Inkster v. Bay State Reproductive Medicine (USA)

Black and white 2

Andy Inkster, a woman who “identifies as a man,” has taken testosterone and underwent surgery to remove her breasts.  She decided she wanted to get pregnant and stopped taking testosterone. In 2009, she sought fertility treatment at Baystate Reproductive Medicine. Baystate was one of the few clinics in the country with an anti-discrimination policy for gender identity. Baystate refused to treat her, allegedly arguing that it didn’t have enough expertise to treat transgender patients.  Inkster found another clinic that helped her conceive via in vitro fertilization and donor sperm. She then sued Baystate for sexual discrimination.

According to court documents, she was denied treatment after failing to comply with a clinic counselor’s request that she supply information from her current therapist that she was emotionally ready to handle pregnancy and parenting. Inkster argued that nontransgender patients weren’t asked to do the same. This fall, the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination — the state’s civil rights agency — found probable cause for Inkster. The case will next move on to a conciliation conference, and then to a possible settlement.

Query if it is reasonable to request such documentation from a woman who has demonstrated – through her actions – that she does not identify with her female anatomy, as evidence by her willingness to inject herself with testosterone and have her healthy breasts removed.

The Next Frontier in Fertility Treatment – NYTimes.

Mondays with Mac_ Telling Andy’s Story_ Andy Inkster Versus Baystate Reproductive Medicine.


2 thoughts on “Inkster v. Bay State Reproductive Medicine (USA)

  1. Some of the most ghoulish experiments known to human kind were carried out by well-meaning people who were convinced they were doing the right thing.

    This isn’t a new frontier. Instead, it sounds more and more like Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory.

    We know that this Orwellian insanity has reached new heights when an opinion page in the New York Times bends over backwards, turns somersaults, and cartwheels to follow this political correct nonsense. Make sure that no one is ever “mis-gendered” even if it flies in the face of biological reality and common sense. They always are careful to use the pronoun “he” even if “he” wants to get pregnant. I especially like the following phrases:

    “he left his female reproductive organs intact.” Please read this again and think about how outrageous this has become. “he left his female reproductive organs intact.”

    No, she has a female reproductive system because she is female. She left her female reproductive system intact because she wanted to leave the option of pregnancy open. It’s not very complicated. Stop calling women who want to get pregnant “he”. The majority of people don’t believe this nonsense.

    In this sentence, they even contradict what they say, but it’s impolite to point this out.

    “Mr. Inkster insisted there was no medical reason to deny him; his baby-making parts were the same as any woman’s.”

    Are they afraid to state out loud that this person has a uterus and ovaries? Or, are they called “baby-making parts” now. I thought that was an old term that parents used when talking to little children. Trans is supposed to be so cool and progressive. Ovaries and a uterus are called “baby-making parts” which, by the way, women have. Inskster is female not male and not “Mr.”.

    No one has ever come up with anything that is more nutritious that mother’s milk. Because of the elective mastectomy and areola and nipple resizing, how will this woman breast feed? She mutilated her own healthy body via elective mastectomy, and now she wants fertility treatments to get pregnant.

    They admit that GnRH agnonists, especially if they are followed by cross gender hormones at age sixteen, can make healthy children infertile. The sterilization of children is often considered a human rights abuse. It’s amazing what people can do if it falls under the general category of “gender identity”. Children do not have the mental capacity to make informed decisions.

    “Since some doctors are concerned that letting transgender teenagers go through puberty in the gender they don’t identify with may be deeply traumatic, they might administer puberty-blocking medications that delay adolescence until the teenagers can begin hormone therapy in their desired gender. But this means the patients may give up the option of having biological children later. “It can be a painful choice for their parents to make,” says Dr. Hastings.”

    GnRH agonists are the same class of drugs that are used on men with advanced prostate cancer. They are also prescribed to women with endometriosis. They shut down the hormones that stimulate tumor growth and the growth of endometrial tissue. There have been reports of horrible side effects with one GnRH agonist, Lupron. Google it. GnRH agonists have also been used for precocious puberty which is NOT the same as transgender. Incidentally, teenagers should not get pregnant while on these drugs.

    Do parents have the right to sterilize their healthy children? We are talking about delaying a normal part of human development based on what essentially amounts to a psychological diagnosis in children. Puberty is “deeply traumatic” for all children. It’s no wonder that some of these kids are confused. If a label of transgender is slapped on a six or seven year old boy, and his parents constantly call him “her” or “she”, when he starts puberty he is going to be more confused. The same goes for girls. No one is allowed to look at the family dynamics, or how they are influenced by cultural factors (everything they see and read about transgender, websites, t.v. programs, etc.).


  2. “Top surgery”, “bottom surgery”, and “baby growing parts”…

    “He had all the requisite baby growing parts and was not taking hormones that could interfere with the process.”

    Ovaries and a uterus are called “baby growing parts”. The way that the transgender community treats healthy female anatomy has always shocked me. Perhaps shocked isn’t the proper word. I can’t find a word to properly describe it. We are never allowed to see what really goes on. The violence being carried out on the female sex is carefully hidden. Notice how words seem to cloak what is being done to healthy anatomy.

    “Top surgery” sounds so benign. “Top surgery” could mean anything above the waist. See, it’s my top. “Top surgery basically amounts to elective mastectomies with the surgical trimming down of areolas and nipples.

    Because male areolas and nipples are usually smaller, strictly for cosmetic reasons, the areolas and nipples are cut off, surgically trimmed down, and then sewn back on after the double mastectomy. Loss of sensation to the nipple area is common, and every now and then a nipple graft doesn’t take resulting in the loss of a nipple or two.

    “Bottom surgery” is elective cosmetic surgery on healthy female anatomy. Usually, a skin flap six to eight inches long is taken from the arm, thigh, or other part of the body and sewn onto the female pubic area. There is always some scarring on the donor site. Extending the female urethra comes with its own set of challenges. This is rather ghastly surgery, and it never creates a “penis” comparable to what a biological male has. The Belgian woman who was euthanized after sex reassignment surgery stated that she was concerned that the skin flap was showing signs of rejection. In other words, the skin flap from the arm that was sewn onto her female pubic area was about to rot off. If the skin flap fails, what do they do?

    Healthy females mutilate their bodies, take testosterone, and renounce their membership in the female sex. Then, they demand that fertility clinics bend over backwards to accommodate their needs. This woman gave birth to a female child. What will she tell her child? I was a female once. I hated my femaleness so much that I got my breasts lopped off and became a man.

    This individual deliberately kept her female sex organs so that she could get pregnant. Thomas Beatie did the same thing. Beatie gave birth to three children AFTER legally changing her sex to male. These are two perfect examples of why biological males and biological females should not be allowed to legally change their sex. The only people who should legally be allowed to change their sex are people with rare disorders of sexual development (intersex). Rare disorders of sexual development are not the same as transgender. DSD are actual genetic and medical conditions whereas transgender is basically a psychological diagnosis, and thus at least partly culturally based. Many intersex people are infertile. Before the hormones and surgery, the vast majority of transgender identified people are physically no different than other people.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s