Transgender Man Eligible for Health Insurance of “Husband”

By:  Dave Bohon
04/09/2012
       
Transgender Man Eligible for Health Insurance of “Husband”

A federal judge in Minnesota has ruled that a man who “transitioned” to the female gender through a “sex change” procedure is eligible to be carried under the health insurance of the man he “married” in 2005. As reported by the American Independent, “The judge said that because one person is male and the other legally transitioned to female, the couple qualifies as legally married under the state’s Defense of Marriage Act.

A federal judge in Minnesota has ruled that a man who “transitioned” to the female gender through a “sex change” procedure is eligible to be carried under the health insurance of the man he “married” in 2005. As reported by the American Independent, “The judge said that because one person is male and the other legally transitioned to female, the couple qualifies as legally married under the state’s Defense of Marriage Act. The case hinged on the marriage of Christine and Calvin Radtke. The two were married in July 2005 in Goodhue County in southeastern Minnesota. Calvin works for United Parcel Service and enrolled himself and his wife in his union’s health plan. Christine had legally transitioned from male to female several years earlier.”

But when officials with Calvin’s health insurance fund — the Miscellaneous Drivers and Helpers Union Local #638 Health, Welfare, Eye and Dental Fund — saw a document in “Christine’s” medical file noting that he had changed sexes, they sent a letter to the couple notifying them that “Christine” was being dropped from coverage.
 
“The Fund has learned, for the first time, that Christine underwent a male to female sex reassignment surgery prior to your marriage,” the health fund administrators wrote. “In reviewing the terms of the Fund, it is the judgment of the Claims Administrator that despite the amendment of Christine’s birth certificate and your subsequent marriage, the basis for your marriage is not one that is currently recognized under any express provisions of Minnesota Law,” the letter said. “Accordingly, Christine is not an eligible dependent under the Fund.”
 
The health fund canceled “Christine’s” health coverage, retroactive to the time of his “marriage” to Radtke, and demanded repayment of $80,411 in past medical benefits, plus interest.

Click here to read the entire article.

Photo: Goodhue County (Minnesota) Court administration building.

The JBS Weekly Member Update offers activism tips, new educational tools, upcoming events, and JBS perspective. Every Monday this e-newsletter will keep you informed on current action projects and offer insight into news events you won't hear from the mainstream media.
JBS Facebook JBS Twitter JBS YouTube JBS RSS Feed