Discrimination in CHIP Renewal is Hurtful to Transgender Youth. Shame on Our State Senators.

My name is Carrie Santoro, and I want to tell you about my son Finn.

Finn loves hiking and exploring nature.

His favorite holiday is Valentine’s Day, and he hates to see people in pain.

He is Student Council President, loves to read, and bemoans homework.

He has a little sister who would swear that he hung the moon and stars just for her.

Loving and nurturing other people is woven into the fabric of who he is. He is a ray of sunshine that makes our corner of the world a brighter place.

He is also transgender.

When Finn told us he was a boy at the end of the third grade, we supported him during his transition to live openly as male. The difference we saw in him was unbelievable. He did better in school, he was happier at home, he talked about his future, and he absolutely glowed, as the way he saw himself was finally reconciled with who everyone else saw on the outside.

Two years ago, we had our first appointment with a pediatric endocrinologist. The medical options available — which, make no mistake, can be life saving for trans youth — were largely not covered by insurance and incredibly cost prohibitive.

Luckily, federal legal protections expanded and eventually trickled down to states, and enough doctors, patients, and parents of patients successfully (and painfully) appealed insurance company denials of these services to set precedent that makes denials in Pennsylvania rare.

The state Senate’s recent passage of House Bill 1388, which renews the Children’s Health Insurance Program with a provision that discriminates against trans youth, threatens that progress.

Senator Don White, the author of the trans discrimination provision, chose to hold hostage 176,000 children insured through CHIP, fabricating a choice between them and care for my son, in a publicity stunt meant to turn people against each other for his own political gain.

For reasons lost on most, Senator White chose to politicize Finn’s existence to sow discord among those of us who have more in common than not, to demonize my son, and to turn other parents and, subsequently, their children against him.

As for the other 33 Republicans, including my state senator, Patrick Browne, and three Democrats who voted to advance a bill that says my son is less human and says appealing to the very worst of human nature for cheap political points is worth sacrificing him on the altar of your own ambition, shame on you.

Shame on you for stoking fear and prejudice and deciding to vote based on political expediency rather than public service or even facts.

Shame on you for being more concerned about re-election and intra-party political promotion than advocating for what is right and just.

Considering Pennsylvania legislators are the second highest paid in the country — topped only by California — I understand you have a lot to lose. But we have more.

You could have stood on solid moral ground and told your colleagues and constituents that the American College of Physicians, the American Medical Association, and the American Psychological Association are just a few of the many organizations that agree gender-transition services are medically necessary for children like my son.

You could have eased their economic concerns by sharing studies like the 2015 analysis by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health that show this care is cost-effective for insurance companies, as transgender people make up a small segment of the population and gender-affirming services actually reduce patients’ future health expenses.

You could have chosen to use your station as a source for change in public understanding of the trans community. You could have publicly called this amendment what it is — hateful, unnecessary, and absurd — and exposed the political motivations behind it. Instead, you continue to fail us. All of us.

Who will be Harrisburg’s next target for exclusions? Will they follow the national model of going after kids with asthma? Cancer? Perhaps cystic fibrosis? Where will they draw the line? The precedent set by this bill will not only affect transgender children nor will it only affect children insured by CHIP.

Bills like HB 1388 that include hateful and exclusionary provisions are not based in economics or medical science nor are they for the greater good. They are meant to call into question the humanity of children like my son and perpetuate the myth that they are less deserving of needed health care.

Our children deserve better. My son deserves better.

Carrie Santoro writes from Lehigh County.

My transgender son is trying to find his way. Politicians aren’t helping.

By Ellen*

I’ll never forget when my son, Jacob, told me that he is transgender. He was 13 years old at the time, and we were out for dinner. As he ate his lobster, he looked at me and said, “Mom, I’m in the wrong shell,” as tears welled in his eyes.

Since his decision to live openly as male, I have done everything that I can to support his healthcare needs, both physical and emotional. We found a pediatrician who has a well-deserved reputation for being supportive of transgender kids, and she has been wonderful. The Mazzoni Center in Philadelphia has also been an irreplaceable resource. He is now 15 and has the healthcare support that he needs.

His social isolation, though, has been a greater struggle. When Jacob came out, he was attending a brick-and-mortar charter school. Being an adolescent is hard enough, but being a transgender teenager is incredibly difficult. We all know that teens can be abominable to one another, and his classmates did not understand Jacob’s experience and gave no indication of interest in understanding what it’s like to be transgender. He had one friend who outed him to others who did not know that he’s trans, which compounded his social anxiety. He now attends a cyber charter school. He has become introverted, uncomfortable with other kids, and friendship with others his age is very difficult for him.

Philadelphia Trans March, October 7, 2017 (photos: Rick Urbanowski Photography)

I celebrate and am grateful for the many trans kids who are able to live their lives openly with support from their families and their friends. I want my son to live the fullest life possible as the person he is, and I hope we’re moving toward a day when transgender people in America are treated with the same respect and dignity as everyone else.

Politicians compound the challenges for transgender youth when they actively pursue discriminatory policies against the trans community. When elected officials use transgender people as a wedge to score cheap political points, it feeds a negative narrative about the lives of trans people, and that narrative is felt acutely by young people.

The Pennsylvania Senate recently engaged in this very kind of underhanded behavior when it passed a bill to renew the Children’s Health Insurance Program with a provision that prohibits CHIP coverage of transition-related surgical procedures. This isn’t a benign policy discussion about how expansive CHIP should be. This is an effort to diminish the humanity of trans youth. If it becomes law, this bill would deny coverage of medically necessary and sometimes life-saving medical care for transgender young people. It feels like nothing less than dehumanization of my son and kids like him.

Jacob and I are lucky that we are able to access private health insurance. Unlike our state senators, though, I have a basic level of empathy, and I don’t need the experience of using CHIP to be able to relate to any parent of a transgender child who just wants the best healthcare coverage possible for their kid.

The teenage years are fraught with challenges. And transgender teens face unique hurdles that cisgender kids do not. They don’t need politicians making things worse.

*Ellen and her son live in Lehigh County. She writes using pseudonyms for both herself and her son to protect their privacy.

Is it time to legalize marijuana in Pennsylvania?

By Matt Stroud, Criminal Justice Researcher, ACLU of Pennsylvania

Is it time to legalize marijuana in Pennsylvania? Photo via herb.co.

Citations and charges can ruin lives. It can be traffic tickets with fines too high to afford, disorderly conduct charges, other non-violent offenses, or even violent offenses that reflect an earlier time in someone’s life before they had a chance to grow up and reform. Any entrance into the criminal justice system can be an automatic ticket to second-class citizenship — a way for employers to discriminate, for judges to make unfair sentencing decisions, and for peers to judge.

As part of ACLU-PA’s efforts to reduce the commonwealth’s incarceration rate, it’s our goal to lessen the number of people ensnared into the criminal justice system. We consider Pennsylvania’s marijuana laws to be low-hanging fruit in that regard.

While a recent Franklin & Marshall poll found that 59 percent of Pennsylvania residents believe marijuana should be legal, retrograde laws nonetheless trap thousands of people in the criminal justice system for pot-related offenses every year. And those numbers have risen in recent years.

Over the last several months, we’ve worked with marijuana advocates and data specialists to quantify Pennsylvania’s cannabis crackdown. And on Monday, October 16, we plan to reveal what we’ve found during a press conference at the Pennsylvania State Capitol in Harrisburg.

Stay tuned for more about Pennsylvania’s cannabis crackdown.

IN OTHER NEWS

(Criminal justice news deserving of an in-depth look.)

Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross has some explaining to do. Photo via The Philadelphia Inquirer.

  • Philly.com: “Study: High rates of stop-and-frisk even in Philly’s lowest-crime black areas”

“It’s not just black people, but entire, predominantly black, neighborhoods that are disproportionately impacted by the Philadelphia Police Department’s use of stop-and-frisk. That’s a key finding of a new analysis of police data from 2014 to 2015 by Lance Hannon, a Villanova University professor of sociology and criminology who began analyzing publicly available police data after the presidential candidates clashed over the effectiveness of stop-and-frisk in debates last year. He found that mostly black neighborhoods drew 70 percent more frisks than nonblack areas, yet yielded less contraband. And, he discovered, the elevated rate of frisking was consistent whether the predominantly black neighborhood was a high-crime area or a very low-crime area. Although many African American neighborhoods in the city have low crime rates, he said, ‘People, police officers, and nonpolice officers tend to judge the dangerousness of a place based on racial predominance. When they think of a black area as being dangerous, they are thinking of the outliers — and all the other neighborhoods that are relatively safe get painted with the same brush.’”

  • Bloomberg: “Prison Video Visits Are No Substitute for Face-to-Face, Especially at These Prices”

“There are 650 U.S. correctional facilities offering some form of video viewing. Like Tazewell, most are county jails, and three-quarters have eliminated in-person visits, often as a stipulation of their contract with the company charging for the video feeds. Tazewell did so in 2014, when it hired Securus Technologies Inc., a prison phone company that now controls about a third of the video market. The business has been lucrative enough to attract the attention of the private equity world. In February, Platinum Equity LLC, the firm run by Detroit Pistons owner Tom Gores, agreed to buy Securus for $1.6 billion, more than double the company’s 2012 valuation. The proposed deal has come under scrutiny from both regulatory commissions and prisoners’ advocates, delaying its likely approval.”

  • TeenVogue: “Why Young Girls Die Behind Bars”

“Arrests of young women during fights with family members such as the one that led to Gynnya’s incarceration are unfortunately all too frequent. According to Unintended Consequences, a report by the National Girls Initiative of the federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, ‘under state domestic violence laws, many law enforcement officers, arriving in homes in which girls are fighting with their parents or caregivers … often respond by making an arrest.’ As a result, ‘in-home conflict is a significant pathway for girls’ involvement in the justice system and many of girls’ arrests are for simple assault of their mothers or caregivers with no or minor injury.’ In fact, one study of 320 domestic violence calls in Massachusetts found that police were more likely to arrest young women in cases of disputes with parents and among siblings than between intimate partners.Nationally, girls of color are disproportionately arrested for assaults of family members in their homes. In Washington State, Black and Native youth are arrested for assault at a rate between 2 and 4 times greater than white youth.”

THE APPEAL — The Appeal is a weekly newsletter helping to keep you informed about criminal justice news in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and beyond. If you’d like to receive this weekly newsletter, you can subscribe here.

 

JOIN— The ACLU of Pennsylvania’s mailing list to stay up to date with our work and events happening in your area.

 

DONATE — The ACLU is comprised of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU Foundation. The ACLU Foundation is the arm of the ACLU that conducts our litigation and education efforts. Gifts to the ACLU Foundation are tax-deductible to the donor to the extent permissible by law. Learn more about supporting the work of the ACLU of Pennsylvania here.

Replacing Medical Judgment with Political Will: PA Pushing Extreme Anti-Abortion Bill, Again

By Amanda Cappelletti, Larry Frankel Legislative Fellow, ACLU of Pennsylvania

Gov. Wolf announces his intention to veto SB3 at a press conference in Philadelphia (credit: Ben Bowens)

The legislative session has barely begun, and we’re already seeing some of the most extreme bills being introduced and pushed through. In that collective is Senate Bill 3, a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks and would ban a medically proven, safe method of abortion. This type of legislation puts women’s health at risk by preventing doctors from making decisions based on their professional medical judgment, in consultation with their patients.

In addition to replacing medical expertise with political will, this bill provides the narrowest of exceptions for abortions after 20 weeks: to prevent death of the mother and substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the mother. But with no definition of “major bodily function,” it is unclear when this exception applies. There are no exceptions for pregnancies that result from rape or incest. There are no exceptions for fetal anomalies. Every woman’s circumstance is different, and this bill takes away her ability to decide what is best for her.

Abortion bans punish women. Not only do they strip a woman of ability to make a personal medical decision, but they can force her to go through severe mental and physical trauma. A Texas woman was forced to wait for her fetus to die in utero and endure a stillbirth because of a similar law, something no one should have to experience.

Doctors are at risk of punishment, too. SB 3 bans a medically proven, safe method of abortion — anyone who performs that method is guilty of a third degree felony. Our lawmakers are criminalizing doctors for following their professional training and conscience. This is one of the many reasons why the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists opposes these types of restrictions.

Extreme legislation like SB 3 has been enacted, challenged, and temporarily blocked or not allowed to go into effect while litigation proceeds in four states because of the serious constitutional issues these types of laws raise. It would seem that Pennsylvania lawmakers would like to add us to the list of states being sued for extreme abortion bans.

While we may not agree about abortion, we can all agree that physicians and not politicians should be a part of the medical decision-making process. We cannot stand by while politicians push their agenda into our doctor’s offices, with no regard for the health and well-being of women. A woman’s health, not politics, should drive important medical decisions. Contact your legislators and remind them — they’re not medical experts and shouldn’t be meddling.

Senate Bill 3 passed the state Senate on February 8 and is now under consideration in the state House of Representatives. Call your state representative today to tell them to vote “NO” on SB 3. To find your state representative, use our “find your legislator” tool, enter your zip code, and look for your representative under “governor and state legislators.”