NY Governor Cuomo pushes for gender reassignment under Medicaid

Under the proposal, gender reassignment surgery will be available for people who are a minimum age of 18 or 21, depending on circumstances, and will require a referral from a doctor.

Click to expand...

NY governor Andrew Cuomo is pushing for gender reassignment to go under Medicaid coverage, which would affect people roughly my age or older.
This means that trans people would be able to get their required surgery under Medicaid, which is covered by tax payer dollars. This was teased by Obama last year.

Source: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12...aid-coverage-for-gender-reassignment-surgery/

And of course, opposition:

"Medicaid is designed for the needy, for the dispossessed, for the destitute," said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League. "It's not meant for middle-class people and upper-middle-class people who don't like the fact that they're a man or woman. … This is an abuse of Medicaid."

Click to expand...

Basically, OMG trans people in the US might get help for once!
I find this to be great for the tight-knit, yet segregated community.

What do you make of this? Is this a step in the right direction? Do you support the motion?

Medicaid /is/ for the poor and destitute... so it'd still be means tested regardless of what is covered or not. At the end of the day though, Medicaid is partially state-funded and so it'll require the input of New Yorkers. The requirements for the surgery seem reasonable, however, requiring that you must have had received hormone therapy, lived as the opposite gender for a year, and consulted with a mental health professional, so I don't see why not. I'm not sure how expensive $6.7 million a year is though.

Kanzler said:

Medicaid /is/ for the poor and destitute... so it'd still be means tested regardless of what is covered or not. At the end of the day though, Medicaid is partially state-funded and so it'll require the input of New Yorkers. The requirements for the surgery seem reasonable, however, requiring that you must have had received hormone therapy, lived as the opposite gender for a year, and consulted with a mental health professional, so I don't see why not. I'm not sure how expensive $6.7 million a year is though.

Click to expand...

In NY? Nothing at all. The Verrazano-Narrows bridge in NYC reels in what looks like $70,000+ per day. $2.6 million per year is absolutely nothing.

15% of transequality respondents made less than $10,000 annually (in the US), so I'd say this definitely helps a lot.

Plus, Medicaid is more than the poor and destitute.
Though, depending on the age of the gender reassignment requirement, a portion of hopefuls may fall outside the 19-20 year-old range.

naturally i think this a is a great thing, regardless of what the final fantasy villain bill donahue has to say
since the state can apparently afford it with ease let's hope it goes through without issue

I see this as a step in the right direction but I think this is going to be held back by a lot of protest from individuals.

I think one thing that is often not considered here is the sheer expense of the treatment, which is why most people are against it in the first place. People don't understand that it's not an aesthetic change in most cases because of the unusual and somewhat rare nature of the condition, and wonder why so much money is being on something that they don't understand. I think the solution in that problem lies in working with producing fair medical costs (across the board, really) but the United States has shown to be very poor at this.

Seriously, if they actually regulated the cost of treatment for most treatments I think this could be shifted under the rug with little notice from truly transphobic individuals but due to the outrageous price of medical care in this country, people will probably lunge on the price as a first protest. "I don't want to have to pay for someone spending [x] amount of money on something so stupid!" You get the same stuff with some treatments like IUDs and sterilization surgery, because people don't understand the purpose and because that **** ain't cheap here.

Know thy enemy, after all. If you can dismantle everything but their bigotry, then they have no true legs to stand on.

I do sincerely hope it goes through though.

Legitimate question - do transgender individuals use medicaid for disability? I wonder because if there are people who have enough problems induced by their dysphoria (or otherwise) that they are medically eligible for disability and thus would be able to use medicaid. If so, then the amount of people benefiting from this stature would increase quite a bit.

daigonite said:

I see this as a step in the right direction but I think this is going to be held back by a lot of protest from individuals.

I think one thing that is often not considered here is the sheer expense of the treatment, which is why most people are against it in the first place. People don't understand that it's not an aesthetic change in most cases because of the unusual and somewhat rare nature of the condition, and wonder why so much money is being on something that they don't understand. I think the solution in that problem lies in working with producing fair medical costs (across the board, really) but the United States has shown to be very poor at this.

Seriously, if they actually regulated the cost of treatment for most treatments I think this could be shifted under the rug with little notice from truly transphobic individuals but due to the outrageous price of medical care in this country, people will probably lunge on the price as a first protest. "I don't want to have to pay for someone spending [x] amount of money on something so stupid!" You get the same stuff with some treatments like IUDs and sterilization surgery, because people don't understand the purpose and because that **** ain't cheap here.

Know thy enemy, after all. If you can dismantle everything but their bigotry, then they have no true legs to stand on.

I do sincerely hope it goes through though.

Legitimate question - do transgender individuals use medicaid for disability? I wonder because if there are people who have enough problems induced by their dysphoria (or otherwise) that they are medically eligible for disability and thus would be able to use medicaid. If so, then the amount of people benefiting from this stature would increase quite a bit.

Click to expand...

These surgeries cost in the tens of thousands:
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/sex-change-surgery-health-care-coverage-108853.html?hp=l5
http://www.newsmax.com/US/insurance-healthcare-transgender-sex-reassignment/2014/07/14/id/582487/
I'd say $50,000 for a nice number.
There are roughly 700,000 transgender people in the USA. As I sourced before, 15% of trans people in the US make less than $10,000. Reading later in that study, it looks like 26%? make the cutoff for Medicaid, unless I am misinterpreting the results.
Let's make that 25%. 25% of 700,000 people is 175,000. 175,000*$50,000 is $8.75 billion dollars. That's for the whole United States, assuming that every single "transgendered" person isn't already transexual. Some fun perspective: The US spent $619 billion dollars in 2013 in military spending. That's almost $7 billion a week, which would easily cover the cost of all gender reassignments.
I'm playing a BIG numbers game. Again, my numbers are very inflated because:
I'm using the US trans population
I'm assuming that every single transgendered person in the population is not transexual. I did this because I could not find *any* data that separated transgenders and transexuals. Also, I could not find any LGBT statewide data that sectioned of trans populations.

My point is, the money is definitely there.

...

As for dysphoria, the DSM removed the fact that being transgendered in itself was an illness years ago. Gender dysphoria from what I've read from it (see DSM V on Dysphoria), the mental health aspect is that you are not happy with your gender. However, gender reassignment sugery would fix the dysphoria. So, I'd imagine that this would fall under mental health. Someone gladly correct me if anything I've said is incorrect.
As for NY treatment, straight from governor Cuomo literally 8 days ago:
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/insurance/circltr/2014/cl2014_07.pdf

Dysphoria falls under mental health, and gender reassignment according to the APA should be an effective treament. In NY, no health insurance companies can deny you mental health treament under dysphoria.
woot I'm on that psych major flow

obZen said:

As for dysphoria, the DSM removed the fact that being transgendered in itself was an illness years ago. Gender dysphoria from what I've read from it (see DSM V on Dysphoria), the mental health aspect is that you are not happy with your gender. However, gender reassignment sugery would fix the dysphoria. So, I'd imagine that this would fall under mental health. Someone gladly correct me if anything I've said is incorrect.
As for NY treatment, straight from governor Cuomo literally 8 days ago:
http://www.dfs.ny.gov/insurance/circltr/2014/cl2014_07.pdf

Dysphoria falls under mental health, and gender reassignment according to the APA should be an effective treament. In NY, no health insurance companies can deny you mental health treament under dysphoria.
woot I'm on that psych major flow

Click to expand...

I always thought of it this way, because it's also misunderstood like other mental illnesses - unlike physical illnesses, where people just accept that your body is more frail or not as capable or your bones are brittle, with mental health people seem to think "I'm fine, so you should be too". A condition that manifests in the mind but is solved by a physical medical intervention.

I agree Obzen, my point is that people don't really look at it that way. Ultimately while the surgery itself is expensive we are also paying a lot of money for many other forms of surgery. To lampoon this issue (because people are just going to look at how much it costs, not the whole picture), reducing the price of other surgeries to more globally acceptable price ranges would not only help making those surgeries more accessible to those with no insurance but also reduce the impact that a claim against monetary issues would have on the pool of money, and also pretty much help everyone involved with this particular option in general. It truly doesn't matter how much the surgery costs since it's a fairly rare required operation and isn't the most expensive thing on the planet (as opposed to some treatments for things like cancer and stuff which can go towards 10 times that amount) but by reducing the price of it and other surgeries to more globally acceptable values you completely wipe that claim down the drain.

I live around quite a few conservative types so this is the argument I see the most often regarding any sort of "aesthetic" considered surgery, at least in their minds. The same treatment is received for sterilization surgeries and treatments by these individuals. I can personally understand the frustration with being told that such changes are merely "aesthetic" though.

I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here, so I do agree with you, but again, this is going to be met with whatever means possible to end it due to people being *******s. A fundamental part I think in pushing forward with this is ultimately undermining every possible argument that they have.

Under your comment about dysphoria not being an illness, I'm aware of such, but you can get disability for things that aren't considered a technical illness, such as autism. Also, since dysphoria can cause a multitude of other various psychological issues due to the uncomfortable nature of it (such as depression and anxiety, which CAN become disabilities) I would assume that there would be quite a few transgender individuals under SSI right now for these very reasons, and, as such, would benefit far more than just the 15% that you mentioned earlier.

daigonite said:

Legitimate question - do transgender individuals use medicaid for disability? I wonder because if there are people who have enough problems induced by their dysphoria (or otherwise) that they are medically eligible for disability and thus would be able to use medicaid. If so, then the amount of people benefiting from this stature would increase quite a bit.

Click to expand...

Medicaid is now available to all people who make under a certain amount of money per year. In most states, that limit is somewhere around 15k per year. By disability, do you mean SSDI or SSI? In order to qualify for SSDI/SSI, you really need to be in some dire straits. I have six different disabilities and a lawyer and I'm STILL having trouble getting covered by SSI. People who really need and deserve it have the hardest time getting it. I've seen people who were literally dying get denied. Because the system is stupid and phobic of accidentally letting in someone that's malingering, the system is extremely rigid and you have to apply multiple times and use a lawyer to get approved for it. Gender dysphoria would not be severe enough of an impairment to stop you from working in the eyes of the government. It's very hard to get disability for mental illnesses, particularly ones outside of the traditional "severe" mental illness category (schizophrenia/schizoaffective/bipolar/severe anxiety, basically.)

I guess it changes depending on where you live because I know quite a few people with schizophrenia, bipolar, depression and PTSD who all receive disability and didn't really run into any problems with it. Maybe they have it more severely but I dunno, some of them are pretty much functional and wish they didn't have the income caps induced by it. *shrugs*

EDIT: If you live in Detroit then I haven't heard any personal cases of that, I thought in Michigan they were more flexible. In fact I know quite a few people who are trying to get off of it but can't. Weird... maybe it also depends on the approver.

daigonite said:

I guess it changes depending on where you live because I know quite a few people with schizophrenia, bipolar, depression and PTSD who all receive disability and didn't really run into any problems with it. Maybe they have it more severely but I dunno, some of them are pretty much functional and wish they didn't have the income caps induced by it. *shrugs*

EDIT: If you live in Detroit then I haven't heard any personal cases of that, I thought in Michigan they were more flexible. In fact I know quite a few people who are trying to get off of it but can't. Weird... maybe it also depends on the approver.

Click to expand...

My state of residence is Ohio, which I've heard is one of the tougher states. I don't know how it can be difficult to get off of it - don't they automatically take it away if you make over a certain amount? I have very severe bipolar (apparently I am the most severe bipolar patient my therapist has seen in 16 years) and moderate POTS, PTSD, sleep apnea, and NCS.

Magic Christmas Lights said:

My state of residence is Ohio, which I've heard is one of the tougher states. I don't know how it can be difficult to get off of it - don't they automatically take it away if you make over a certain amount? I have very severe bipolar (apparently I am the most severe bipolar patient my therapist has seen in 16 years) and moderate POTS, PTSD, sleep apnea, and NCS.

Click to expand...

Not from what I've heard. I know several people who do a lot of stuff under the table because they can't get off of it. Basically from what I've heard they just won't send you the check for anything anymore but they'll still cap your income.

While I think it's great on paper, I believe it'll fall very hard and very fast when put into practice. This country is already under great strain and slipping further and further into debts, and to be honest I don't feel like we should have to collectively pay for someone else to receive a surgery that can be seen as optional. If this person is born with both genitalia that might be a different story, but if you're uncomfortable in your own skin, I have to say tough luck and print your own money because I don't have enough left over after paying for our growing prison population and the illegals (all ethnicities) to pay for your new body.

Warsmith said:

While I think it's great on paper, I believe it'll fall very hard and very fast when put into practice. This country is already under great strain and slipping further and further into debts, and to be honest I don't feel like we should have to collectively pay for someone else to receive a surgery that can be seen as optional. If this person is born with both genitalia that might be a different story, but if you're uncomfortable in your own skin, I have to say tough luck and print your own money because I don't have enough left over after paying for our growing prison population and the illegals (all ethnicities) to pay for your new body.

Click to expand...

While I am loathe to entertain such a post, I'll point out that it is financially viable, as shown by obZen's data in his previous posts. So, it is very suspicious to just dismiss it in favour of paying for prisoners and 'the illegals.' Not to mention that as obZen pointed out, many transgender people could never afford treatment.

'As I sourced before, 15% of trans people in the US make less than $10,000. Reading later in that study, it looks like 26%? make the cutoff for Medicaid, unless I am misinterpreting the results.'

Click to expand...

But, this is hardly new information.

A little look at this shows that 41% of people in the United States who identify as transgender have attempted suicide at least once. Furthermore, it states that this 'vastly exceeds the 4.6 percent of the overall U.S. population who report a lifetime suicide attempt, and is also higher than the 10-20 percent of lesbian, gay and bisexual adults who report ever attempting suicide.'
I don't feel like going into the depths of gender dysphoria and how severely it can affect a person, but it is often crucial to the wellbeing of someone with the dysphoria that they get the surgery that they need. Otherwise, it can be like a ticking time bomb when it comes to their mental health.
Telling them to develop a thicker skin when it is clear that much more is needed is what the unenlightened public has been saying for, well, ever and it is a huge factor into why transgender people are so disparaged by society in the first place.

I think that you are letting your psuedo-concern over where your money is going cloud your judgement on the matter.

Aphrodite said:

While I am loathe to entertain such a post, I'll point out that it is financially viable, as shown by obZen's data in his previous posts. So, it is very suspicious to just dismiss it in favour of paying for prisoners and 'the illegals.' Not to mention that as obZen pointed out, many transgender people could never afford treatment.

But, this is hardly new information.

A little look at this shows that 41% of people in the United States who identify as transgender have attempted suicide at least once. Furthermore, it states that this 'vastly exceeds the 4.6 percent of the overall U.S. population who report a lifetime suicide attempt, and is also higher than the 10-20 percent of lesbian, gay and bisexual adults who report ever attempting suicide.'
I don't feel like going into the depths of gender dysphoria and how severely it can affect a person, but it is often crucial to the wellbeing of someone with the dysphoria that they get the surgery that they need. Otherwise, it can be like a ticking time bomb when it comes to their mental health.
Telling them to develop a thicker skin when it is clear that much more is needed is what the unenlightened public has been saying for, well, ever and it is a huge factor into why transgender people are so disparaged by society in the first place.

I think that you are letting your psuedo-concern over where your money is going cloud your judgement on the matter.

Click to expand...

While many people cannot afford treatment, the problems arise from us all having not enough money, simple as that. There isn't a contest on whether or not we have enough money, but whether whom we owe it to. Gender reassignment surgery falls down the list on my priority bar, say to: homelessness, combating crime, schooling (teacher salaries as well), traffic projects, housing projects, Fire Station upkeep, and a slew of other problems that we all have no money to combat currently. I view this surgery as a potential option and not at all life threatening, whether that makes me insensitive or mean so be it. The money simply isn't there, and in order to tack these surgeries on to available services, the money has to come from somewhere.

And there is simply no way I am going to accept the argument that this can help reduce suicide rates.

Protip: number one cause of death among officers? Eating their gun. And that's to say that Police officers are one of the careers where everyone watches you, teams ask how you're doing in certain periods of the year, and every time there is a death related to Officers or killing bad guys there is often mandatory counseling (if not mandatory, optional albeit strongly recommended). And they still off themselves to have suicide sit at the tippy-top of how officers die.

There is no plausible way to prevent someone from attempting suicide besides keeping them interred in mental wards and even then it isn't a sure thing. Every age group, all genders, every profession and every type of person is capable of killing themselves. Some people kill themselves because they lose their job, lose their children, get divorced, lose their homes, etc. and there are several helplines out there that they can reach out to if need be. And what's worse is that funds appropriated from other departments is put towards the gender reassignment surgery, which sorry sod doesn't get the heart transplant?

Each little thing the government does often gets a collective budget pool, from Military spending all the way to Medical help. Just because it's voted in that Medicaid can now cover this procedure' doesn't mean that Medicaid gets more money. The money it gets will be drawn from elsewhere within its own budget pool. Unless there is a boost to its funding, or can appropriate funds elsewhere, someone isn't going to receive treatment and in my book hearts are the kind of organ you need to live and drawing funds from actual needed treatment for a 'potentially optional' treatment is not a winning battle for me.

It isn't dumb to wonder where the money is going to come from, seeing as we don't have much to begin with.

Warsmith said:

While many people cannot afford treatment, the problems arise from us all having not enough money, simple as that. There isn't a contest on whether or not we have enough money, but whether whom we owe it to. Gender reassignment surgery falls down the list on my priority bar, say to: homelessness, combating crime, schooling (teacher salaries as well), traffic projects, housing projects, Fire Station upkeep, and a slew of other problems that we all have no money to combat currently. I view this surgery as a potential option and not at all life threatening, whether that makes me insensitive or mean so be it. The money simply isn't there, and in order to tack these surgeries on to available services, the money has to come from somewhere.

Click to expand...

you're acting like if medicaid allows gender reassignment surgery to be covered in new york then suddenly all transgender people will swamp the hospitals and devour all the money in the state
as daigonite said, it's a fairly rare operation and iirc it's a fixed price (that is, it's not like cancer which could spiral into god knows where financially) and ultimately less expensive than many other covered surgeries

while it's likely that the amount of surgeries will increase if gender reassignment does get covered, it's ultimately not that much a drain

And there is simply no way I am going to accept the argument that this can help reduce suicide rates.

Protip: number one cause of death among officers? Eating their gun. And that's to say that Police officers are one of the careers where everyone watches you, teams ask how you're doing in certain periods of the year, and every time there is a death related to Officers or killing bad guys there is often mandatory counseling (if not mandatory, optional albeit strongly recommended). And they still off themselves to have suicide sit at the tippy-top of how officers die.

Click to expand...

this false equivalence has no relevance to the thread

There is no plausible way to prevent someone from attempting suicide besides keeping them interred in mental wards and even then it isn't a sure thing. Every age group, all genders, every profession and every type of person is capable of killing themselves. Some people kill themselves because they lose their job, lose their children, get divorced, lose their homes, etc. and there are several helplines out there that they can reach out to if need be. And what's worse is that funds appropriated from other departments is put towards the gender reassignment surgery, which sorry sod doesn't get the heart transplant?

Click to expand...

then we shouldn't try to help a group of people who have until very recently had little to no support from the government or the public? while it's true that the budget is finite, the whole point of gender reassignment being covered, however small the coverage may be, is that there is finally measurable support being given to people who the government has actively discriminated against for so long

Each little thing the government does often gets a collective budget pool, from Military spending all the way to Medical help. Just because it's voted in that Medicaid can now cover this procedure' doesn't mean that Medicaid gets more money. The money it gets will be drawn from elsewhere within its own budget pool. Unless there is a boost to its funding, or can appropriate funds elsewhere, someone isn't going to receive treatment and in my book hearts are the kind of organ you need to live and drawing funds from actual needed treatment for a 'potentially optional' treatment is not a winning battle for me.

It isn't dumb to wonder where the money is going to come from, seeing as we don't have much to begin with.

Click to expand...

this quote is better left to someone like obZen who seems to have more knowledge of new york's finances
naturally organs are going to get priority over gender reassignment but the point is that now there is the option for gender reassignment to be covered unlike before

Aphrodite said:

you're acting like if medicaid allows gender reassignment surgery to be covered in new york then suddenly all transgender people will swamp the hospitals and devour all the money in the state
as daigonite said, it's a fairly rare operation and iirc it's a fixed price (that is, it's not like cancer which could spiral into god knows where financially) and ultimately less expensive than many other covered surgeries

Click to expand...

But that wasn't the point I was making. The problem again boils down to where they will receive the extra funding to perform these surgeries. The queue for surgeries, treatment, and medication upkeep from previous years just don't go away; so even if it is a 'rare' surgery, other services already provided take a hit financially from previously stated reasons.

The best example is beans: Medicaid gets 100 beans they can use to help 100 people. They only ever get 100 beans as standard every year, so they cannot expend beyond what they already have. Adding more people to the list creates budget problems, see? Just because it's 'rare' or 'cheap' on paper it means absolutely nothing when put into practice. 'Not much drain' when collectively said is a very big drain.

Ignoring the fact that money is money, and that the system as a whole receives a set amount and drains the pool of its reserves does not make a very clear argument to me. Medicaid is a Governmental organization that operates throughout the United states, and is not strictly tied to just New York state. The money received by the New York branch of Medicaid is pulled from the same pool that the Medicaid branch in Idaho draws its funds from. So, even though it may not seem like it affects those people 'over there', it indeed does. Medicaid is a division of a mass budget, and like most divisions it has subdivisions. That's the best I can explain that to you. Changes to one state effect the system as a whole. You cannot add something without taking something else away, and that much is a fact.

Also, my suicide (Police equivalent) likeness is absolutely valid. To say that one group killing themselves is completely different when its more or less the same is a tad overzealous. Like I said, Police Officers receive much support when it comes to talks about suicide. Hotlines, counselors, Captains and the like, and it still does not help.

The facts are that suicidal people vary wildly on a case to case basis. One transgender person may be fine how they are, another transgender person might still remain suicidal even after receiving 'treatment'. There is no factual proof that it will actually help against suicide attempts. Much like giving a suicidal man who is broke money will stop him from killing himself, there is no guarantee this surgery will actually prevent transgender people from committing suicide. The first matter of issue is qualifying for medicaid to begin with. So if they don't qualify, I guess they'll just eat the dust instead? That logic just doesn't make sense to me.

Just because they allow the surgery to happen in the first place doesn't mean that transgender people are strictly born to couples that qualify for medicaid and qualify themselves, making the entire point of this surgery reducing suicide rates among transgender people absolutely moot.

May I also remind you that there are numerous websites, help hotlines, and centers to help someone through their suicidal thoughts. These centers are available to everyone that requires help, and further more I cannot recall if someone could tell you're transgender over the phone or internet. I would even venture to say that transgender people don't so much have a problem with others calling them names, so much as coming to terms with their own identity.

I have no problem with transgender at all, but if a person feels feel suicidal we have things in place that can already help them out. So, if you truly wanted to break it down suicide in general has no purpose in this thread then I suppose, other than to say help is available to those who need it, race, gender, lifestyle; no one is turned away: 1-(800)-273-8255 National Suicide Prevention Lifeline or visit www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org if you have thoughts of suicide or know of someone who has thoughts of suicide.

It also doesn't do to dismiss those Officers that saw fit to end it all, and dismissing it without even a proper sentence sure seems far more cold than me asking where the money goes.

I don't understand the comment that middle class and upper middle class trans people will be taking advantage of this...medicaid is only awarded to people in a bad financial situation or who are otherwise disabled.

Anyway, I think this is awesome. One step forward for the trans community and for equality.

EDIT:

I have no problem with transgender at all, but if a person feels feel suicidal we have things in place that can already help them out. So, if you truly wanted to break it down suicide in general has no purpose in this thread then I suppose, other than to say help is available to those who need it, race, gender, lifestyle; no one is turned away: 1-(800)-273-8255 National Suicide Prevention Lifeline or visit www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org if you have thoughts of suicide or know of someone who has thoughts of suicide.

Click to expand...

Would you just tell someone who was being horrifically abused everyday by their partner and became suicidal as a result to just call a suicide helpline? You wouldn't tell them to change their environment to end the cause of their misery? Calling a helpline does not make things all better. It is a temporary bandaid. You must change your situation to ensure that the reason you're suicidal doesn't keep recurring. Otherwise, the problem will never be solved and you're looking at a life time of misery.

This seems like a great addition to the US medical scheme. I believe reassignment surgeries are available under the NHS here, as are other forms of plastic surgery - as long as it is linked to anxiety or depression in some way. The only statistics I can find, at hand, are that less than 150 surgeries happened in the UK in 2009. Not sure how this would compare to the US/NY State in particular, but shows it's a very low number.

Magic Christmas Lights said:

Would you just tell someone who was being horrifically abused everyday by their partner and became suicidal as a result to just call a suicide helpline? You wouldn't tell them to change their environment to end the cause of their misery? Calling a helpline does not make things all better. It is a temporary bandaid. You must change your situation to ensure that the reason you're suicidal doesn't keep recurring. Otherwise, the problem will never be solved and you're looking at a life time of misery.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing that the suicidal hotline speaker would be the one recommending those things, it wouldn't be a 'call this number and everything will be OK' kind of solution. It's a first step, an acceptance of sorts.

I don't know. I think there needs to be some significant form of oversight. It's not as black and white as everyone's making it. I think there are certainly a lot of good, rational people who could legitimately benefit from this kind of thing. I also think there are others for whom what they really need is professional mental help. I think there are a nontrivial number of people who have existing mental distress that could lead them to desire this kind of surgery when they wouldn't in sound mind. I'm also concerned that people may get this kind of surgery, not completely think it through, and then later regret it. Remember that this kind of surgery is permanent and the brain and body basically consider it major physical trauma (which it basically is from a biological standpoint). I think significant oversight should be required for this, especially if tax money is going to it.

Magic Christmas Lights said:

Would you just tell someone who was being horrifically abused everyday by their partner and became suicidal as a result to just call a suicide helpline? You wouldn't tell them to change their environment to end the cause of their misery? Calling a helpline does not make things all better. It is a temporary bandaid. You must change your situation to ensure that the reason you're suicidal doesn't keep recurring. Otherwise, the problem will never be solved and you're looking at a life time of misery.

Click to expand...

As far as I know, the people staffing such a hotline are trained to be able to provide other resources and advice that can help in the long-term, but I might be wrong on that.