Constitutional right to federally-mandated "adequate medical care" for MA prisioner

[annr]

Recently a federal judge in Boston ruled that MA authorities must provide taxpayer-funded-sex-change operation for a prisoner (incarcerated for murdering his wife). The rationale was that denying the prisoner the operation would violate his 8th amendment rights. The judge also admitted that the prisoner was going to receive a better standard of care than the tax-paying citizen.

This is an odd situation to say the least, but here we have another example of the Federal government deciding what the State must do under the law--the citizens of the MA were not allowed to have a say in the matter. Also, does the 8th amendment apply here? And if the prisoner is receiving better care than I would, that is one of the more exasperating abuses of taxpayer money I can think of (Scott Brown agrees). On the other hand, this person is obviously ill.

Opinions anyone?

In a first-of-its-kind ruling, a federal judge in Boston has ordered Massachusetts authorities to provide a taxpayer-funded sex-change operation for a transgender prisoner.

Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf said he based his ruling on the recommendations of doctors at the commonwealth’s Department of Correction who prescribed sex-reassignment surgery as “the only form of adequate medical care” for Michelle Kosilek.

Kosilek, who used to go by “Robert,” is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1990 murder of his wife.

Judge Wolf, describing his 126-page order as “unprecedented,” said that denying Kosilek the surgery was a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

Prison officials opposed the operation, saying they couldn’t provide security for Kosilek were he to receive a sex change — an argument Judge Wolf described as “pretextual.” Several state legislators publicly opposed using taxpayer funds to pay for the sex-reassignment surgery.

Specialists have diagnosed Kosilek with severe gender identity disorder, and since 2003 he has been receiving female hormones. Kosilek lives in the general population of an all-male prison in Norfolk, Mass.

Despite the hormone treatment and psychotherapy, Kosilek has attempted to castrate himself and twice tried to commit suicide, according to court documents.

“It is unusual to treat a prisoner suffering severely from a gender identity disorder differently than the numerous inmates suffering from more familiar forms of mental illness,” wrote Judge Wolf, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan. “It is not permissible for prison officials to do so just because the fact that a gender identity disorder is a major mental illness not understood by much of the public and the required treatment for it is unpopular.”

Judge Wolf acknowledged that Mr. Kosilek, a convicted murderer, may receive better care for his disorder than many law-abiding Americans.

“It may seem strange that in the United States citizens do not generally have a constitutional right to adequate medical care, but the Eighth Amendment promises prisoners such care,” he wrote, pointing to a 2011 Supreme Court decision that said providing anything less was “incompatible with the concept of human dignity.”...

Sen. Scott Brown (R., Mass.) called the decision “an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars” and encouraged state officials to appeal the decision....

Only a handful of courts have considered sex-reassignment surgery...

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/09/04/...eral-prisoner/

[timcsaw]

I heard about this and I think it's outrageous!!

[quietmike]

This is what happens when people believe the constitution is a "living, breathing" document

[ttoney83]

Insanity!

[timcsaw]

Maybe we should even give prisoners TV, the latest movies on Blue Ray, and literally TONS of weight training equipment so that they are even more "beefed up" and intimidating when they are released from prison... oh... wait...

[annr]

..and whether to house the prisoner with the men or women...

[Kiah]

While the decision is obviously stupid to anyone who isn't a politician, it's more selective outrage and distraction. Not even a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend on locking up victimless criminals along side him.

[eyeeatingfish]

Wow... can we execute him first? How is a sex change even prescribed as a treatment for something. How about getting out of prison being prescribed as the only treatment!

[quietmike]

While the decision is obviously stupid to anyone who isn't a politician, it's more selective outrage and distraction. Not even a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend on locking up victimless criminals along side him.

Agreed.

[annr]

I think that one of the facts of the case that galled me most was that the decision was based upon the prisoner's doctor's recommendation--a right that we are fighting to retain under our current and recently legalized health insurance schemes. This seems like unequal protection under the law (or a double-standard)--today under their insurance plans, patients (non-prisioners) are denied care deemed appropriate by their physicians.

[timcsaw]

While the decision is obviously stupid to anyone who isn't a politician, it's more selective outrage and distraction. Not even a drop in the bucket compared to what we spend on locking up victimless criminals along side him.

Agreed... I too am a big fan of the chain gang.

[Kiah]

Agreed... I too am a big fan of the chain gang.

An Arpaio supporter?

"Conservative" is such a misused term these days.

"Wanna use my money to provide healthcare, food, and shelter for people? DOWN WITH BIG GOVERNMENT!!!!"

"Wanna use my money to cage people for going against my religious values? Here ya go and you've got my vote!!!"

[timcsaw]

An Arpaio supporter?

"Conservative" is such a misused term these days.

"Wanna use my money to provide healthcare, food, and shelter for people? DOWN WITH BIG GOVERNMENT!!!!"

"Wanna use my money to cage people for going against my religious values? Here ya go and you've got my vote!!!"

I wouldn't cage people for going against MY religious values... I would however cage them... and THEN put them on a chain gang if they were found guilty (using due process) of breaking the laws of our country.

[jdm61]

So murdering your wife is going against my religious values?

An Arpaio supporter?

"Conservative" is such a misused term these days.

"Wanna use my money to provide healthcare, food, and shelter for people? DOWN WITH BIG GOVERNMENT!!!!"

"Wanna use my money to cage people for going against my religious values? Here ya go and you've got my vote!!!"

[timcsaw]

So murdering your wife is going against my religious values?

Must be... after all, its ONLY the Christian Bible that says "Thou shalt not kill" isn't it?

[russianpolander]

<
Specialists have diagnosed Kosilek with severe gender identity disorder, and since 2003 he has been receiving female hormones. Kosilek lives in the general population of an all-male prison in Norfolk, Mass.>

I wonder if his "disorder" arose after taking it up the wazoo from fellow inmates for a prolonged period of time?

[Kiah]

I wouldn't cage people for going against MY religious values... I would however cage them... and THEN put them on a chain gang if they were found guilty (using due process) of breaking the laws of our country.

Here's where self-proclaimed conservatives lose me. Do you support big government in the case of drug use, prostitution, etc? Do you applaud or get outraged when a politician campaigns on getting drugs off the street or cheers the DEA or FDA for going paramilitary on a cannabis clinic or Amish farm? Please don't tell me it's about the law. Anyone willing to concede an issue because of it's legal status has already given big government the win. I'm sure you're aware that I'm referring to victimless or self-victimizing crimes here.

My point is that most that claim to be conservative and against big government are only against it when it suits them. They tend to cheer it on when it supports their own religious, moral, or financial views regardless of the toll on others. Anyone who's all a twitter about healthcare or food assistance while thinking "good job" when the DEA kidnaps a pot farmer or street walker that's doing nothing harmful is beyond my comprehension I guess.

So murdering your wife is going against my religious values?

Sorry, not up to playing the "let's squash the topic through sensationalism" game.

[timcsaw]

Here's where self-proclaimed conservatives lose me. Do you support big government in the case of drug use, prostitution, etc?

No, I don't support big government for much of anything.

[Kiah]

No, I don't support big government for much of anything.

I do wonder how many people that claim that will be voting for Johnson. In those places that the Republican party doesn't get him barred from of course.

[jdm61]

Kiah, just so you know, there are no victimless crimes. All crimes, at a minimum, have that most important "victim." When you commit any crime, you do what used to be known as "violating the King's peace" whether there is any individual citizen victim involved or not and by doing so, you offend the State. Remember that the person you rob, shoot, rape or otherwise harm is NEVER actually a legal party to the criminal case. Your adversary in court is the State. The "victim" is, at best, a witness for the prosecution.