By Marie E. Matyjaszek
Everyone has heard of workplace sexual discrimination, and the general thought that comes to mind is an employer doing something unfairly to an employee based on the employee’s gender of male or female. Many people do not realize that the Federal Law, Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964, has also protected transgendered workers since 2012.
On September 25, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) slapped R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Home Inc., of Garden City, Mich. with a discrimination lawsuit, claiming its transgendered employee, Amiee Stephens, was fired after she advised them that she was going to live as a female.
When Amiee let her boss and fellow funeral workers know of her planned transition, she alleges that she was told it was “unacceptable” and fired a mere two weeks later.
In a much more publicized case, Chelsea Manning (formerly known as Bradley Manning), is suing the federal government for failure to have her gender dysphoria properly treated while serving her 35-year prison sentence. You may remember the little WikiLeaks espionage scandal Manning was involved in a few years back.
Once Manning announced that she would be living as Chelsea and not Bradley, she asked the military to develop a treatment plan to continue her transition. Supposedly the military agreed, but Manning said she never received the military’s plan or any treatment. In addition to the hormone therapy, Manning is seeking to be able to follow the prison beauty standards for female prisoners (i.e. longer hair and use of makeup).
Transgendered individuals face a high rate of discrimination, suicide, and self-harm. Many individuals believe any additional treatment beyond what is “medically necessary” for prisoners is a privilege, not a right. The government pays for prisoners to receive medical treatment for all sorts of conditions – mental and physical – prisoners have access to counseling, cancer treatments, dialysis, surgery, prescription medications, etc. So is what Manning is proposing medically necessary for her diagnosis of gender dysphoria? And if it is, should the government pay for it while she’s serving a 35-year prison sentence for espionage? These are certainly only some of the many questions that the public is waiting for the courts to answer.
Amiee Stephens’ case seems more cut and dry – if she can prove that she was fired for coming out as a transgendered individual, her former employer will be in a world of hurt. Manning’s case will really help define the rights of transgendered individuals in prison – and health care coverage for these conditions in general.
(The author is a family law attorney whose blog site is: http://legalbling. blogspot.com. She can be reached by e-mailing her at matyjasz@hotmail.com.)
