GenderLife Forum: The Information Exchange

Another country heard from...

---
OTTAWA (AFP) - A criminally insane man jailed for sexually assaulting two women is demanding a sex change and wants Canada's publicly funded health care pay for it, said a local paper Sunday.

[...]

In 1976, Egglestone was found not guilty of a brutal rape by reason of a mental disorder, and was institutionalized for treatment.

He pleaded guilty to a second sexual assault in 1985 for confining and choking another woman, shortly after being released from the mental hospital.

Taylor now blames this criminal behavior on a gender identity disorder.

"I was a female trapped inside a male's body," Taylor told the Sun. "I started acting out in ways that I thought a male was supposed to act ... my head was in a spin back then."

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090309/canada/canada_crime_sex_health

That would be like putting the fox in the hen house.

They are not taking him , seriously ,I hope?

This is why people like the BBLZ can push their dumbass ideas. This person puts transsexuals in a bad light with the general public. The religous right now has more ammo to use against TS people. The media hasn't helped

This is just bad, nothing good can come of this. Canada isn't the most progressive place for TS people to begin with. This is just not good.

I say give her what she wants. Won't be raping anyone without a penis. At the very least give her an orchi.

I don't know that I actually believe that GID caused her to brutally rape women. Whatever. But, you're right. At least give her an orchi to decrease the chance that she'll do this to anyone else ever again. If I were one of the women "she" raped, I would be all for the SRS being granted. It's hard to shoot someone if you don't have a gun, isn't it?

I hate seeing headlines like this. It collectively casts transgender people in a bad light. This simply sounds like propaganda to me.

If this person does have GID, wouldn't one consider withholding 'medically necessary' treatment while someone is incarcerated to be 'Cruel and Unusual punishment?'

Would it be ok to withhold HIV drugs from a gay inmate because they could be seen as giving gay men a bad name?

Would withholding GID treatment from the inmate imply that such treatment is not medically necessary, and how would that affect us.

(I don't want to discuss whether GID is the appropriate way to talk about this instead of say, vaginal agenesis, as I can't remember the ICD code for that, and the difference isn't really relevant to the question. Replace the acronym GID with that ICD code if that makes you more comfortable)

No. When your liberty is taken from you the government assumes a lot of obligations according to our legal systems. Among those are a person's well being and that includes medical care. However that does not mean if a person has rotten teeth the state has to provide dental implants (as an example). It does mean that medical care must be provided for treatable lie threatening conditions. However if the threat is on of suicide then the treatment is isolation and 24 hour observance.

In the arena of GID or alleged GID the judicial decisions are just now being written and it will be quite a few years before the courts work their way to clearly defined rules. Typically that will lag behind what the medical community applies as standards in general society.

One important fact to remember is that incarceration expenses are borne by the taxpayers. Inmates with incurable conditions are often released by the system to live out their last few years or to avoid extremely high costs. In the case of murder, however, release for medical conditions is extremely rare.

In answer to one of your questions nothing decided in an incarceration situation will affect us. Jail decisions follow rather than lead the justice system.

Isolation and 24 hour observation could be considered cruel and unusual punishment as well.

There is a chance that the individual is claiming transsexuality in order to claim a lesser charge in an appeal due to 'insanity', as transsexualism is still considered a mental disorder via the DSM.

I think a concern many of us have, however, is that this may imply to the general public that transsexualism is a mental illness that may cause violence. Silence of the lambs, and all.

Actually after thinking about Shauna's remark which was...

the proper medical treatment would seem to be a lobotomy not an orchie. The problem doesn't seem to be related to the testicles at all but rather to the way he thinks men should behave with women. As an alternate treatment some big strong male inmate could be turned loose to choke and rape the bi*ch since she sees that as proper male behavior! Just my thoughts.

Indeed. I'd say a right to treatment doesn't stop if someone commits a crime, no matter how offensive or atrocious. But I'm such a sop I'd likely defend Pol Pot's rights, too.

The rape must be dealt with, as it likely is, but it's a separate issue from the possible TSity, which should be considered separately.