supposedly transgendered - person requires all at once, she said.

"Because of the way exceptions are written, very often trans people get excluded from gender-specific care," Keisling added.

For example, she said, some transgendered people may at times require both a mammogram and a prostate exam. Their policies, which would normally cover each procedure on its own, claim these exams are "transgender related," and thus they refuse to cover either.

Lambda Alliance chairman and College junior Dennie Zastrow called failing to cover the costs of the procedure "a perfect example of the discrimination the community still faces."

But Division of Human Resources spokeswoman Terri Ryan disagreed that the policy was discriminatory.

She wrote in an e-mail that, because the procedure is denied to all plan participants, it is not in violation of the nondiscrimination policy, which guarantees the same coverage "regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, color, national or ethnic origin, age, disability or [veteran status]."

She added that through a survey, Penn determined that few other Ivy League universities cover the surgery.

Mercer, one of Penn's consulting firms, estimated that only about 2.3 percent of employers cover the procedure, based on data collected in October and November 2007 by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans.

Still, Ryan said Penn must strike a balance between the most extensive coverage possible and the need to control costs. She added that the cost of including reassignment surgery in the current insurance plan would be substantial.

Cross disagreed. She said the cost of treating the severe depression or suicidal tendencies associated with some patients amounts to more than that of the procedure.

Although Lambda has no concrete plans in place to address the issue, Zastrow said the group has discussed bringing the greater issue of campus climate to the Undergraduate Assembly and intends to focus largely on transgender-related issues throughout the semester.

"It is a critical time in our country for individuals in need of health insurance coverage," said School of Law lecturer Stacey Sobel. "Transgender people deserve the same access to ensure that their health care needs are covered as any other employee."

Comments (14)

It's curious that those who disagree with the homosexual activists are called bigots. Perhaps medical payment for extensive, professional counseling may be more beneficial than radical invasive surgery.

In it's most basic form, health insurance is a form of collective economic cooperation. Recognizing the reality that one may require health procedures too expensive to pay for on one's own (and necessary for one's continued economic viability), one pays a monthly premium into a large pool on the condition that one can extract necessary payment when one requires medical payment for services to return one to sufficient health to regain economic viability. This equation further benefits society, which stands to gain from having a maximum number of economic units viable at any given time. Gender reassignment surgery defies both these standards. First and foremost, gender reassignment surgery is not required for economic viability, ergo it should not be covered under health plans. Secondly, gender reassignment surgery is expensive, an expense which would lead to premiums being raised throughout contributors, which would lead to less persons being able to pay premiums, which would result in both a) a continuing cycle of increasing premiums and decreasing participation and b) an increase in the number of disabled economic units due to a lack of health coverage, which actually has a negative overall effect on the society in question. It follows, therefore, that gender reassignment surgery should not be covered under health plans.

[QUOTE id="2623e2cc-174e-4953-bb6f-8813992b6ac9"]All of this gender reassignment shit costs tons of money. If you're a freak and want to go ahead with all of these "alterations" and procedures, YOU'RE gonna have to commit some of your own freakin' money. [/QUOTE] Wow, you really proved the point of the article quite well. Congratulations on being a bigot.

Hey Kevin - Labotomies are covered - I signed you up. Having children costs tons of money. If people want to breed like cockroaches, then THEY should pay for their own damn inability to keep their pants on, not me!

oh jesus h. CHRIST!! All of this gender reassignment shit costs tons of money. If you're a freak and want to go ahead with all of these "alterations" and procedures, YOU'RE gonna have to commit some of your own freakin' money. Don't be free-ridin' off the University. Seems like everyone wants Penn to pay for every god-damn thing.

These procedures cost a serious amount of money. While I'm all for providing benefits where due, I question the degree to which these procedures are non-elective. If they were elective and cheap, it wouldn't be as big a deal, but all of these procedures are massively expensive, and ultimately, everyone on the plan will wind up having to subsidize them. Sure, I would be happier too if the university would pay for me to alter my body so that I would find it more appealing. But, the insurance does not pay for me to bond my teeth or receive a hair transplant. Both of these procedures would improve my mental wellbeing, but it is not the responsibility of those paying into the insurance to provide them.

It's elective surgery despite any claims to the contrary. In the feel-goodery that is becoming america, these folks have to realize that its unfair for others to bear the burden of their own decisions. Pop some lithium, see a shrink and cope with the parts that God gave you.

I think it is reasonable for Penn's insurance to pay for these operations as long as the patient gets a small to medium sized penis and the breasts are no larger than a 36B. Anything larger would be at their own expense.

[QUOTE id="13f4c133-a8b4-4c5d-ad61-636e8f123a99"]These procedures cost a serious amount of money. While I'm all for providing benefits where due, I question the degree to which these procedures are non-elective. If they were elective and cheap, it wouldn't be as big a deal, but all of these procedures are massively expensive, and ultimately, everyone on the plan will wind up having to subsidize them. Sure, I would be happier too if the university would pay for me to alter my body so that I would find it more appealing. But, the insurance does not pay for me to bond my teeth or receive a hair transplant. Both of these procedures would improve my mental wellbeing, but it is not the responsibility of those paying into the insurance to provide them.[/QUOTE] OMFG - you're likening a sex change operation to liposuction?!?!?! People can live with many physical deformities (cleft palates, clubfoot), yet insurance pays to correct it. Assuming you are male, how would you feel if, tomorrow morning, you suddenly woke up with a vagina and breasts? Would you expect help? Transgendered people aren't trying to improve their looks. For them, it's a matter of survival. Could any one of you happily live as your opposite sex if it happened to you?

[QUOTE id="22c10564-8b7a-4425-9f67-1f7e63b30cbe"]Never has the following been more true than in this comments section: the moment someone writes or posts an opinion in any way divergent to someone else's, other people instantly spring to labeling and name calling. Doing so is juvenile, tactless, and unproductive. If you have an opinion, say it and support it, but don't just label someone else a (in this case), "bigot," or insult them.[/QUOTE] Don't you know, the purpose of higher education (more accurately, I'm speaking of the soft sciences) isn't to learn how to analyze commentary and text to discover whether or not they express something that is *true.* The important part is whether or not you personally like the idea, or whether it has political implications of which you approve. The point isn't: Is this really an elective surgery and is it fair to pay for an operation for one person that another would never be necessary for another person? The point is: That guy isn't actively pro-sex-change, so he must be a prejudiced bigot. If we all dogpile him with our indignation we can feel morally superior to all those people who aren't of the same opinion. The goal isn't to make the world a better place. It's just to make yourself feel better than others. Welcome to Penn. You should take some courses in cultural anthropology or sociology. I'm sure you'll come to understand.

Never has the following been more true than in this comments section: the moment someone writes or posts an opinion in any way divergent to someone else's, other people instantly spring to labeling and name calling. Doing so is juvenile, tactless, and unproductive. If you have an opinion, say it and support it, but don't just label someone else a (in this case), "bigot," or insult them.

Penn's insurance is discriminatory because it doesn't cover SEX CHANGE operations?! I'm glad I graduated the Penn bubble of absurdity and radicalism last year...the real world is slightly more sane.

[QUOTE id="8e93e155-4429-4e42-bbb2-7cab4959674a"]It's curious that those who disagree with the homosexual activists are called bigots. Perhaps medical payment for extensive, professional counseling may be more beneficial than radical invasive surgery.[/QUOTE] I think calling someone a bigot ecause they disagree with you is a poor choice. I do, however, have a term to describe a number of the individuals who have posted comments to this article, and that term is uninformed. I'm male, so I would never begin to speculate as to the necessity of something like a breast reduction by a woman with exceptionally large breasts. Some may see this as elective, while some may see this as required to avoid future spinal problems or other health issues. I think I would be uninformed, at best, if I had an opinion on this issue. I'm not an alcoholic, so I would never begin to speculate as to the necessity of an insurance-paid rehabilitation program versus free AA meetings. As someone who has never faced this challenge, I cannot possibly hold an informed opinion as to which of the two choices is best. Similarly, I'm not transgendered. I'm going out on a limb to guess that not a single one of the people who have left comments on this post is either. I'll go further out on said limb to assume none of you are licensed doctors or psychiatrists either. Let's leave the determination of if this qualifies as elective or required up to the handful of people who actually live with this issue every day (or even know someone who does!) or have the relevant qualifications to determine it...

Comments are closed for this item.