I would be very interested in learning more about the person that transitioned in the program at Stanford. By ‘at Stanford,’ I assume they were in the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Stanford, and not yet on active duty. But I Would like to know more about it.

May I respond to a couple of things that often get lost in the discussion, imho. Shari, I hope you won’t think I’m picking a fight or slamming you. I’m not, and I apologize in advance if it comes across that way.

The Army’s medical regulation is AR 40-501, if memory serves. Regardless of the specific number, it’s a joint reg applying to all services, and it disqualifies anyone and everyone who has had genital surgery of any kind. That could be changed, of course, but for now, that’s the way it is.

Before we all raise our fists in outrage, let’s take a peek at reality. DoD has a business logic for this. GRS either way is a complex, unique surgery. It’s not a combat injury, it’s expensive, and as a niche specialty, the military doesn’t need it. If a person genitals are wounded, I’m sure the cosmetic ‘repair’ surgery would be referred to the civilian sector or the VA, as is the case for the many, many specialties that the services do not routinely recruit for. Let’s say, for example, the Army recruited or drafted Dr. Marci Bowers. How many GRS surgeries would she perform? Several a year, perhaps, as opposed to the 500 or so she does now? What a waste of talent. Do we really want her to be in the service? We most certainly do not.

As an aside, my brother-in-law wanted to rejoin the Air Force, but was refused because he had an ingrown toenail. Which he may have had before he left the first time he was in. Why” They would have had to ‘fix’ him before they could deploy him. Petty? Perhaps, but it was a readiness issue. It was legitimate for the Air force to do that. It doesn’t make sense to recruit the “sick, lame and lazy” when you can recruit people who are healthy. It’s business, that’s all.

The mission of the Army Medical Department is to conserve fighting strength, not treat patients. There is a subtle but distinct difference. Military medicine cannot provide all services to everyone. They plainly and simply cannot afford it.

If a person has a unique medical situation, and there’s a problem, DoD just doesn’t have the resources to deal with it. GRS imho falls in this category. It affects readiness and fighting strength, and that’s what DoD is for. I may not like it, but as a 26 year veteran and senior Army warrant officer retiree, I understand it. It is a reasonable attitude on their part. Should it be changed? Well, as we used to say, that kind of decision is way above my pay grade. Our activism may eventually change it, yes.

Why would the VA be sympathetic if the military forces were so opposed? I’m sure you mean the VA health care system, and the military in general. The missions, motivations and funding of the military are far different than the missions, motivations and funding of VA health care. Therein lies the differences in attitude.

Again, Shari and all commentors, your opinions and concerns are just as valid as mine. I hope I’m not out of line, and apologize if I’ve offended anyone. Thank you all for your service to the country. It was important to the nation, whether the nation cares to recognize that or not.

The VA hospitals have helped transgender persons in some cases, but I don’t know if they still are. It’s been a long time since I’ve heard of that.

You would be much more aware of current policies than am I, but as you recall it was a bit of a surprise to me to hear that the military is so transphobic. Why would the VA be sympathetic if the military forces were so opposed?

My years in the Air Force weren’t good ones, but that’s another story….

Still they should be included in the discussion, despite not beling included in DADT.