To read more about Jonathan Richardson’s case, check out the stories linked at the bottom of this article.
A federal district judge has disregarded yet another evaluation showing Jonathan Richardson, a mentally-ill man incarcerated for murder, should not get transgender surgery — especially on taxpayers’ dime.
On March 5, Judge Richard Young of the Southern District Court of Indiana extended his preliminary injunction against a state law preventing tax dollars from funding transgender surgeries.
Young first issued the injunction in September when he ordered the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC), a tax-funded institution, to pay for Richardson’s “gender-affirming” vaginoplasty (the construction of a fake vagina) and orchiectomy (castration).
Refusing Richardson surgery would constitute cruel and unusual punishment, Young wrote in his September ruling.
The IDOC opposed this month’s extension, submitting yet another psychiatric evaluation of Richardson finding he shouldn’t get transgender surgery.
Dr. Kelsey Beers, the lead psychologist at New Castle Correctional Facility, conducted an assessment of Richardson at the request of Richardson’s would-be surgeon. According to Young’s nine-page order, Beers concluded:
Beers expressed discomfort at evaluating Richardson without specializing in gender dysphoria. But her conclusions mirror that of Drs. Steven Levine and Michael Farjellah, who evaluated Richardson ahead of the hearing in September.
Farjellah claimed Richardson’s borderline personality disorder made him unable to consent to such drastic surgery.
Levine, a former member of WPATH’s predecessor, the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association, concluded Richardson’s gender confusion was sufficiently managed by opposite-sex hormones and therapy.
He suggested more therapy be dedicated, in part, to Richardson’s “…. willingness to manipulate and mislead doctors.”
Young found Farjellah and Levine’s arguments “unpersuasive.” Last week, he found Beers’ qualifications “questionable” and her revelations about Richardson’s personality disorders “nothing new.”
The judge’s decision is flabbergasting, but also predictable. As the Daily Citizen previously reported, Young’s adjudication of the case is hopelessly skewed by his reliance on the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH).
WPATH bills itself as an objective, scientific body dedicated to caring for those with gender dysphoria. In reality, its members, affiliates and researchers are ideologically and financially invested in transgender medical interventions.
Judge Young hasn’t clocked this conflict of interest. Instead, he disregards the testimony of every doctor that disagrees with WPATH’s “surgery at all costs” orientation.
Case in point: the judge found Dr. Randi Ettner’s testimony “credible and persuasive.”
Ettner, a WPATH contributor and employee at the Weiss Memorial Hospital Center for Gender Confirmation Surgery, painted Young two categorically opposed pictures of Richardson’s mental state in September.
The surgeries were “medically necessary,” Ettner argued, because Richardson could commit suicide if he didn’t go under the knife — a common refrain among gender idealogues. She simultaneously claimed he was mentally well enough to consent to surgery because his depression and personality disorders were under control.
Ettner even portrayed Richardson’s attempt to castrate himself as evidence of his healthy mind. She told Judge Young:
I’m no expert, but I’m 200% sure self-castration isn’t a sign of rationality. That statement alone should have disqualified Ettner’s testimony — and maybe barred her from courtrooms altogether.
But even overlooking the castration kerfuffle, Ettner’s larger argument is coconuts. Richardson cannot simultaneously be mentally ill enough to commit suicide if he doesn’t receive “gender affirming” surgery and mentally well enough to consent to such interventions.
Interestingly, Beers’ wrote of a December 2024 counseling session in which Richardson was “clinically stable…with no remarkable symptoms of depression or anxiety.”
Judge Young did not take this testimony as evidence Richardson is doing perfectly well without a faux vagina. Instead, he doubled down on Ettner’s perspective — that Richardson’s stability simply confirms he can consent to transgender surgery.
I’m not the only one concerned about Young’s decision making. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita appealed the ruling in October.
“[The Eighth Amendment doesn’t require] the state to provide experimental treatments generally, and it certainly doesn’t here, when multiple doctors have said this inmate is a poor candidate for surgery,” he argues.
Rokita doubled down on his stance this week, telling Fox:
In his order, Young writes he will extend the preliminary injunction until Richardson gets his surgery. That means taxpayers are still on the hook, unless the Indiana Court of Appeals overturns Young’s ruling first.
Please pray common sense — and speed — will have their day in Indiana soon.
Additional Articles and Resources
Indiana AG Appeals Ruling in Case of Gender-Confused Felon
Taxpayers Will Fund Violent Inmate’s Transgender Surgery, Judge Rules
Activist Group WPATH Influences Judgement in Case of Prisoner Receiving Trans Surgery
Suicidal or Stable? WPATH Activist’s Contradictory Evaluation Secures Felon Transgender Surgery
The WPATH Files Exposes ‘Surgical and Hormonal Experiments on Children’
The WPATH Files – Transgender Interventions Are ‘Unethical Medical Experiments’
