-
-
...
That was a good read. Hope that the consideration passes. -
THANK GOD i hope smitherman comes through for us and ill be the first one in line for sure.Originally posted by admin View PostSEMI-RETIRED 519-209-3058Comment
-
Meh,
Yahoo Go Go!!!! Jurassic Clarke !!!
Just a personal opinion but, A little friendly advice ...
DIY is safer for your personal well being and mental health ....
+++ Pattaya gives you a "hole"-lot more "Depth," than Charing Cross ....Comment
-
8 - 10 a year? Being sent back to the Clark hell hole. fuk that.
I think as TS Roxy posted DIY
S~Comment
-
This could end up being a Pyrrhic victory for us - a victory with devastating costs to the victorious.
CAMH / Jurassic Clarke has a horrendous track record of mistreatment and discrimination against members of our community, and they have a political interest in minimizing the number of people for which they "authorize" SRS. If they end up being the final determinants of what we're "allowed" to do with our own bodies, then we could end up in a worse situation than we started in.
Which is more costly? Raising $17,000 on your own, or being pathologized, dehumanized and confined to a rigid and outdated set of expectations?
For the record, they automatically disqualify any trans-identified people that engage in sex work - which could have dire consequences for many, many people on this forum. Would you give up escorting, and work at Starbucks for minimum wage for two years, simply for the possibility (not a guarantee!) of publicly-funded SRS?
Be careful what you wish for. . . you just might get it.Comment
-
Your post very accurate Nikki. When I first heard the news I thought FINALLY. When I read the article that painted a whole other picture. Certainly I will check with my physician as to what is really transpiring.
To go by what is in the news this is certainly a lose/lose proposal and policy for all Ontario Transsexuals.
S~
Originally posted by TGirl Nikki View PostComment
-
Back To Choices Again
While I commend Our Minister of Health for some long over due consideration for the transgendered community, I am not sure what the actual ramifications will be for the patients who seek government funding.
Sounds like there is already some controversy among the posters, all that to say those who seek SRS still do have a choice, to undergo the government requirements or pay for it themselves.
By way of example one poster mentioned that as a sex trade worker they would be precluded from funding. To me it seems hardly equitable in my opinion.
We have numerous examples here on the forum of gals who have worked very hard in order to achieve their ultimate goal of a complete transformation. Albeit by working as escorts along the way.
Just look at Lisa and the progress she has made through her own hard (pardon the pun) efforts. Another that comes to mind and has been well documented is none other than the beautiful Nina Arsenault.
They obviously did not wait for government funding to embark on the road of becoming who they really wanted to become.
Strange that there are a number of other gals that work in the sex trade but have not undertaken SRS although they may well might have afforded to do so given their earnings.
It is a bit of a puzzle to me why some gals want the reassignment and others do not but again and I emphasize it is my own personal opinion it is entirely a self choice.
Life it seems is all about choices these days.
PatComment
-
Pat;
While your post may come from the heart it clearly shows your ignorance of who transsexuals are and what our lives truly are.
There is already controversy over this reinstatement amoung Ontario residents who also have no understanding of what is involved.
We have been pushed from sugar daddy's to a prison warden all the while enslaved.
You really believe the outlandish stories on here? The cat fights? You think this is glamorous? Its business and it is one of the ugliest communities. Riff with lies, deciet and selfishness. A communitie pited against itself for self survial.
You mention Lisa and Nina, what of the TS 16 year olds, thrown out of their home, left to live on the streets only to work rough trade, prostitution, escorting. (You pick what you like to call it) No education, no work. Is this glamorous? Does society truly believe this is Ok.
We spend more money on violent criminals then it would ever cost taxpayers to help every TS in Canada.
If you support transsexuals great, take the time to know the real truth. Do not try and make something glamorous out of a ugly situation.
S~
Originally posted by Pat View PostComment
-
CAMH's guidelines
I probably should have clarified this in my previous post: it takes a lot more than $17,000 and a friendly surgeon to get SRS. You need letters from two psychiatrists (I'm not sure if licensed psychologists are allowed to give letters anymore) stating their approval. Even the clinics in Thailand now require psychiatric approval.
The ONLY WAY to receive public funding for SRS (before delisting in 1998 ) was through CAMH. Their Gender Clinic requires, in a nutshell:
- a minimum of TWO YEARS of constant psychiatric assessment;
- possibly as many as SIX YEARS before a recommendation for SRS is given;
- legal name change, as well as full-time or part-time employment, education or volunteer work;
- provision of independent proof that you are living full-time in your gender role;
- a minimum of ONE YEAR living in your identified gender role before hormone therapy is allowed;
- no criminal activity (including sex work!!!) no drug use, no other mental illnesses, nor any "general life instability"
- funding DOES NOT COVER breast augmentation, hair removal, facial feminization surgery, or travel expenses related to obtaining SRS.
Basically, you have to put yourself under CAMH's microscope for two to six years, and do exactly what they tell you to do. Even then, there's no guarantee that CAMH will recommend a patient for surgery; they reject approximately 90% of patients requesting recommendation for SRS.
According to Dr. Dickey, who is in charge of CAMH's Gender Clinic, "the other 90% goes away and learns to live with it." Real compassionate, these folks - there are countless horror stories that have come out of this place, and many choose NOT to live with it; they commit suicide instead, or go to an unlicenced surgeon, with predictably disastrous results.
On top of everything else, most of these requirements are far more stringent than the Harry Benjamin Association's (now WPATH) Standards of Care; hormone therapy normally requires only three months of full-time living OR psychological treatment, and recommendation for SRS requires one year of hormone therapy (because removal of the testicles will significantly lower testosterone levels). If you can get two psychiatrists (or possibly psychologists?) to verify these requirements have been met, AND you can afford the $17,000 price tag, you are permitted to receive access to SRS.
However, to receive public funding for SRS, you have to satisfy CAMH's guidelines, and even then, there is no guarantee. You could be waiting for up to SIX YEARS before they will give you a recommendation, and even then, you have to pay all your travel expenses (there are no SRS surgeons in Ontario) without reimbursement.
CAMH won't release their exact requirements publicly, but most of this information came from the recent Ontario Human Rights Commission decision challenging the original delisting of SRS. Since it is a matter of public record, the case can be found here:
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onhrt/do...006hrto32.html
Most of the details on CAMH's requirements can be found in articles 36 to 44, near the top of the judgement.
I'll be investigating this more carefully when the government reveals its health care model in the coming weeks, but trust me: if the new funding formula is anything like the old one, then there is very little reason to celebrate.
Comment
-
Unbelievable Nikki!
Thank you Nikki for revealing the nature of the requirements that are needed in Ontario for funded SRS.
What a tortuous and horrendous route for anyone to have to follow. That would be almost certain to discourage most who might consider such application. Of course discouragement is what government originally intended to do. That decision was not really based on financial considerations as is usually claimed, nor even medical reasoning, but it was purely a moral one, since most legislators did not then, and still do not, appreciate the needs of this community.
If anyone in government should have been able to understand and help moderate the current situation, surely Geo. Smitherman should have. Being the Minister of Health, the M.P. for the riding most associated with alternate lifestyles, and a member himself of that community, one expects from him more than the usual consideration and reflection on the needs of its' members.
But as you say, there is not yet sufficient information to be able to yet make a judgement on this situation until it is publicly revealed. Perhaps the Minister may yet convince the gov?t to bring in something new and more realistic in the coming regulations.
A Psychiatrist can provide both medical and psychological evidence so I have doubts that a Psychologist?s opinion alone would be acceptable in this case, as they have no medical background whatsoever, though IMO, any MD should be able to provide whatever medical requirements that are needed. Thus, perhaps an MD and a Psychologist together could do what is necessary. Many psychologists I believe, are based more in the real world than most psychiatrists, who in general, seem to me be kind of quirky themsel_ves.
Re; criminality - So is it possible that say a criminal record from a DUI could scuttle the whole process? What does that have to do with suitability for such surgery anyway? Was this designed as a roadblock to eliminate sex workers? But today prostitution [with few exceptions] is legal.Comment
-
New info on SRS
Well, I've done some more research, and I've been in contact with a source in CAMH's Gender Identity Clinic, as well as someone who's spoken to George Smitherman directly. And, the general feeling is. . .
. . . nobody in the Ontario government knows what the hell is going on at CAMH, and all signs point to a return to their old model of pathologization. CAMH isn't releasing any details to the public, but the timing is incredibly suspect. . .
It seems that Kenneth Zucker and Ray Blanchard are both part of the The Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group that is revising the DSM for the upcoming fifth edition, and may be seeking to entrench "autogynephilia" (essentially, calling our condition a sexual kink, where we're turned on by seeing oursel ves as women) in the new release.
What a shocking coincidence! They're part of this work group, seeking to include their theories in the DSM, just as public funding is restored, exclusively through their clinic!
I'll be publishing a column on this in a few days, once I put it together, but we have to be incredibly wary about this. These doctors have a history of treating transsexuality in a very unappealing way, and we really need to rally against the single-access model, pronto.
Whatever bullshit has transpired between community members in the past, now is the time to forget it, and move on. I'm just as guilty of this as anyone else, but this is not the time to argue over stupid stuff. We really have to get it together, and present a united front against CAMH's exclusive right to authorize publicly-funded SRS.
More details will follow as they trickle in, but people, let's cut the drama and get organized. For everyone that may seek SRS at some point down the road, this issue could shape our lives for decades to come.
Comment
|
|
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Tweet
Comment