42 Comments
тна Return to thread

Yes, they should. Any concessions on trans rights are bad.

Expand full comment

Trans rights or trans funding? Is this not the latter?

Also curious: we can of course discuss the principles of this bill, but could you quantify the impact? How many kids seeking gender-affirming care do American service members covered by Tricare have?

Expand full comment

Funding for gender-affirming care using TriCare is the provision in question.

Expand full comment

Precisely. Funding, not rights.

Expand full comment

It sounds like itтАЩs not eliminating funding, itтАЩs eliminating insurance coverage. This could save the military $0 a year, it could save millions. Depends on the medical needs of the pool of insured people. Im also curious about deductible and out-of-pocket. What about getting in-network discounts? I have no idea how Tricare works (I work in health insurance but not that kind) and there are plenty of ways health insurance coverage can help make a medical bill cheaper while also paying out nothing.

IтАЩd be interested in knowing more how all of this works but IтАЩm guessing itтАЩs worst case scenario. IтАЩve reviewed many medical claims at work and helped pay hundreds of thousand of dollars. The ones that suck the most are ones where the claim is denied bc the medical plan doesnтАЩt cover that, which is what this legislation sounds like. ItтАЩs a dead end. There are no special rules to trigger, no in-network or out-of-network things to review. Those people are fucked and owe the entire amount of the bill, the insurance wonтАЩt even look at it.

Since this is all so expensive, itтАЩs basically taking away a right. Not a constitutional one. But, these people had the right to get medical care that their insurance would allow and now they donтАЩt and itтАЩs too expensive to pay out of pocket. ThatтАЩs something being taken away from them. And since being trans is so closely associated with medical care, it takes away peopleтАЩs ability to be authentically trans.

Expand full comment

Thank you for clarifying. You cast some very informative light on this.

Expand full comment

The proviso says "gender affirming care that results in sterilization" correct? Isn't the "results in sterilization" a loophole that still allows most forms of care?

Expand full comment