Insurance Exclusions Against Transgender Persons Should Be Eliminated

I tried to get this debate started a few months ago but, as was pointed out to me by a voter, I didn't get much traction with the topic because I used the term GID (Gender Identity Disorder) and did not reference the term Transgender. Of course, with the new DSM-V the proper term is "Gender Dysphoria" ("GD") To be clear, the resolution applies to transgender persons who have been diagnosed as having GD per the WPATH standards of care and who have met their obligations for treatment, e.g. appropriate letters from counselor and doctor. The services the ban would cover would be any service in those same WPATH standards of care as approved by the transgender person's medical professional(s). The round will start after the negative accepts the debate. I will then post my opening argument. Note that the resolution does not state who should be doing the eliminating. I do not want to get caught up in whether the acting agency is the SCOTUS, federal or state legislation, or simply the insurance companies themselves. The focus will be on the exclusions and whether they should be eliminated by some entity, even if that entity is the insurance company doing, what I view to be, the right thing. As you may be able to tell, I'm new to debate.org and could not see a way to respond to the comment: "Are you arguing that insurance shouldn't be excluded for gender changes specifically." Clarification #1: To clarify, as stated above, I'm saying that insurance should not be excluded for all services provided for by the World Professional Association for Transgender Health ("WPATH") to the extent those services are indicated as stated in the WPATH standards of care. For example, a transgender person with GD may only need hormones or t-blockers. The current standards of care do not require that you have gender confirmation surgery if the hormones will treat the dysphoria. The standards of care offer a flexible well thought out approach to the diversity of needs within the trans community. All of those services, if indicated after diagnosis, should be covered by insurance just like any other treatment needed for a medically recognized condition. This is the position I will be taking. Clarification #2: It's frustrating to be new and unable to directly reply to comments made on my own topic. Oh well, this too shall pass. I am asked whether I am against the exclusions which the topic proposes be eliminated. Yes. I am against the exclusions by which insurance companies deny premium paying transgender people the services I've described. As the first clarification paragraph states, "insurance should not be excluded." For context, I am trans. I will be paying tens of thousands of dollars for surgery in August. I pay insurance premiums but coverage is excluded in every policy I could purchase in Oklahoma unless I happened to work for a few large companies which are trying to get the 100% equality index rating of the Human Rights Campaign. These exclusions, the kind which are costing me tens of thousands of dollars and which put treatment out of reach for much of my community, should be eliminated. Clarification #3: "It's a shame that you've limited the challenge criteria. Its ironic that someone looking for equality accross medical/insurance spectrum would exclude challenges based on demographic criteria." I do not believe that your analogy is apt but I'm okay with eliminating the challenge criteria. I put it in because last time I raised the topic a poster went one round and dropped out. I did not want a repeat. In any event, I have eliminated the challenge limitation. Have at it if you wish.