It is obviously true and wonderful to hear . . . how fast will it be overturned?
"but rather that Aetna’s policy exclusion prohibits only transgender individuals, the only individuals who can experience gender dysphoria"
I have to take issue with that phraseology. A transgender person may be the category of who experience gender dysphoria as a circumstance of birth, but as has been noted recently a cisgender boy who incidentally develops breasts unexpectedly is generally less than enthusiastic about the matter.
All the more reason why the single best government policy that would benefit all trans people is the elimination of for-profit health insurance. Down with the gatekeepers. Inscribe our rights into federal law.
And hopefully, all the insurers will realize that timely access to puberty blockers is a whole lot cheaper than undoing the damage of an unwanted puberty later. Having them advocating for youth trans healthcare would be a very good thing.
Amazing to see. I declined my employer’s Aetna insurance last year and went on my spouse’s insurance instead specifically because of this discriminatory policy from Aetna. I’ll have to keep an eye out for what happens in the class action.
Maybe when insurers have to bear the full cost of treating gender dysphoria in adults who have suffered unwanted pubertal changes they will find it's more cost effective to treat GD early with blockers and social support.
This is very good. I have seen a noticeable difference in service from Blue Shield this year. I have an open claim for medically necessary electrolysis and when I called to check on it after about 60 days, customer service didn't even know the status.
The current atmosphere has made service significantly worse for trans patients.
These medical services are ABSOLUTELY necessary and insurance companies that profit off all of us must be forced to cover the costs.
I have Aetna through my employer. This is huge. My employer (our town government) is supportive of me, and I've been able to get GCS and BA through them. I've actually found Aetna shockingly easy in approving those surgeries. But not even being able to pursue this has been disappointing, even if I'm unsure about getting FFS. Now I can at least explore the possibility if this ruling leads to Aetna ending its blanket denial. I'm cautiously optimistic, as with all things trans-related, this could be struck down in a higher court, though I would imagine not that Court of Appeals district.
Wonderful news! Hope this spreads to other insurers. My insurance UHC covers almost everything except FFS. So many people could benefit from this change!
Please tell me there's no way for this to get appealed to go to the US Supreme Court. I'd hate for them to rule in a way that tells insurers it's OK not to cover FFS.
Mazel Tov 🥳 I paid out of pocket for both of my FFS‘s, and I had Aetna when I had my GCS/GRS and they paid for that. No one is going to be looking at what’s below your waist when you have clothes on, but they will definitely see what’s above your shoulders and it does make a difference.
It’s nice to get a win once in a while…..
Thank you.
It is obviously true and wonderful to hear . . . how fast will it be overturned?
"but rather that Aetna’s policy exclusion prohibits only transgender individuals, the only individuals who can experience gender dysphoria"
I have to take issue with that phraseology. A transgender person may be the category of who experience gender dysphoria as a circumstance of birth, but as has been noted recently a cisgender boy who incidentally develops breasts unexpectedly is generally less than enthusiastic about the matter.
All the more reason why the single best government policy that would benefit all trans people is the elimination of for-profit health insurance. Down with the gatekeepers. Inscribe our rights into federal law.
Insurance- the singular industry in which a business is only able to exist because of all the times it 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴𝘯'𝘵 do what you pay it for.
And hopefully, all the insurers will realize that timely access to puberty blockers is a whole lot cheaper than undoing the damage of an unwanted puberty later. Having them advocating for youth trans healthcare would be a very good thing.
Amazing to see. I declined my employer’s Aetna insurance last year and went on my spouse’s insurance instead specifically because of this discriminatory policy from Aetna. I’ll have to keep an eye out for what happens in the class action.
Maybe when insurers have to bear the full cost of treating gender dysphoria in adults who have suffered unwanted pubertal changes they will find it's more cost effective to treat GD early with blockers and social support.
This is very good. I have seen a noticeable difference in service from Blue Shield this year. I have an open claim for medically necessary electrolysis and when I called to check on it after about 60 days, customer service didn't even know the status.
The current atmosphere has made service significantly worse for trans patients.
These medical services are ABSOLUTELY necessary and insurance companies that profit off all of us must be forced to cover the costs.
Another wonderful decision by an informed judge - let’s hope this decision will go a long way to help others in the fight for their rights
I have Aetna through my employer. This is huge. My employer (our town government) is supportive of me, and I've been able to get GCS and BA through them. I've actually found Aetna shockingly easy in approving those surgeries. But not even being able to pursue this has been disappointing, even if I'm unsure about getting FFS. Now I can at least explore the possibility if this ruling leads to Aetna ending its blanket denial. I'm cautiously optimistic, as with all things trans-related, this could be struck down in a higher court, though I would imagine not that Court of Appeals district.
Wonderful news! Hope this spreads to other insurers. My insurance UHC covers almost everything except FFS. So many people could benefit from this change!
Please tell me there's no way for this to get appealed to go to the US Supreme Court. I'd hate for them to rule in a way that tells insurers it's OK not to cover FFS.
Mazel Tov 🥳 I paid out of pocket for both of my FFS‘s, and I had Aetna when I had my GCS/GRS and they paid for that. No one is going to be looking at what’s below your waist when you have clothes on, but they will definitely see what’s above your shoulders and it does make a difference.
GOOD!
Colorado's law that mandates FFS coverage actually only applies to about 33% of insurance plans in the state. The rest are governed by federal law.
Do you think this will apply for FUE hair transplants as well?