Sixteen states sue White House over healthcare access for transgender youth
The Democratic attorneys general of California, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and Connecticut are leading the lawsuit, announced on Friday, which challenges the president's efforts to eradicate vital medical treatments for trans youth.
The complaint targets one of the president's first executive orders issued in January, which described puberty blockers and hormone therapy as 'chemical and surgical mutilation', called for federal funds to be withheld from hospitals that provide the treatments and suggested the US Department of Justice could investigate doctors. Those gender-affirming treatments, which are accessed by a small fraction of youth in the US, have for years been the standard of care endorsed by major US medical associations.
Under intensifying threats that hospitals could lose federal funding, and growing fears that providers could be criminally prosecuted, a number of major institutions have abruptly ended gender-affirming care for trans youth.
The crackdown has sent families scrambling for alternatives, including in blue states long considered sanctuaries for LGBTQ+ rights, where clinics and lawmakers had previously assured youth they would be shielded from Donald Trump's agenda.
Last month, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, one of the nation's largest and most prominent institutions to serve trans kids, shuttered its gender-affirming care center for youth after three decades, citing funding threats from across the federal government.
Other institutions that have recently pulled back gender-affirming care services for trans youth include Phoenix Children's Hospital in Arizona, Stanford Medicine, Denver Health, the University of Chicago, the University of Pennsylvania and Children's National Hospital in Washington DC. Some have ceased surgeries for patients under age 19, which are rare, while others have also ended hormone therapy and puberty blockers.
The justice department in July also announced that it had sent subpoenas to more than 20 doctors and clinics that provide gender-affirming care to youth, a move that sent shock waves among providers and raised alarms that patients' records could be shared with the federal government.
The blue states are also challenging a June memo from Brett Shumate, assistant US attorney general, which directed the justice department's civil division to 'use all available resources to prioritize investigations of doctors, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies and other appropriate entities' that provide gender-affirming care.
Republican lawmakers in more than 25 states have moved to restrict trans youth healthcare in recent years. But the treatments remain legal in other parts of the country, and states such as California have anti-discrimination laws that explicitly protect the services.
The plaintiffs argue that Trump's actions should be declared unlawful, alleging his order exceeds federal authority. California's attorney general, Rob Bonta, also challenged Trump's definition of children as people under the age of 19, affecting 18-year-old adults' access to care, saying the administration's directives force hospitals to violate state laws.
Sign up to This Week in Trumpland
A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration
after newsletter promotion
'Denying this care has been shown to worsen mental health outcomes, including increased rates of depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation,' Bonta's office said.
Joining the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Wisconsin, along with the District of Columbia and the Pennsylvania governor.
The suit comes after the US supreme court upheld Tennessee's ban on trans youth healthcare.
'Hormone therapy truly saves lives,' said Eli, a trans 16-year-old who lost his healthcare in Los Angeles, in a recent Guardian interview. 'I wish people understood they're doing so much more harm than they could possibly imagine – that so many lives will be hurt and lost and so many people torn apart.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
The struggle to access weight-loss jabs from NHS
Thousands of obese patients in England are unable to access the weight loss jab Mounjaro due to a 'postcode lottery' in NHS provision. Data obtained by Sky News reveals only 8 of 42 NHS Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) in England are currently able to provide the treatment, despite its intended availability from 23 June. Doctors warn patients are being 'set up for failure', with claims that NHS England has only funded treatment for a fraction of the 97,500 patients NICE calculated should be treated in the first year. NHS England stated it has 'fully supported the rollout', issuing guidance and providing funding to ICBs in March to cover treatment costs and support services. Concerns also exist regarding post-treatment support, with NICE stressing the need for structured follow-up for NHS patients to prevent weight regain, a service not available to the 1.5 million private users.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
GPs warned using AI to record patient notes can lead to dangerous inaccuracies
GPs have been warned to look out for 'inaccurate or fabricated' information when using AI to write their medical notes. Family doctors are increasingly using tools that listen to their consultations with patients and automatically add summaries to their records. But the Royal College of GPs has warned AI can misinterpret the nuance of conversations, with potential dangerous consequences. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) also says there is a 'risk of hallucination which users should be aware of, and manufacturers should actively seek to minimise and mitigate the potential harms of their occurrence'. The safety watchdog is now urging GPs to report issues with AI scribes through its Yellow Card Scheme, which is typically used to report adverse reactions to medicines. This should include 'suspected inaccuracies', trade publication GP Online reports. The British Medical Association's GP Committee said earlier this year that 'the adoption of passive scribes in general practice has gathered significant pace', with practices using standalone systems or tools rolled out with other common software. Dr Phil Whitaker, a UK GP who recently moved to Canada, wrote in the New Statesman that an AI tool he used was 'not to be trusted'. He said it misinterpreted conversations with patients who asked him about his move from the UK - and recorded notes suggesting patients had recently moved to Canada instead. He added: 'I've caught it recording findings of examinations I haven't performed and detailing advice I haven't given. 'The company that makes it advises users to check its output carefully. 'For me, the time spent reading and editing outweighs any productivity gains.' And an article published by Fortune last month outlined a case in which 'a patient in London was mistakenly invited to a diabetic screening after an AI-generated medical record falsely claimed he had diabetes and suspected heart disease'. However, despite this growing use of AI and the recognition of potential problems, the MHRA said a search of its database revealed 'no adverse incident reports related to the use of AI scribes'. The government's 10-Year Health Plan says it intends to 'accelerate the adoption and spread of AI technology, such as AI scribes, by streamlining AI regulation'. A new national procurement platform will be set up next year to support GP practices and NHS trusts to adopt new technology safely. Professor Kamila Hawthorne, chair of the RCGP, said: 'AI has enormous potential for transforming the future of our health and patient care. Fewer than one in three Britons are comfortable with the prospect of using new AI features in the NHS App to diagnose their issues, a poll reveals. Health secretary Wes Streeting announced plans to revamp the app as part of Labour's 10-Year Health Plan so every patient could have a 'doctor in their pocket'. But a new survey found 44 per of the public are 'uncomfortable' with trusting the diagnosis and management of their conditions to artificial intelligence, with this figure rising to 60 per cent among pensioners. Only 31 per cent of the 2,030 respondents to the Savanta poll, for the Liberal Democrats, said they are 'comfortable' with the idea. Helen Morgan, the Liberal Democrat's health spokesperson, praised Labour for tackling bureaucracy but added: 'Making the NHS more efficient is of course welcome but it cannot come at the cost of leaving people behind as they try to grapple with digitised services rather than a real life doctor. 'Ministers need to allay these fears by offering support to those who are not digitally literate and older people to ensure that these sweeping changes benefit everyone.' Speaking at the Plan's launch last month, Mr Streeting said: 'The NHS App will become a doctor in your pocket, bringing our health service into the 21st century.' It will use patients' medical records and artificial intelligence to provide instant answers to users' questions and direct them to the best place for care. Dennis Reed, director of Silver Voices, which campaigns for elderly Britons, said at the time 'Elderly people will be sceptical about whether the plan will be delivered and concerned that greater reliance on the app could exclude them from accessing timely care. 'For some, the doctor in their pocket will be padlocked.' 'However, its use is not without risks and so its implementation in general practice must be closely regulated to guarantee patient safety and the security of their data. 'GPs are always open to introducing new technologies that can improve the experience of patients and help cut the administrative burden, and an increasing number of GP practices are now using AI scribing tools to improve the quality and efficiency of their consultations. 'While these tools can offer real benefits, particularly at a time of significant GP workforce pressures, there are some important concerns - particularly around data security of sensitive patient records, data controllership and the risk of inaccuracies. 'We are aware that AI scribes can produce inaccurate or fabricated details, and that they can also misinterpret the nuance of conversations. 'It is important that clinicians review AI-generated documentation for accuracy before adding it to the patient record.' The MHRA said: 'The MHRA is aware of this potential issue in AI enabled tools generally and this includes AI scribe tools. 'We recommend that GPs and healthcare professionals only use tools which are registered medical devices which have been determined to meet the required standards of performance and safety. 'Recently published MHRA guidance clarifies how these technologies qualify as medical devices and while this is specific to digital mental health, the principles apply across digital health applications. 'While not published by the MHRA, NHS England guidance encourages the use only of registered medical devices when used in a clinical context. 'We strongly encourage that all suspected adverse incidents, including suspected inaccuracies are reported to the MHRA via the yellow card scheme.' The watchdog said the yellow card scheme website had been updated to include 'a standalone page for software and AI as medical device'. Earlier this year, the BMA advised practices to pause use of AI scribes until they had carried out data protection and safety checks and sought assurances that the products meet NHS standards.
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump administration wants to end abortion coverage through Veterans Affairs
President Donald Trump 's administration is calling to remove abortion coverage from the list of medical benefits for veterans and their families, saying it's not needed. The Department of Veterans Affairs posted the proposed rule change on Monday and opened a public comment period on it that runs through Sept. 3. The department said in its proposal that it wants to ensure it 'provides only needed medical services to our nation's heroes and their families.' The department says it would still provide abortion in life-threatening circumstances — something state laws allow, even in places where bans are in place. But critics of the change note that abortion would not be provided when pregnancies are the result of rape or incest. Amy Friedrich-Karnik, director of federal policy at the Guttmacher Institute, said in a statement that the change would cut off millions of veterans and their families from services. 'Veterans have historically faced significant barriers to reproductive health care, and with the current patchwork of abortion bans and restrictions across the country, these barriers are even steeper today," she said. Veterans Affairs, which provides health coverage for veterans and their dependents, did not include abortion in its coverage until 2022. President Joe Biden 's administration added it months after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and state abortion bans began kicking in. The Biden changed allowed the VA to provide abortion even in states where it was banned. The VA says in its proposal that allowing abortion is legally questionable because Congress has not specifically allowed it. The policy change would also bring the VA's coverage into line with other federal health care plans — including Medicaid and the TriCare coverage for active military members and their families — which exclude abortion in most cases. The VA said in its filings that about 100 veterans and 40 dependents obtain abortions using the benefits each year — far below the projection the department made in 2022 of a total of 1,000 a year. The conservative law firm Alliance Defending Freedom called on the VA to drop abortion coverage in a letter last month, saying the cost or providing abortion takes other health resources away from veterans.
