Massachusetts State Judge In Favor Of Changing The Sex Of A Prisoner

The rules of conviction of transsexuals suffer very harshly and the payment orders of taxpayers.

This week, a federal court ordered Massachusetts to pay the sex change of transgender prisoners with taxpayers’ money.

Former prisoner Michael-Kosselik was convicted of strangulating his wife Cheryl in 1990 and serving a life sentence in a men’s prison in Norfolk, Massachusetts.

The decision of District Court Judge Mark Wolf focused on the Eighth Amendment, which states that the government is prohibited from imposing “cruel and unusual punishments” on its inmates. Judge Wolfe received a widespread criticism of his decision.

“The denial of adequate medical care due to fear of controversy or criticism from politicians does not serve the press or the public any legitimate punitive purpose,” he wrote in the extensive court order, “precisely the kind of conduct prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. ”

Doctors diagnosed Kossilik with a gender disorder, a psychological condition described as bothersome or dissatisfied with sex or sexual orientation. The sexual identity disorder is a medical diagnosis recognized by the DSM-IV, the Bible of Medical Psychology. Even when she was a girl, Koselik said she felt trapped in the wrong body. In many cases, Koselik attempted suicide and castration. He also stated that psychotherapy and hormone therapy did not work. After the testimony of several doctors, the court ruled that changing sex would be the only option to protect their physical and mental health.

“The underlying medical condition in gender dysfunction is real, legitimate and recognized by the established medical community,” says Jennifer Levy, a lawyer with the LGBT Foundation, a nonprofit organization. “At the heart of this situation, it is a stain of medical conditions.”

Levy does not advise Koselik in the case, but says that the increasing sexual changes are covered by private and public insurance plans.

“It’s true that people are arguing about why people in prison receive three meals a day and shower once a week,” he says. “The criticism that we should not worry about the prisoners is one rejected by our founders.”

Levy once addressed a case that served as a precedent for the judge’s decision. One of his clients was involved in a dispute with the IRS after the elimination of expenses related to the change of sex, which was denied by the IRS. After a five-day trial, your client won the case.

While the LGBT community sees the decision as a great victory, many lawyers and other legal professionals are strongly opposed to the federal judge’s decision.

A lawyer, Ken Boehm, president of the National Center for Legal Ethics and Accountability, believes the operation is purely voluntary, which says it is not included in the rights of inmates to medical care. “If this becomes the new natural situation, where do we draw the line?”

The decision was tantamount to altering the constitution, he said, adding that the Eighth Amendment was created to protect prisoners from practices such as cutting off the hand for simple theft.

“Lawyers can form 101 reasons for cosmetic surgery,” he says. “If they have a better face, they can get a job and not kill people.”

A spokesman for the Massachusetts Department of Corrections said he was considering resuming the case. They predict that such a case will appear in another electoral district in another state, and this time the judge may not look favorably on the accused.

“Sooner or later, they will collide with the Court of Appeal and then take them to the Supreme Court,” he says.

Check Out Top Rated Male Enhancement Product in

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *