Prominent Leftist Activist Files Ethics Violation Against Metro Nashville Employee Benefit Board Members After Vote To Deny Coverage For Gender Reassignment Surgeries

Image Credit: Paul Brennan / Public Domain

The Tennessee Conservative [By Kelly M. Jackson] –

This past week, a prominent leftist activist, Maryam Abolfazli, a Nashville native, who chairs the Metro Human Relations Council, filed ethics violations charges against 2 of the members of the Metro Employee Benefits Board for alleged comments they made before voting against adding coverage for sex reassignment surgeries for employees of the city to their healthcare plans.

Already covered in those same plans are hormone treatments, but the board voted against adding surgery as part of coverage, for reasons Ms. Abolfazli attributes to discrimination based on the 2 members religious beliefs.

According to reports, Edna Jones who chairs the committee, said she opposed expanding health benefits because “my God does not make mistakes.” 

Also allegedly conveyed in the meeting was Ms. Jones opinion that emphasized a belief that minors who are being subjected to this type of treatment are being subjected to “child abuse”. The same report said that Harold Finch, the other target of Ms. Abolfazli’s ire are due to alleged comments he made that “Metro doesn’t need to recruit transgendered employees”. 

Ms Abolfalzli said “Both of these statements are deeply troubling,”. “This is Metro government. This kind of discrimination should not happen anywhere in any workplace, in any setting, but particularly when we’re talking about a government body.”

A review of the minutes from the meeting Ms. Abolfazli refers to where the comments were allegedly made, produced no evidence of the comments. Since the board does not record their meetings and post them for public view, there is no way to confirm that Ms. Jones or Mr. Finch said any of the things they are being accused of saying. 

What is in the minutes and can be confirmed, is that there was a discussion about the addition of sex reassignment surgeries being added to city workers health care plans being revisited, since the motion was defeated more than once over the past two years. 

The reasons for defeating the motion may have nothing to do with the feelings or beliefs of anyone on the board, since the meeting minutes also mention that board counsel indicated that “the medical plans do have a definition of medical necessity that the plan administrators follow.”  This would include medical policy criteria and liability issues that far outweigh any personal feelings members of the board would have. 

According to the medical policy definition in the Metro Nashville And Davidson County Employee Benefit Board handbook, for the PPO Medical plan by Blue Cross Blue Shield, in order for treatments and procedures to be approved under the plan, in order to be determined as medically necessary they first have to be considered “medically appropriate”.

Under the policy handbook that means “services which have been determined by the Medical Director of the Plan to be of value in the care of a specific member.” 

The first criteria for “medically necessary is shown below:

“Services which have been determined by the Plan to be of proven value for use in the general population. To be Medically Necessary a service must:

• Have final approval from the appropriate government regulatory bodies.

• Have scientific evidence permitting conclusions concerning the effect of the service on health outcomes.

• Improve the net health outcome.

• Be as beneficial as any established alternative.

• Demonstrate the improvement outside the investigational setting.

• Not be an experimental or Investigational service.

There was some discussion during the meeting, according to the minutes, comparing this type of surgery to that of a bariatric procedure for weight loss, which the health plan does cover. However, that procedure has been clinically shown for decades by hundreds of studies and a plethora of data to improve overall health and reduce the exposure to diseases that are caused by obesity such as cancer, diabetes and heart disease.

The discussion was ended with a vote on the motion to revisit adding this type of treatment to health plans, which was defeated by a vote of 4 to 5. 

Based on the evidence discovered in the meeting minutes and a review of the rules that are the basis for what can and cannot be included in city employee health plans, it seems that an accusation of ethics violations charges based on discrimination due to personal religious beliefs are presumptive.

There was no information as to when the charges will be addressed by the Ethics Committee or what a possible outcome would mean for those accused. 

About the Author: Kelly Jackson is a recent escapee from corporate America, and a California refugee to Tennessee. Christ follower, Wife and Mom of three amazing teenagers. She has a BA in Comm from Point Loma Nazarene University, and has a background in law enforcement and human resources. Since the summer of 2020, she has spent any and all free time in the trenches with local grassroots orgs, including Mom’s for Liberty Williamson County and Tennessee Stands as a core member.  Outspoken advocate for parents rights, medical freedom, and individual liberty. Kelly can be reached at kelly@tennesseeconservativenews.com.