
Heidi Stevens: Shutting down hotline services for LGBTQ+ youth is malice by Trump administration
There's cost-cutting, and then there's cruelty.
President Donald Trump's administration appears determined to blur that line to the point of indistinction, using the former, over and over, to justify the latter. The decision to abruptly shut down the LGBTQ+ portion of a youth suicide and crisis hotline — a service that has no doubt saved countless lives — is the latest example.
The Trevor Project, a nonprofit focused on suicide prevention for LGBTQ+ youth, received a stop work order, effective July 17, for the crisis services it provides to the national 988 suicide and crisis hotline. Since 2022, the group has provided crisis services to LGBTQ+ youth who contact the 988 Lifeline by offering them the option of being connected to counselors trained specifically in mental health for individuals who identify as LGBTQ+.
After July 17, the 988 Lifeline will remain in place, but will no longer provide specialized LGBTQ+ crisis counseling. A White House spokesman told the New York Times that the specialized portion of the hotline had 'run out of congressionally directed funding,' and continuing to fund it would jeopardize the entire operation.
'This is devastating, to say the least,' the Trevor Project wrote in a statement. 'Suicide prevention is about people, not politics. The administration's decision to remove a bipartisan, evidence-based service that has effectively supported a high-risk group of young people through their darkest moments is incomprehensible.'
Trevor Project counselors helped about 500,000 people in 2024, 231,000 of whom came through the 988 line, Zach Eisenstein, a spokesman for the organization, told The New York Times. Trevor Project is encouraging people to visit TheTrevorProject.org/ActNow to help fight the decision, which Congress could, in theory, reverse.
It's unconscionable that it's come to this. It's unconscionable that the physical, mental and emotional health of young people is on the chopping block because of who they are and who they love. It's unconscionable that our leaders, elected to serve and protect us, are instead finding new ways, daily, to degrade our humanity.
I called my friend and former podcast partner John Duffy, a clinical therapist who specializes in adolescent mental health, to get his take on the hotline shutdown. I wanted to hear from someone whose funding isn't being cut, but who is nonetheless on the front lines of suicide prevention.
I trust Duffy like no other on this topic — for his wise and enormous heart, for his evidence-based approach to helping young people and because he lost his own brother to suicide in 2001.
He is, in a word, heartbroken.
'By the time a kid feels inclined to call a hotline,' Duffy said, 'they are hopeless and they don't feel understood. If you are in the LGBTQ community and you feel hopeless and misunderstood, you don't have the luxury of shopping around. You need someone on that line who understands you now.'
LGBTQ+ youth often face family rejection, cultural rejection, discrimination, fear of personal violence, losing their civil rights — issues that call for an intentional, specified approach to care, Duffy said.
'Their mental health is a very delicate space,' he said. 'They need and deserve people who can handle that space with care. And to take that away when they're in a crisis state? It's lethal.'
Duffy said he began hearing from his clients as soon as the order made headlines.
'It feels to them like things are just going to get worse,' he said. 'They feel like they're being targeted directly. They feel like they're not going to have the support they need. They feel hated by massive groups of people just by virtue of who they are.'
Often, he said, his LGBTQ+ clients are struggling to accept themselves even as they're struggling for acceptance from the people they know and love.
'Many of them aren't comfortable with the idea of being L, G, B, T or Q,' he said. 'It's confusing and perplexing to them, even as they're trying to make other people comfortable with it. And the chance that they reach out in crisis and they hang up feeling unheard and misunderstood? The chance that their suicidal ideation remains, or they make a move to take their lives? That all just increased exponentially.'
There is zero defense for this. Zero.
Straight kids are impacted by the decision as well, Duffy said. They worry about their LGBTQ+ friends. They wonder what kind of world they're graduating into, growing into, and maybe, one day, bringing their own kids into. Hope feels hard for them to come by, he said.
'It's another indication of the depletion of the humanity of our systems,' he said.
And for what? For cost-cutting? I don't buy it. The cruelty is the point. And it's costing us dearly.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
How the Air Force Designated Its Next Fighter Jet ‘F-47'
The Air Force may have been caught off guard or was just unprepared when President Donald Trump said the next generation fighter jet would be called F-47, documents obtained by FOIA Files suggest. By Save Welcome back to another edition of FOIA Files! This week, I'm going to take you behind the scenes as US Air Force officials, in late March, prepared to discuss the name of the next-generation fighter jet: the F-47. Any guess what—or who—it's named after? If you're not already getting FOIA Files in your inbox, sign up here. I've long been fascinated with the military's naming conventions. More than a decade ago, US Central Command unveiled 'Operation Inherent Resolve,' its campaign to defeat the Islamic State. Right after, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with CENTCOM to find out how the military settled on that name. Two years later, I ended up with an incredible set of documents that detailed the discussions that took place between the Joint Chiefs of Staff, experts and top military brass as they debated three different names for the operation.

Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Stock Market Today: Relief rally erupts after Trump delays Iran decision
Investors seemed relieved early Friday after President Donald Trump said he'd decide within two weeks whether to commit America to join Israel in its war against Iraq. Oil prices were falling with crude oil down 39 cents to $73.11. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Trump's decision seemed to surprise many after he'd called for "unconditional surrender" from Iran over its nuclear aspirations. But Trump ally Steve Bannon, a vocal opponent of going to war, visited the White House on Thursday. Futures trading suggests the Standard& Poor's 500 Index will open 8 points higher. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was looking at an opening increase of about 67 points, and Nasdaq-100 futures were up about 50 points. U.S. markets had been closed Thursday for the Juneteenth holiday. Shares of Accenture (ACN) were off 2% preopen even as the consulting giant reported better-than-expected earnings and revenue. Barron's cited weak bookings and leadership changes for the decline. Shares of supermarket operator Kroger (KR) were up 1% to $66.25. . Building-materials supplier GMS (GMS) shares were up 27% premarket to $101 as a bidding war for the company erupted between Home Depot (HD) and Brad Jacobs' QXO. GMS has a market capitalization of about $3.1 billion. Wall Street believes the bidding is already at $5 billion. The 10-year note yield was up slightly at 4.436%. Related: Veteran fund manager sends dire message on stocks The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
An inflation surge could swamp Trump's presidency. This one investment will keep your money safe.
America's financial outlook has darkened under President Donald Trump's leadership. All three major credit-rating agencies now rank U.S. federal debt one notch below triple-A, and Jamie Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase JPM, has warned of a crack in the U.S. bond market. With the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield BX:TMUBMUSD10Y at 4.4% on Wednesday and the 30-year rate BX:TMUBMUSD30Y at 4.9%, holders of nominal U.S. debt should be prepared for significant real losses. The principal risk is not U.S. sovereign default, but rather unexpected increases in medium- and long-term interest rates, owing to market expectations of higher inflation. Fiscal policy under Trump is unsustainable, as it was under former President Joe Biden — but even more so if the Trump administration's 'big, beautiful' budget passes in anything like its current form. 'I'm at my wit's end': My niece paid off her husband's credit card but fell behind on her taxes. How can I help her? Why the biggest-ever 'triple witching' options expiration could deliver a jolt to Friday's trading Israel-Iran clash delivers a fresh shock to investors. History suggests this is the move to make. 'I prepaid our mom's rent for a year': My sister is a millionaire and never helps our mother. How do I cut her out of her will? I'm 75 and have a reverse mortgage. Should I pay it off with my $200K savings — and live off Social Security instead? The January 2025 Financial Report of the United States Government makes this clear. The U.S. ratio of federal debt held by the public to GDP at the end of the 2024 fiscal year was around 98%, although $4.7 trillion of the $28.3 trillion in federal debt was held by the Federal Reserve — meaning it is erroneously categorized as held by the 'public,' when really the central bank's accounts should be consolidated with those of the federal government. Under current policy and based on the report's assumptions, federal debt held by the public would reach 535% of GDP by 2099. Stabilizing the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio requires that the annual primary federal deficit (excluding interest payments) fall by an average of 4.3% of GDP over the next 75 years. And yet, the federal deficit and primary deficit were 6.4% and 3.3% of GDP, respectively, in fiscal-year 2024 — far above what can be justified with the economy near full employment. Read: America's debt is at a breaking point — Trump's tax bill might just push it over the edge With the U.S. Congress so dysfunctional, no one has any faith that it will deliver the required deficit reduction. Democrats do not do permanent spending cuts, and Republicans do not do permanent tax increases. The federal government does own about 28% of U.S. land (roughly 640 million acres), as well as other real commercial assets that could yield significant additional nontax revenues if properly managed. But neither party — nor even the misnamed Department of Government Efficiency — appears to have considered this option, so the federal deficit as a share of GDP is likely to rise over the next few years. With no foreseeable improvement in fiscal policy, there are two possible outcomes. First, the U.S. government could default. There has long been a small, but recurrent, risk of a technical, short-lived default if Congress fails to raise, suspend, extend, revise or abolish the federal debt ceiling on time. Fortunately, it has averted this scenario 78 times since 1960, and we expect it to continue doing so. As matters stand, the debt ceiling (including debt held by federal agencies) is set at $36.1 trillion, and debt subject to the limit is also $36.1 trillion. If needed, the Treasury has a highly liquid asset (the Treasury General Account held with the Fed) worth $332.9 billion that it can use to meet its obligations, and it may temporarily use 'extraordinary measures to continue to borrow additional amounts for a limited time.' The second, more likely possibility is that the Fed will monetize enough federal debt to prevent default. Since U.S. federal debt is serviced in dollars, 'printing money' is always an option. But, as the Fed well knows, a large-scale monetization of federal debt would result in significantly above-target inflation. We believe the Fed will do this without its operational independence being revoked by Trump. To get the Federal Open Market Committee to do something it does not want to do, the president would need to control the majority of its 12 voting members. These include the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and five (out of 12) regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents who vote at any given FOMC meeting. Neither the president nor Congress can appoint or fire Federal Reserve Bank presidents. The Board of Governors must approve them, and only the board can remove them. The president nominates board members, but the Senate must confirm them. Board members' current term limits imply that, assuming none are fired, Trump will have the opportunity to nominate only two new members. True, with the power to fire board members 'for cause' — meaning 'inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance' — Trump could try to replace a majority of the members with loyalists. But this seems unlikely. Whether the 'for cause' criterion has been met will be contested in the courts, and the Senate would have to confirm Trump's appointees. Read: Trump's pick to replace Fed Chair Powell could rock your mortgage and retirement. Buckle up. Similarly, Congress could revise the Federal Reserve Act to replace the Fed's monetary-policy objectives with a mandate to buy or sell sovereign debt according to the wishes of the Treasury. But this, too, is unlikely. And the same goes for a scenario in which the Treasury sets a rapidly depreciating exchange-rate target for the dollar DXY that can be achieved only through large-scale Fed purchases of U.S. public debt that generate high inflation. However, fiscal dominance — indeed, fiscal capture — is very likely, because the need to avoid a domestic and global financial crisis will force the FOMC's hand. It will do whatever is necessary to prevent a U.S. government default, because the Fed's financial-stability mandate (the Financial Stability Act of 2010 mentions the Fed 179 times) undoubtedly trumps its monetary-policy mandate of maintaining maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates. The Fed cannot credibly threaten to refuse to monetize debt and deficits to compel fiscal retrenchment by the Treasury, let alone Congress. Thus, the Fed will have no choice but to engage in sovereign-debt purchases that it knows to be incompatible with its monetary-policy objectives. With nominal interest rates for medium- and long-term U.S. sovereign debt far below the levels consistent with realistic expectations of future inflation, serious capital losses on nominal debt instruments (public and private) are likely. The inflation surge could be no more than three years away. As the prospect of fiscal capture comes into view, investing in Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS) and other indexed public and private debt instruments will become increasingly attractive. Willem H. Buiter, a former chief economist at Citibank and former member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England, is an independent economic adviser. Anne C. Sibert is professor emerita of economics at Birkbeck, University of London. This commentary — 'U.S. Debt Holders Should Brace for Impact' — is published with the permission of Project Syndicate. Read: 'You are going to panic,' Jamie Dimon tells regulators about what will happen when the bond market cracks More: What's at stake if world's most powerful market finally buckles after decades-long U.S. debt splurge 20 companies in the S&P 500 whose investors have gained the greatest rewards from stock buybacks Israel-Iran conflict poses three challenges for stocks that could slam market by up to 20%, warns RBC I'm 51, earn $129K and have $165K in my 401(k). Can I afford to retire when my husband, 59, draws Social Security at 62? 'It might be another Apple or Microsoft': My wife invested $100K in one stock and it exploded 1,500%. Do we sell? Why the stock market will be performing a high-wire act over the summer, according to UBS