A woman, Michael Maier, undergoing hormonal shots after a gender changing surgery was refused the hormones while she was in prison for 5 days. Now she is trying to sue the state to prevent something like this to happen to other transgenders.
Now, she was asked if she had any medication... well, here's a quote from the article:
In the city's motion to dismiss the lawsuit, it said Maier answered no to the following questions: "Do you have a medical problem that requires immediate medical attention?" "Are you now under treatment or taking medications?" And, "Do you suffer from any other medical condition for which a physician is seeing you?"
You can see why this is problematic. She should have answered yes to the last two questions. It is either that she didn't recall being a transgender, that she is ashamed that she has to take medication to continue to be a woman, or she did tell them and they didn't believe her. The reason why she said "no" was never explained.
Now, she also seems to think that people should bend over backwards for transgenders. How about no? We shouldn't treat transgenders better, no more than whites should be treated better than blacks. Instead, equality is needed.
I don't know if a hormonal withdrawal is painful, but it sounded like it by how much of a fuss she was getting into, and for that reason, yes, they should have given her the hormones, AFTER consulting it with her doctor to confirm the prescription.
Now, as to the suing? I have no opinion about that. It should just be talked about in court.
The only real objection I have to the article is the comments. If someone isn't being totally inappropriate, it's someone saying "you go girl!" and then being told that this woman deserved what she got.
The only thing that made me smile was the totally random comment: "Obama the halfbreed is the third anti Christ."
You mean there were two other antichrists? Who knew! 9w9