Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Tuam councillor calls for HSE to axe sex change operations

  • 26-07-2010 01:42PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,026 ✭✭✭


    Link here

    Call for HSE to axe sex-change ops as child denied aid
    Conor McMorrow, Political Correspondent
    Colm Keaveney: called for HSE review

    The HSE should not pay for public patients to undergo sex-change operations abroad when cuts are being made to frontline services for children, a Labour Party councillor hass claimed.

    Colm Keaveney, from Tuam in east Galway, has called for a review of all HSE expenditure after a child in his area was denied funding for essential hearing-aid implants. His comments come in the wake of recent reports that the HSE has paid for at least 22 public patients to undergo sex-change operations over the past decade at a cost of around of €63,000 for female-to-male operations and €30,000 for male-to-female procedures.

    "When allocating scarce resources, we must establish what actually delivers best value for society and the individual," he said.

    "Depriving children of necessary aids and appliances at this point in their life will have a devastating social outcome in later years when compared to some very expensive procedures being paid for by the taxpayer.

    "While I understand this may be offensive to transgender people, I would ask them to look at this through the eyes of a parent and try to empathise with how they feel about their child's wellbeing.

    "Given the dire straits the country finds itself in, it is vital that we focus government spending on areas that will deliver positive results for our society in the long run."

    A spokeswoman for the Transgender Equality Network Ireland said: "I agree that it is regretful that the HSE is making cutbacks in service provision [but] transgender people are part of Irish society and are also taxpayers so they are entitled to access healthcare appropriate to their specific needs, just like other people living in Ireland."

    She added that "the government is now in the process of working on legislation that will finally recognise the legal status of transgender people in Ireland."

    It was recently reported that the HSE is funding sex-change operations under the Treatment Abroad schemes, where the HSE pays for the treatment in another EU country when it cannot be obtained in Ireland. Keaveney was speaking after being contacted by parents of a child with hearing difficulties.

    The seven-year-old child, who has 35% hearing loss in both ears, may have to be taken out of mainstream education as the HSE has refused to fund hearing-aid implants at a total cost of €1,600 for the child.

    A spokeswoman for the HSE said the organisation does not comment on individual cases.
    My own thoughts on the matter is that priorities are needed, I know next to nothing about transgender issues but it seems strange that so much can be spent on such operations when €1600 can be denied for a child (My own hearing was saved by the HSE when I was a baby, thanks to a timely operation)
    Any thoughts on the matter?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    Cuts in sex-change operations? Seems to be part of the procedure.

    Axing in sex-change operations? Seem a bit brutal. Scalpels are better.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Does he know all there is to know about the crying game?

    Seriously though, similarly to you doctors saved my sight when I was a baby, that's an obvious priority but it must be very hard not being able to identify with ones own body and I imagine if we were in that situation it'd be a major priority to attempt to remedy that


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    Personally I think that "sex change" operations are vital and very important procedures, just as important as any other operation. It would be horrifically unfair to cut funding for them. They are life changing and correcting procedures. There is a perception that these are just "cosmetic" type procedures but I disagree.

    If funding was cut it would further marginalize these people. It would result in much suffering as they would not be able to afford it themselves. Why sort of message will it send out? These people are not worthy of equal treatment and access to health-care as everyone else?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,968 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    Wonder if An Bord Snip would have any comment on this spending ;)

    Anyway, the State doesn't even fund laser eye surgury which some argue is cosmetic but it's vital for some people.
    Serving members of the defense forces for example.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    If you're going blind and get surgery thats a physical solution to a physical problem. Wanting to change your sex implies a mental problem.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    MUSSOLINI wrote: »
    Personally I think that "sex change" operations are vital and very important procedures, just as important as any other operation. It would be horrifically unfair to cut funding for them. They are life changing and correcting procedures. There is a perception that these are just "cosmetic" type procedures but I disagree.

    If funding was cut it would further marginalize these people. It would result in much suffering as they would not be able to afford it themselves. Why sort of message will it send out? These people are not worthy of equal treatment and access to health-care as everyone else?

    I agree that they are very important operations that should be funded by the taxpayer. however, funding is something we don't have. If drawing up a list of priorities i would by sight saving operations above gender re-assignment.

    unfortunetely fairness is a very subjective thing when the cupboards are bare.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭BeardyGit


    I very much doubt that the parents of the child concerned are unable to raise the €1600 required to pay for the procedure/implants themselves when it comes down to it. Each year there are thousands of children whos parents pay for all sorts of procedures and treatments themselves, even if the HSE should really cover it.

    I know if I had a child who needed this procedure and the funding was refused by the HSE, I'd be out there doing what I needed to do to find it, not feeding a sheeplike junior politician with the means to have a pop at the HSE over providing funding to another individual for a procedure which to all intents and purposes could prove to be 'life saving' for that person.

    That self serving politician deserves a slap for the clear discrimination he's displayed. He should be taking on the HSE and its failures as a whole, not playing the needs of one citizen against another.

    Divide and conquer, eh? Looks like Labour aren't much different from any other political party if that's how they approach these matters.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭BeardyGit


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    If you're going blind and get surgery thats a physical solution to a physical problem. Wanting to change your sex implies a mental problem.

    And you're implying ignorance I'm afraid. Transgender identity is a super complex area and one that you can't just sum up by saying it's a 'mental problem'.

    If a gender reassignment can help save a life, would you put it higher up the list of priorities than saving someones hearing? Or sight? Or limbs?

    Think before you type.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Wanting to change your sex implies a mental problem.

    Being transgender is not a mental issue.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,026 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    RoverCraft wrote: »
    If a gender reassignment can help save a life, would you put it higher up the list of priorities than saving someones hearing? Or sight? Or limbs?

    Think before you type.
    This is going into extremely risky territory; what if I am so distraught by the thought of having a large nose, that I will commit suicide unless it is surgically downsized? Should the taxpayer stump up for this?
    I know you'll claim that having a large nose is not the same as feeling trapped in the wrong body but it does open up the can of worms as to how much the HSE should accomodate someone who's suicidal.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    I very much doubt that the parents of the child concerned are unable to raise the €1600 required to pay for the procedure/implants themselves when it comes down to it.
    It doesn't surprise me that much. Times are hard and €1600 is a fair amount of money.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Each year there are thousands of children whos parents pay for all sorts of procedures and treatments themselves, even if the HSE should really cover it.
    Yes, and these parents can afford to pay for it.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    I know if I had a child who needed this procedure and the funding was refused by the HSE, I'd be out there doing what I needed to do to find it, not feeding a sheeplike junior politician with the means to have a pop at the HSE over providing funding to another individual for a procedure which to all intents and purposes could prove to be 'life saving' for that person.
    Can't they be doing both?
    The idea of a sex change being "life saving" enters difficult ground, as I have outlined above.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    That self serving politician deserves a slap for the clear discrimination he's displayed. He should be taking on the HSE and its failures as a whole, not playing the needs of one citizen against another.
    Unfortunately, the HSE resources are finite. Prioritising of healthcare is obviously needed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    This is going into extremely risky territory; what if I am so distraught by the thought of having a large nose, that I will commit suicide unless it is surgically downsized? Should the taxpayer stump up for this?
    I know you'll claim that having a large nose is not the same as feeling trapped in the wrong body but it does open up the can of worms as to how much the HSE should accomodate someone who's suicidal.

    As pointed out in post 11, there's a medical basis for this. Thus the feeling of being trapped in the wrong body is because essentially the brain is trapped in the wrong body - its not a psychological disorder, as was formerly thought.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    I know you'll claim that having a large nose is not the same as feeling trapped in the wrong body but it does open up the can of worms as to how much the HSE should accomodate someone who's suicidal.

    pretending for one second that being transgender is a mental issue (which it isn't!), how much do you think the HSE spends on people with serious psychological issues? treatment for people who may be suicide risks, people with severe depression, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, or any number of other issues that can pose a risk of suicide? you know, staff for facilities to help young adults who are self harming and might be at risk of suicide?

    IF being transgender was something psychological, why would it be any different to all the other psychological ailments that pose a risk of suicide, and that the HSE are already accommodating?

    PS. it's not a mental issue. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭BeardyGit


    This is going into extremely risky territory; what if I am so distraught by the thought of having a large nose, that I will commit suicide unless it is surgically downsized? Should the taxpayer stump up for this?
    I know you'll claim that having a large nose is not the same as feeling trapped in the wrong body but it does open up the can of worms as to how much the HSE should accomodate someone who's suicidal.


    It doesn't surprise me that much. Times are hard and €1600 is a fair amount of money.

    Yes, and these parents can afford to pay for it.


    Can't they be doing both?
    The idea of a sex change being "life saving" enters difficult ground, as I have outlined above.


    Unfortunately, the HSE resources are finite. Prioritising of healthcare is obviously needed.

    I don't see for a minute how it's entering difficult ground. You've said that times are hard and €1600 is a lot of money. Sure it is. But that's no excuse. As a parent of a 7 year old kid, you'd find it by cutting back on other things. Don't go suggesting that maybe they've already cut back everything they can in support of your argument - it's weak enough as it stands. A credit union loan, help from family, hospital saturday fund....the list of possible sources goes on and on. And they'll find a way to pay for it, that's a fact. Don't try to hype this into something greater than it is.

    Why are you suggesting that it's 'difficult ground' and 'extremely risky territory' to suggest that a transgender procedure could be life saving for someone who could potentially take their own life? The actual 'condition' is only treatable via a gender reassignment, but the very real mental illnesses that often present as a consequence of not having this operation could certainly amount the same sort of costs in therapy, hospitalisation etc over time.

    No matter, in neither case do you or I have specific facts, so we're just throwing our own thoughts around for now. One thing's for certain though - Most folks who read this thread and our contributions are likely to sympathise with the child and his/her parents as opposed to those singled out for a discriminatory dig by this politician. And for that he should be singled out.

    These things need to be treated on a case by case basis, always, but that's not how the media or the general population react when presented with things in the misleading and ill-informed opinion of a politician and his slack jawed media contacts.

    Who's to say that the recipient of a 30k operation hasn't already been on the receiving end of 20 years worth of treatment for depression? Who's to say that the childs parents aren't some outraged and indignant couple who can easily afford to pay it, but sought it from the state just because they see it as an entitlement?

    Who knows? But deciding that one deserves it more than the other isn't really the point. Prioritising where funds are spent isn't your job, and unless you're going to go get that job, you won't have the privelage. The HSE is flawed, that's for sure. But you have to put some trust in those with a greater perspective on things to decide if and when a patient will receive funding for a particular treatment.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    RoverCraft wrote: »
    And you're implying ignorance I'm afraid. Transgender identity is a super complex area and one that you can't just sum up by saying it's a 'mental problem'.

    If a gender reassignment can help save a life, would you put it higher up the list of priorities than saving someones hearing? Or sight? Or limbs?

    Think before you type.

    I'm against free healthcare anyway. Sick people die. Not my problem.
    Links234 wrote: »
    Being transgender is not a mental issue.

    Thanks I'll read these to put time off writing my essay.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    I already made my mind up about this when I just read "Tuam councillor calls for" :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    also, I'd like to know where this €30k figure is coming from

    in the other thread, I said I wouldn't like to get the government to pay for my own operation, because I would have to get it done in the UK, and from accounts I've heard, the surgeons in the UK who do this are using very outdated methods, discard a lot of sensate material during the procedure, and the results are less satisfactory. as well as that I've heard about very poor aftercare. reading things from people on other transgender messageboards, some people are shocked that the UK surgeons are even allowed to practice, many people in the UK won't go to them for surgery.

    my choice, for what I'm going to pay for myself, is to go to Dr. Christine McGinn in America.
    everything I've heard about her has been fantastic, and I almost wouldn't want to be done by anyone else.
    From her, my vagina would cost $17,500 or €13,464

    another one I had considered was with Dr. Suporn in thailand, the price would be about €9,426

    anyone know if the UK surgery actually costs €30,000? it seems ridiculous


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 210 ✭✭Hazlittle


    Read those links. Something wrong with brains their not their genitals. Its an unnecessary surgery. Dont care if its legal just dont like paying taxes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,305 ✭✭✭Chuchoter


    Links you must get so sick of being the TG representative for the whole of boards! There are so many stupid threads over in AH (well this one is more sensible) and you're always right there chopping up dumb arguments :p:D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    Hazlittle wrote: »
    I'm against free healthcare anyway. Sick people die. Not my problem.

    Aren't you pleasant
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    Read those links. Something wrong with brains their not their genitals. Its an unnecessary surgery. Dont care if its legal just dont like paying taxes.

    Nooo, there is nothing wrong with their brains and thats where their personality lives. Its really quite simple


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,026 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    RoverCraft wrote: »
    I don't see for a minute how it's entering difficult ground. You've said that times are hard and €1600 is a lot of money. Sure it is. But that's no excuse. As a parent of a 7 year old kid, you'd find it by cutting back on other things. Don't go suggesting that maybe they've already cut back everything they can in support of your argument - it's weak enough as it stands. A credit union loan, help from family, hospital saturday fund....the list of possible sources goes on and on. And they'll find a way to pay for it, that's a fact. Don't try to hype this into something greater than it is.
    You're right. As everyone who needs €1600 has access to it.
    Don't be so foolish. Times are extremely tough right now, for people across Ireland and if you honestly think that such an amount of money is obtainable by everyone then I'm baffled as to how someone can be this sheltered.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Why are you suggesting that it's 'difficult ground' and 'extremely risky territory' to suggest that a transgender procedure could be life saving for someone who could potentially take their own life? The actual 'condition' is only treatable via a gender reassignment, but the very real mental illnesses that often present as a consequence of not having this operation could certainly amount the same sort of costs in therapy, hospitalisation etc over time.
    Because then it opens up the question as to what the government should pay for.
    A €1600 operation to save a child's hearing is one thing.

    Like it or not, resources are not infinite. Prioritising needs to take place. What you are suggesting basically amounts to a person feeling suicidal being entitled to any surgery they wish.
    Where do you propose the line is drawn here?
    Anyone can feel suicidal for any number of reasons; should the HSE pay for all of these thing?
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    I
    No matter, in neither case do you or I have specific facts, so we're just throwing our own thoughts around for now. One thing's for certain though - Most folks who read this thread and our contributions are likely to sympathise with the child and his/her parents as opposed to those singled out for a discriminatory dig by this politician. And for that he should be singled out.
    For questioning the money being spent on sex changes when saving a child's hearing is viewed as too expensive? I see no problem with this.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    These things need to be treated on a case by case basis, always, but that's not how the media or the general population react when presented with things in the misleading and ill-informed opinion of a politician and his slack jawed media contacts.
    Who's to say that the recipient of a 30k operation hasn't already been on the receiving end of 20 years worth of treatment for depression? Who's to say that the childs parents aren't some outraged and indignant couple who can easily afford to pay it, but sought it from the state just because they see it as an entitlement?
    As you're doubtless aware, the funding of the HSE is limited. We don't have infinite money to throw around, especially in a recession when we are running up an extremely high deficit. Running case by case tests would could cost a lot of extra in paperwork and screening, broad strokes are needed in a universal healthcare system like Ireland.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Who knows? But deciding that one deserves it more than the other isn't really the point. Prioritising where funds are spent isn't your job, and unless you're going to go get that job, you won't have the privelage. The HSE is flawed, that's for sure. But you have to put some trust in those with a greater perspective on things to decide if and when a patient will receive funding for a particular treatment.
    Ah right, forgive me for posting up on a politics debating forum. Clearly it's not my job to decide which needs priority and I should trust the powers that be.
    I should obviously not worry about the almighty economic mess the current government has gotten us into. As it is not my job to decide these things and I should have trust in them to do the right thing.


    Links234 wrote: »
    pretending for one second that being transgender is a mental issue (which it isn't!), how much do you think the HSE spends on people with serious psychological issues? treatment for people who may be suicide risks, people with severe depression, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, schizophrenia, or any number of other issues that can pose a risk of suicide? you know, staff for facilities to help young adults who are self harming and might be at risk of suicide?

    IF being transgender was something psychological, why would it be any different to all the other psychological ailments that pose a risk of suicide, and that the HSE are already accommodating?

    PS. it's not a mental issue. :)
    Yes, and (to my knowledge) the HSE doesn't pay for surgery due to someone's personal issues. Does the HSE pay for liposuction for someone feeling depressed for their being morbidly obese (as an example)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,375 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    How does not having the procedure affect your health? Does it cause cancer or paralyze you? Blindness? Excema? Chron's?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 478 ✭✭CokaColumbo


    I don't think the tax-payer should be expected to make large amounts of cash available so that people can mutilate their bodies in order to feel more in-tune with their own psychological identity; especially at a time when deaf children can't get sufficient care in public sector hospitals.

    Saying that these folks deserve to have their "surgeries" publically funded because if they don't get them, they may become depressed and kill themselves is essentially blackmail.

    Did you know that a separate psychological disorder exists whereby the "victim" honestly feels that he/she would live a more fulfilling life as an amputee? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_identity_disorder). Should we be compelled to pay for people to have their healthy limbs amputated? Absolutely not; its unethical and nobody should be forced to pay for that procedure.
    Likewise, I don't think it is right for anybody to be forced to pay for a procedure which involves slicing a fully functioning penis from a man's torso.

    If that dude wants to do that to himself, he can go right ahead but he should not expect me to foot the bill for such a messed up operation.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,650 ✭✭✭sensibleken


    I don't think the tax-payer should be expected to make large amounts of cash available so that people can mutilate their bodies in order to feel more in-tune with their own psychological identity; especially at a time when deaf children can't get sufficient care in public sector hospitals.

    Saying that these folks deserve to have their "surgeries" publically funded because if they don't get them, they may become depressed and kill themselves is essentially blackmail.

    Did you know that a separate psychological disorder exists whereby the "victim" honestly feels that he/she would live a more fulfilling life as an amputee? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_identity_disorder). Should we be compelled to pay for people to have their healthy limbs amputated? Absolutely not; its unethical and nobody should be forced to pay for that procedure.
    Likewise, I don't think it is right for anybody to be forced to pay for a procedure which involves slicing a fully functioning penis from a man's torso.

    If that dude wants to do that to himself, he can go right ahead but he should not expect me to foot the bill for such a messed up operation.

    so is all research into depression blackmail if its publicly funded?

    Also there are a lot of different disorders you cannot compare transexuality to what you cited anymore than you can homosexuality with schizophrenia. they are completely different things. transexuality research has shown that they are neurologicaly a different gender than whats between their legs.

    If these have to be shelved for the time being while the country picks itself up then that may be an unfortunate neccesity. but the main problem with the HSE is that the organisation is a financial black hole. If it ran efficiently I would have no doubt that both would be possible


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,535 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    Well, if there is an option between saving a deaf child's hearing, and changing a person's sex, then obviously the first operation should get the budget.

    However, operations don't usually work like that, everything goes on a schedule, and the priority cases jump the queue, I doubt someone has ever changed sex in lieu of saving someone's sight.

    I also think we're about 10 years early technologically speaking on the sex change front, we can pump people full of hormones, and cut and add bits in a very rough fashion, but we really need to be able to grow and replace internal organs to do it properly.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,772 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    So, out of perhaps €100,000,000,000 (one hundred billion euros) spent on health over the last ten years, the HSE have spend about €1,000,000 (one million euros) on such operations? I think the suggested priorities for cuts are misguided.
    Hazlittle wrote: »
    If you're going blind and get surgery thats a physical solution to a physical problem. Wanting to change your sex implies a mental problem.
    Are you suggesting that people with mental health issues* shouldn't receive care? Gender reassignment isn't done for kicks.

    http://www.who.int/about/definition/en/print.html
    Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.
    Oh, here's an idea. the head of the HSE commented at the weekend that hospital services in Galway cost too much - staff working all night with very few patients. I see a solution.


    * See other posts on this issue. Note that health insurers only cover substance abuse and not other mental health issues.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,943 ✭✭✭BeardyGit


    You're right. As everyone who needs €1600 has access to it.
    Don't be so foolish. Times are extremely tough right now, for people across Ireland and if you honestly think that such an amount of money is obtainable by everyone then I'm baffled as to how someone can be this sheltered.


    Because then it opens up the question as to what the government should pay for.
    A €1600 operation to save a child's hearing is one thing.

    Like it or not, resources are not infinite. Prioritising needs to take place. What you are suggesting basically amounts to a person feeling suicidal being entitled to any surgery they wish.
    Where do you propose the line is drawn here?
    Anyone can feel suicidal for any number of reasons; should the HSE pay for all of these thing?


    For questioning the money being spent on sex changes when saving a child's hearing is viewed as too expensive? I see no problem with this.


    As you're doubtless aware, the funding of the HSE is limited. We don't have infinite money to throw around, especially in a recession when we are running up an extremely high deficit. Running case by case tests would could cost a lot of extra in paperwork and screening, broad strokes are needed in a universal healthcare system like Ireland.

    Ah right, forgive me for posting up on a politics debating forum. Clearly it's not my job to decide which needs priority and I should trust the powers that be.
    I should obviously not worry about the almighty economic mess the current government has gotten us into. As it is not my job to decide these things and I should have trust in them to do the right thing.




    Yes, and (to my knowledge) the HSE doesn't pay for surgery due to someone's personal issues. Does the HSE pay for liposuction for someone feeling depressed for their being morbidly obese (as an example)


    Blah blah blah blah blah. You're making a whole load of leaps and bounds here bucko, jumping from liposuction for morbidly obese (when that's nowhere near the right type of surgical/medical treatment - ignorant much?) to asserting that I'm sheltered and foolish for suggesting a parent would fine a way to lay their hands on €1600 for their childs health....

    Sensationalist ****e obviously hits the mark with you, eh? And the only practical point of reference you can bring to things is that you had an operation that saved your hearing when you were a baby. Well, good for you.

    Well sunshine, let me tell you something. A parent would find the money. If the state hadn't paid out for your operation, you can bet your arse your folks would have sold their house and cycled to work for the next 20 years to pay for it. That's how it works. End of story. The rest of your post....well, you're so far off the mark now that I couldn't be arsed responding. Enjoy your bliss.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54 ✭✭SassyGirl_1


    I don't think the tax-payer should be expected to make large amounts of cash available so that people can mutilate their bodies in order to feel more in-tune with their own psychological identity; especially at a time when deaf children can't get sufficient care in public sector hospitals.

    The child isn't deaf, it has a 35% hearing loss.
    Likewise, I don't think it is right for anybody to be forced to pay for a procedure which involves slicing a fully functioning penis from a man's torso.

    Please, do a little research before repeating the same tired mis-conceptions about what is involved in changing ones gender.
    If that dude wants to do that to himself, he can go right ahead but he should not expect me to foot the bill for such a messed up operation.

    I guess you'd have the same problem with the HSE paying for operations for people to go private, who are on the public waiting list - http://www.ntpf.ie/home/

    22 operations in 10 years roughly works out at 66k (at the low end) a year - Out of a budget of how much? 14 Billion this year alone.

    Any operations to change gender are carried out of state (because such a service is not provided here) under the National Treatment Purchase Fund. As far as I know there is an EU directive if a operation is not available in this country, people have the option of travelling to another EU country to avail of that operation.

    If as the bandwagon has stated the HSE should no longer fund such operations, in order to treat everyone the same, they should also, no longer fund any operation with is not provided for here. They should also no longer fund treatment for cancer suffers who smoke, same applies for diabetes, stroke victims and so on - in cases where all those illnesses are self-inflicted - why should anyones taxes pay for their treatment?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,026 ✭✭✭Lockstep


    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Blah blah blah blah blah.
    Damn, your eloquence has really caught me out here.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    You're making a whole load of leaps and bounds here bucko, jumping from liposuction for morbidly obese (when that's nowhere near the right type of surgical/medical treatment - ignorant much?)
    But if they're going to commit suicide over it and lipsuction will quickly get rid of the fat, then surely it's one of the things the HSE should do. Seeing as it is a life or death decision.
    "Bucko".
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    to asserting that I'm sheltered and foolish for suggesting a parent would fine a way to lay their hands on €1600 for their childs health....
    Most would do their level best, but you're living in lala land if you honestly think that every parent in Ireland can do this.
    Newsflash; there's a recession. And €1600 is a no small amount of money.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Sensationalist ****e obviously hits the mark with you, eh? And the only practical point of reference you can bring to things is that you had an operation that saved your hearing when you were a baby. Well, good for you.
    And what is your practical point of reference? But of course, you think that those in authority know best and that the only people who should question priorities are those who have to make them.
    RoverCraft wrote: »
    Well sunshine, let me tell you something. A parent would find the money. If the state hadn't paid out for your operation, you can bet your arse your folks would have sold their house and cycled to work for the next 20 years to pay for it. That's how it works. End of story. The rest of your post....well, you're so far off the mark now that I couldn't be arsed responding. Enjoy your bliss.
    My parents rented a house when I was a wee baby (they still do) and weren't earning much (my mother was unemployed at the time) "sunshine".
    The fact you automatically assume that my parents owned a house in 80s Ireland (combined with your assumption that raising €1600 is something any parent can do) really reinforces my thoughts that you're fairly sheltered from how lean things are in Ireland right now.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    Victor wrote: »
    the HSE have spend about €1,000,000 (one million euros) on such operations?

    I've been scratching my head over this for a while now, and €30,000 for male-to-female surgery doesn't make any sense to me at all, so I'm now guessing that what the HSE is paying for is the cheapest, lowest bidder price procedure

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67130114&postcount=228

    so maybe it's not €30,000 per procedure, but that's the TOTAL amount payed for male-to-female surgeries over the last 10 years.
    so that's €93,000 for 22 patients over the last 10 years, nothing close to one million

    nowhere in the article does it say that it's €30,000 EACH, it just says that that much was spent.


Advertisement