A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the NCTE press release about court ruling that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) covers us, there is an article about the judge’s ruling in ThinkProgress. In the ruling the judge said,
U.S. District Judge Susan Richard Nelson, an Obama appointee, concluded that Rumble had provided significant evidence to substantiate a case against the hospital under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which protects against sex discrimination in health care. She similarly allowed Rumble’s charges under the Minnesota Human Rights Act to proceed. This ruling, however, simply rejected the hospital’s request to dismiss the case, meaning that it will still proceed toward discovery and an eventual final outcome.This morning I am having my annual physical and I know that once again I am going to have to fight to get my PSA test covered. It is not they will not pay for the test but rather it is the computer system that kicks it out because on Medicare I am female and they say the test is not necessary for women so they are not paying for the test. In response the doctor’s office bills me, so I end up calling the Medicare to tell them I’m trans and then calling the doctor’s office telling them they need to file an override code 45. These iterations usually take six months to get everything straighten out.
Nelson described Dr. Steinman’s treatment as “objectively offensive,” particularly his refusal to stop a painful genital exam. “A reasonable person, seeking treatment from an emergency room doctor at a hospital, would expect that the doctor would respect the patient’s wishes to stop a painful exam,” she wrote. It is plausible, she concluded, that this mistreatment was because of Rumble’s gender identity and did not constitute “random poor treatment that anyone might have received.” The bill’s reference to his gender “inconsistency” further bolsters Rumble’s claim that he experienced discrimination because he is transgender.
The same “objectively offensive” standard applies to the misgendering Rumble experienced from hospital staff, as well as the delays and refusals of treatment. It is plausible, Nelson concluded, that these were more than “perceived slights,” but a likely indication that he was treated poorly because of his protected class.