Trans Landowner Sues NHS for Refusing to Carry Out Third Sex Change Surgery

A transgender Scottish landowner is suing the NHS after it refused to carry out a third sex change surgery, claiming negligence, discrimination and a breach of human rights. The Telegraph has the story.

Lady [sic] Samantha Kane, who was born male and now styles himelf as Lady Carbisdale after buying a £5 million Scottish castle, is thought to be the only person in Britain to have changed gender three times.

Mr. Kane, who was born male, had surgery in 1997 to become Samantha, before having it reversed and taking on the identity of Charles Kane in 2004.

He claims doctors at University College London Hospital (UCLH) NHS Foundation Trust then refused a request for a third surgery to revert to a woman in 2017, leading Mr. Kane to have a private procedure in Serbia in 2018, which was allegedly “botched”.

Mr. Kane, a trained engineer, barrister and business tycoon, alleges that the NHS then refused treatment again after the Serbian procedure allegedly resulted in “infected” surgical devices being left inside his body, which he said caused agony lasting three years.

UCLH medics finally agreed to help in 2021, Mr. Kane said.

In the legal claim, the 64-year-old said the refusal to provide treatment relating to the third gender reassignment amounted to negligence, discrimination and a breach of human rights. …

The court heard that Mr. Kane is claiming £162,000, according to the schedule of loss, but told the judge the case was not so much about the money, “but more about achieving justice”.

Sam Burrett, for the NHS trust, told the judge that it would fight the claim.

A full trial is set to take place at a later date.

Worth reading in full.

Subscribe
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

22 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
NeilParkin
1 year ago

So, the suit is that the surgery wasn’t done by the NHS but it is all their fault that this person went instead to a butcher in Serbia to have it done.? Can they not sue the surgeon responsible for the work carried out.? My view would be that this is ‘misadventure’. Perhaps he/she could have had a zip fitted instead and something akin to a light bulb socket so that they could have decided what kind of genitalia they wanted, day by day. They sound awfully confused..

Dinger64
1 year ago
Reply to  NeilParkin

I wish it had gone to a butcher in Serbia then we wouldn’t have to read about all this ‘woe is me’ crap

RW
RW
1 year ago

So, justice is when proles have to pay taxes to enable rich people to have medically pointless cosmetic surgery at their whim but can’t get a dentist appointment for an urgent procedure within a year?

This entity should certainly wish that justice never catches up with it.

soundofreason
soundofreason
1 year ago

Sounds like everyone would have saved money and/or time if the NHS had just got on with it and botched the first operation. He’d have got his compo, the NHS wouldn’t have to do the other two operations and the sawbones in Serbia wouldn’t have had to be paid. Result.

Mogwai
1 year ago
Reply to  soundofreason

Yes but would you let your young child sit on this Santa’s lap?

https://x.com/benonwine/status/1869743200849858728

Ozone
Ozone
1 year ago

I’m confused what day it is today: gender is a construct day, gender is fluid day or souls have a fixed gender day.
Maybe this is a leap day when we have to believe something else instead…

CircusSpot
CircusSpot
1 year ago

I believe a third of those who have surgery asked to be changed back which is why the NHS used to insist on years of therapy before any surgery.
Once the NHS has refused to turn them back for the second time, they usually go abroad and have it done there.
Needless to say when it goes wrong they go back to the NHS for free surgery again.
The only surprise is Serbia rather than Thailand.

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago

Making the taxpayers pay for this is “negligence, discrimination and a breach of human rights”.

Old Arellian
Old Arellian
1 year ago

WTAF?

Jack the dog
Jack the dog
1 year ago

They’re trolling us.

Personally I couldn’t give s shit, either way.

Matt Dalby
Matt Dalby
1 year ago

If we needed any more proof that being trans gender is a form of mental illness then surely this man/woman/man provides it.

godknowsimgood
godknowsimgood
1 year ago

The Telegraph article refers to him as ‘he’. The Express and GB News are referring to him as ‘she’ – did they miss the bit where the third surgery was botched? How botched would the surgery have to be before they would have to acknowledge that he is still a ‘he’?

Gezza England
Gezza England
1 year ago
Reply to  godknowsimgood

Probably finding it hard to keep up.

Kone Wone
Kone Wone
1 year ago

Lady Nutter.

Rusty123
Rusty123
1 year ago

Should have been sectioned in the first instance, theres a reason why you have lots of councilling etc, why should taxpayers pay for their stupid fantasys?, its still a man.

RTSC
RTSC
1 year ago

Why should taxpayers fund treatment for a mentally-challenged narcissist?

Grim Ace
Grim Ace
1 year ago

Another disturbed, gay man who gets off wearing women’s clothes and fantasises about having his parts chopped off. He needs mental health help not physical health interventions.

Hester
Hester
1 year ago

If the system allows it, people are going to exploit it.

kev
kev
1 year ago

No elective cosmetic surgery should be available on the NHS for free.

If there is a clinical need that is different.

Robert Liddell
Robert Liddell
1 year ago

Nice legs

hogsbreath
hogsbreath
1 year ago

Looks like a man in drag. Will always look like a man in drag.

Cotfordtags
1 year ago

If proof were needed that this is a mental health issue and not a surgical issue. He wasn’t changing his dress or even having a reversible boob job. Psychiatry not surgery was needed in the first place.