Florida continues on its quest to establish itself as “the state where woke goes to die.” The latest chapter in this story involves a new bill introduced in the state legislature known as the “Reverse Woke Act.” If passed, the proposed law would require any employer that covers “gender transition” services to also pay for detransition medical care, even if the employee had the original procedure done in another state. It would also apply if the patient is no longer with the company. The bill is seen as a shot across the bow toward states like California that bill themselves as “sanctuary” states for transgender people seeking medical services not allowed in their home state. (Fox News)

A new Florida bill filed this week would require companies offering gender-affirming healthcare to be liable for an employee’s detransition.

The proposed, “Reverse Woke Act,” filed Monday by Florida Sen. Blaise Ingoglia, R-Spring Hill, would require companies to pay for an employee’s detransition – even if that employee is no longer with the company or received the treatment out of state.

Ingoglia said the proposed bill was intended to protect Floridians from being “used as political pawns to advance a leftist agenda for the Governor of California” – an evident nod to the Golden State’s bill to safeguard transgender minors and their families from out-of-state legal action if they travel to California for “gender-affirming” care.

Ingoglia’s bill would cover something that is apparently happening in Florida already. More than thirty companies have announced that they will cover out-of-state travel and medical expenses for employees seeking transgender procedures. The Reverse Woke Act is intended to “hold businesses accountable” for abetting such travel and medical services.

While I can see the political leverage behind this move, I’m really not sure about this bill. First of all, even the linked analysis from Fox asks how such a law could be enforced. That’s certainly unclear. The law would offer the option for patients to take the employer to civil court in an effort to force them to reimburse the costs, but there doesn’t seem to be any sort of criminal penalty involved.

Also, is this a burden that employers should bear? When an employee leaves a job, their health benefits typically expire fairly shortly afterward unless they enroll in some sort of COBRA plan. If the employer didn’t force the worker to have the original transition work performed, why would they be responsible for this one specific type of medical procedure after they no longer work there?

Also, we’re talking about employees here, so the vast majority of them will almost certainly be adults. While I remain firmly opposed to any sort of gender-bending medical procedures being inflicted on children, what consenting adults decide to do to their own bodies is up to them as far as I’m concerned. (Provided they are willing to accept responsibility for the consequences of their decisions later.)

This really looks more like an effort to punish employers and their insurance providers for covering a controversial set of medical procedures for adults that are not illegal anywhere to the best of my knowledge. (Though it should be illegal to do such things to children, and it already is in some states.) This bill looks as if it would be a prime target for a court challenge the moment it’s signed into law, and I don’t know if it would hold up very well if it were. There are probably better ways to address the transgender debate than this, honestly.