The Transgender Issue Is About Healthcare and Not Bathrooms

Even though the population of transgender individuals in America is an extremely small one, the media has caused a massive rise of attention towards the individuals. The current dilemma is one concern the use of their bathrooms in public space. Are transgender people allowed to use the bathroom that associates with the gender they identify as? President Obama thinks yes, but many conservatives think they should not. Like with all political debates, there are legitimate concerns on both sides. However, the solution to this dilemma is not as complex as most people think.

The real issue with transgender individuals is healthcare. It sounds really off course especially when state governors are citing easy access for perverts. There’s a lot to explain, but overall, the dilemma eventually originates with healthcare.
Like same-sex marriage, there are some actual limitations to what that entails. Same-sex marriage is still the marriage of two human individuals. It does not mandate polygamy or bestiality. The government is not giving licenses or recognizing marriages between a man and his dog. Such limitations are representative between transgender individuals.
Transgender people, for the most part, if not their entirety, are not looking to exploit vast arrays of identities. They are choosing between male and female, and nothing out of the ordinary, and like same-sex marriage, it should not be too difficult for governments to accept that. It’s still a human being nonetheless.
Surprisingly, this issue probably does not need the federal government to make an assertion. It can actually be resolved at the state level.
Here in Texas, a person’s driver’s license indicates the gender between male and female. There are a several things that can be change and updated on a driver’s license like address and name. So if a person could officially change their name on their driver’s license, could they be allowed to possibly change their gender too?
Society is usually comfortable with who goes into the two different bathrooms based on how they look. The conservatives do have point when they say that a person of the opposite sex could simply waltz into an opposing bathroom, and claim that they are of that gender. Most of us could simply understand that is quite silly, especially when the individual does not try to look like the gender they claim to identify as. However, if a police officer were to stop them, it wouldn’t be expected for that officer to look down that individual’s trousers. The officer would likely ask for an ID, and if that ID, registered by the state, indicated that the person was the gender they identified as, then they are correct because the state recognized it. That’s how identification works.
Now the process is by no means going to be simple. Like changing the address on one’s identification, one has to provide proof of such. In this case, how does one bring proof of a gender change?
A medical solution would be necessary. The transgender individual could provide medical documentation that they had surgeries that have crafted them into the opposite sex, or they can provide documentation from a psychologist that has approved their mental qualifications as the opposite sex. The solution is to let a doctor decide. State government could recognize this as legitimate proof, and the state could officially recognize their gender transition through reassignment on their ID. So now, not just by mental identification, transgender people can officially claim their gender, and their gender is protected by their representation on their ID. This here resolves the bathroom dilemma.
Here’s the hard part. If a state is going to recognize officially changing genders on IDs, then are people entitled to health insurance that covers gender therapy procedures or the full cosmetic transition? If so, then do Medicaid and Medicare have to cover these procedures, and are private insurers mandated to cover this?
It’s quite similar to the abortion issue. The dilemma behind this is if there is coverage, what gets covered? To keep it minimal, covering gender therapy on the psychological side might be the better solution when coming to coverage. Not all transgender people aim to have the full cosmetic transition. Also, insurers are not likely going to be willing to cover cosmetic surgery. Even though, the plight for gender transition may be a more legitimate reason for cosmetic surgery to be performs as, per say, breast implants, realistic coverage to be accessible if identification is defined by psychoanalysis, and not by aesthetics. This will make is easier for transgender to claim their official transition via decision by a doctor.
It has been well noted how difficult legislatures have been on Obamacare. There’s a strong chance that they would not want to allow the official change on identification because they do not want to expand government mandates on healthcare. If the governments allow for gender to be changed on identification, and the individual is independent on how they must provide the proof, then there will be a Fourteenth Amendment issue because transgender individuals are going to have to provide the proof out of their own pocket. America has been awful on people’s civil rights before, so this might be the interim solution.
All in all, the transgender issue is still very minuscule, and it is nowhere as dangerous or problematic as terrorism, gun violence, unemployment, poverty, executive overreach, etc. but its bathroom dilemma does need a solution. Legislation could be passed making a proper system to change the gender on IDs, but if that happens, legislatures have to be ready on how the individual will have access to healthcare. That’s the thought that legislatures probably have in the back of their heads. That’s the real civil rights issue.  The conservatives’ concern on perverts is correct. It cannot be acceptable that person could say what they are just by the mouth. There need to be official representation just like in our names and addresses. For those who think that a third bathroom is needed, it’s not. There just needs to be expansion on identification, and healthcare towards that identification.


Leave a Reply

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

The Bridge News
Visit Us On InstagramVisit Us On Facebook