Life really is stranger than fiction, isn’t it?
Sam and I just read in the newspaper that a man reported to the sheriff’s office that thieves broke into his home and stole a urn that contained his wife’s ashes. The thieves also took a rifle, $25 in change; several Seattle Mariners bobble head dolls and three handmade fishing poles. Sam and I can’t help wondering which of the stolen items the victim valued the most. The newspaper article didn’t say.
Speaking of criminals and strange things happening, we also see in the newspaper that an Ohio inmate has petitioned a court to delay his execution for the slaying of a female hotel clerk 30 years ago, because he has gained so much weight, that vein access and other medical problems would lead to a “torturous and lingering death.” The bad guy asserted that the execution gurney might not hold his 480-lb frame either, thus his executioners might be “over burdened” trying to do their job - seems like it might be worth the risk though.
But now here’s a real doozy of an article Sam and I found in the newspaper. A judge in Boston has ordered the state of Massachusetts to pay $500,000 (that’s half a million dollars) of a convicted murderer’s legal fees - not for defending himself against the murder charges, but for winning the right to force the state to pay for his sex-change operation, because the court found that prison officials had violated the murderer’s Eight Amendment right to protection against cruel and unusual punishment by attempting to deny him the “only adequate treatment” for his gender-identity disorder. Geez, wouldn’t it be a lot less costly to let some other prisoner just make the guy his “bitch.” Wouldn’t that have been an affirmation of his identity?
Good grief! The $500,000 decision comes on top of having to pay for the convict’s operation, which reportedly could cost taxpayers between $30,000 and $80,000. Wonder if presidential candidate Mitt Romney counted prison convicts as part of the 47% of our nation’s population that he says is dependent on the U.S. government to take care of them?
Health care is one of the costliest items for keeping a person incarcerated and health care costs continue to spiral upward as the prison population ages. Heart operations, diabetes care, cancer care - all cost beaucoup bucks.
Unfortunately, the 1976 Supreme Court Estelle v. Gamble decision held that deprivation of health care constituted cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. This interpretation created a de- facto right to health care for all persons in custody, whether convicted (prisoners) or not (pretrial detainees). The decision also brought forth the concept of "deliberate indifference," a legal definition that prohibits ignoring the plight of prisoners who need care and translates into a mandate to provide all persons in custody with access to medical care and a professional medical opinion. Correctional authorities and health care professionals who infringe this right do so at their peril and may be prosecuted in federal or state courts.
Apparently, some of our shiftier-thinking populace - the 47% maybe - have realized that committing crimes will give them better access to health care than they could ever afford on the outside. Sam and I recently read a story about a guy holding a bank up for one dollar so he could go to prison and obtain free health care.
But health care is one thing, transgender operations are entirely another. Three bags of poop on that judge who made Massachusetts pay for creating another girly man in our country - like we needed more of them. GAG!
Sam and I just read in the newspaper that a man reported to the sheriff’s office that thieves broke into his home and stole a urn that contained his wife’s ashes. The thieves also took a rifle, $25 in change; several Seattle Mariners bobble head dolls and three handmade fishing poles. Sam and I can’t help wondering which of the stolen items the victim valued the most. The newspaper article didn’t say.
Speaking of criminals and strange things happening, we also see in the newspaper that an Ohio inmate has petitioned a court to delay his execution for the slaying of a female hotel clerk 30 years ago, because he has gained so much weight, that vein access and other medical problems would lead to a “torturous and lingering death.” The bad guy asserted that the execution gurney might not hold his 480-lb frame either, thus his executioners might be “over burdened” trying to do their job - seems like it might be worth the risk though.
But now here’s a real doozy of an article Sam and I found in the newspaper. A judge in Boston has ordered the state of Massachusetts to pay $500,000 (that’s half a million dollars) of a convicted murderer’s legal fees - not for defending himself against the murder charges, but for winning the right to force the state to pay for his sex-change operation, because the court found that prison officials had violated the murderer’s Eight Amendment right to protection against cruel and unusual punishment by attempting to deny him the “only adequate treatment” for his gender-identity disorder. Geez, wouldn’t it be a lot less costly to let some other prisoner just make the guy his “bitch.” Wouldn’t that have been an affirmation of his identity?
Good grief! The $500,000 decision comes on top of having to pay for the convict’s operation, which reportedly could cost taxpayers between $30,000 and $80,000. Wonder if presidential candidate Mitt Romney counted prison convicts as part of the 47% of our nation’s population that he says is dependent on the U.S. government to take care of them?
Health care is one of the costliest items for keeping a person incarcerated and health care costs continue to spiral upward as the prison population ages. Heart operations, diabetes care, cancer care - all cost beaucoup bucks.
Unfortunately, the 1976 Supreme Court Estelle v. Gamble decision held that deprivation of health care constituted cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. This interpretation created a de- facto right to health care for all persons in custody, whether convicted (prisoners) or not (pretrial detainees). The decision also brought forth the concept of "deliberate indifference," a legal definition that prohibits ignoring the plight of prisoners who need care and translates into a mandate to provide all persons in custody with access to medical care and a professional medical opinion. Correctional authorities and health care professionals who infringe this right do so at their peril and may be prosecuted in federal or state courts.
Apparently, some of our shiftier-thinking populace - the 47% maybe - have realized that committing crimes will give them better access to health care than they could ever afford on the outside. Sam and I recently read a story about a guy holding a bank up for one dollar so he could go to prison and obtain free health care.
But health care is one thing, transgender operations are entirely another. Three bags of poop on that judge who made Massachusetts pay for creating another girly man in our country - like we needed more of them. GAG!
No comments:
Post a Comment