Davin News Server

On 25 Apr 2025, a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com> posted some
news:qiOOP.2639593$OrR5.2009332@fx18.iad: 

> On 4/25/25 02:26, 51st State wrote:
>> The Court of Appeal says OHIP must cover surgery for a resident
>> seeking to have a vagina constructed while leaving penis intact
>> 
>> Ontario's top court has ruled the province must cover the cost of an
>> out- of-country, penis-sparing vaginoplasty for a 'transgender and
>> non-binary resident'Å¥ who wishes to have both female and male
>> genitalia. 
>> 
>> In a unanimous decision released this week, a three-judge panel of
>> the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed a lower court's ruling ordering
>> the Ontario Health Insurance Plan to pay for the patient, identified
>> as K.S. in court records, to undergo the novel phallus-sparing
>> surgery at a Texas clinic.
>> 
>> The latest ruling is the third unanimous decision in K.S.'s favour.
>> 
>> 'K.S. is pleased with the Court of Appeal's decision, which is now
>> the third unanimous ruling confirming that her gender affirming
>> surgery is covered under Ontario's Health Insurance Act and its
>> regulation,' K.S.'s lawyer, John McIntyre, said in an email to
>> National Post. 
>> 
>> The legal battle between K.S., whose sex at birth was male, dates to
>> 2022, when the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) refused a funding
>> request for surgery to construct a vagina while sparing the penis, a
>> procedure this is not available in Ontario, or anywhere else in
>> Canada. 
>> 
>> OHIP argued that, because the vaginoplasty would not be accompanied
>> by a penectomy, the procedure isn't one specifically listed in OHIP's
>> Schedule of Benefits and therefore shouldn't be publicly funded. OHIP
>> also argued that the requested surgery is considered experimental in
>> Ontario and, thus, also ineligible for coverage.
>> 
>> K.S. appealed to the Health Services Appeal and Review Board, which
>> overturned OHIP's refusal, arguing that 'vaginoplasty' should be
>> covered, whether a penectomy, a separate procedure included on the
>> list of publicly funded sex-reassignment surgeries, is performed or
>> not. 
>> 
>> OHIP appealed that decision to the Divisional Court but lost again
>> after the panel dismissed the province's appeal and declared the
>> surgery, which leaves intact a functioning penis, an insured service.
>> 
>> The province's latest appeal was heard on Nov. 26. The three-judge
>> appeal court panel rejected OHIP's arguments that the proposed
>> surgery isn't an insured service because it won't be accompanied by
>> removal of the penis ' a penectomy 'neither recommended by K.S.'s
>> health professionals nor desired by K.S.,' according to the court's
>> written decision. 
>> 
> Simply amazing!
> I want it all!
> I want it both ways!
> And I want all of you to pay for it!
> ---------- Court - OK, sounds fine to us.

That's ridiculous.  

>> K.S., who is in her early 30s, 'has experienced significant gender
>> dysphoria since her teenage years, as well as physical, mental and
>> economic hardships to transition her gender expression to align with
>> her gender identity,' the court said.
>> 
>> K.S.'s doctor submitted a request to OHIP for prior funding approval
>> for the surgical creation of a vaginal cavity and external vulva. The
>> request made it clear that K.S. wasn't seeking a penectomy.
>> 
>> In a letter accompanying the request, her doctor said that because
>> K.S. is 'not completely on the 'feminine' end of the spectrum' it was
>> important for her to have a vagina while maintaining her penis,
>> adding that the Crane Center for Transgender Surgery in Austin,
>> Tx.,'has an excellent reputation' for gender-affirming surgery, 'and
>> especially with these more complicated procedures.'

Doctors who encourage this kind of silliness have crossed the line.  They 
are abusing the mentally ill.

>> The appeal court ruled that the divisional court did not err in
>> holding that the requested vaginoplasty is listed in the Schedule of
>> Benefits, with or without an accompanying penectomy.
>> 
>> 'The existence of different techniques to perform a vaginoplasty does
>> not affect this conclusion,' the appeal court's written decision
>> reads. 'It was open to the drafters of the Schedule of Benefits to
>> describe each specifically listed service in broad or narrow terms.
>> 
>> 'Here the description chosen, vaginoplasty,' is broad enough to
>> encompass different techniques,' the court said.
>> 
>> 'As the (Health Services Appeal and Review) Board put it, a
>> vaginoplasty without a penectomy is an insured service because it is
>> still a vaginoplasty, a specifically listed service.'
>> 
>> The World Professional Association for Transgender Health's standards
>> of care, the appeal court added, also 'expressly refers to 'penile
>> preserving vaginoplasty' as a surgical option for some non-binary
>> people and also note that vaginoplasty 'may include retention of
>> penis and/or testicle.'' 
>> 
>> Ontario has until June 23, 2025, to seek leave to the Supreme Court
>> of Canada.
>> 
>> 'As this matter is within the appeal period, it would be
>> inappropriate to comment further,h said a spokesperson for Ontario's
>> Ministry of the Attorney General.
>> 
>> In dismissing OHIP's appeal, the court ordered Ontario to pay K.S.
>> $23,250 in costs.
>> 
>> Gender-affirming surgeries at the Texas clinic range from US$10,000
>> to $70,000, depending on the procedures performed.
>> 
>> https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ohip-coverage-penis-sparing-
>> vaginoplasty
>> 
> 
>