Transsexualism isn't a lifestyle choice

The Edmonton Journal April 16, 2009

No one asks to be born with a heart defect, but the government provides coverage to defray medical costs of repair. No one asks to be disabled with erosive arthritis that requires joint replacement surgery, which is also covered by the government. Why should the government pay for such procedures? Because it makes business sense.

Every working citizen pays taxes, so it makes sense to have a healthy work force. The longer a person lives, the more they work and the more taxes they pay. Keeping people employable is a patriotic investment in the country's future.

I have not met anyone who chose to be born with a heart defect, or chose to have disabling erosive arthritis. I have met such people who have become actively employed taxpayers after appropriate procedures and rehabilitation, which were mostly covered by government health plans.

I have not met anyone who chose to be born with transsexualism, gender identity disorder, gender variant development, Harry Benjamin Syndrome, or other designations all referring to the phenomenon of acute and chronic distress stemming from persistent cognitive dissonance of having to display a gender which is incongruent with a person's self-identity. Such people might become productive taxpayers for a while, but many do not achieve their full potential over their lifetime, which might be brief in comparison to the general population.

Social awkwardness and gender presentation which is judged as inappropriate jeopardizes a person's employability. It may provoke a violent reaction leading to physical injury or death. Withdrawal, alienation and depression result in chronic access of medical resources and increasing drug costs, none of which are likely to succeed in rehabilitating a potential tax payer.

The greatest economic loss comes from violent death or suicide. Dead people do not pay taxes. It is not in the government's interest to lose the talent, gifts, skill sets, and abilities of a citizen who can potentially become a productive worker who pays taxes over a long lifetime.

It makes business sense for the government to pay for GRS, just as there is justification for paying for correction of cardiac defects, or joint replacement surgeries.

In summary, here are the following reasons:

- There is a return on the investment over a long time through income taxes paid by the fully employed individual;

- There is a benefit to the government in reducing expenditures in chronic care, AISH, drug plans, psychiatric services, emergency room costs, ambulance costs, police services, and alcohol and drug rehabilitation services. Costs related to investigations of murder or suicide can be avoided;

- There is a benefit to the government, the community and the country through the services provided by the taxpayer who makes full use of their individual talents, gifts, and skill sets as they pursue a career with long employment;

- The government only meets the minimal moral requirement by providing care limited to endless chronic support, which is not only a Band-Aid solution to a life threatening phenomenon, but also increases costs as it achieves little in worthwhile outcome. The moral requirement of the government is to see to the welfare of its citizens and to the welfare of the state.

Dr. Karen Hofmann, Edmonton
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal