Georgia doctors decry bill aimed at restricting adolescent access to puberty blockers
Opponents of legislation that would place restrictions on transgender Georgians gathered across from the state Capitol in January. Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder
As medical and mental health providers, we are deeply concerned about two bills currently making their way through the state Legislature that would prevent us from providing necessary medical care for some of our most vulnerable patients.
Senate bills 30 and 39 would further restrict access to life-saving medical care for adolescent transgender patients, and, in an unprecedented step, would make it more difficult for some adult transgender patients to obtain gender-affirming care. These policies would infringe on the rights of health care providers, families, and patients to make important medical decisions, risking the medical and mental health of transgender people in our state. We unequivocally believe that all Georgians should have access to high-quality, evidence-based medical care, and we strongly oppose any legislation that would harm the health and wellbeing of our transgender and gender diverse patients.
In 2023, Gov. Brian Kemp signed Senate Bill 140 into law, a ban on essential health care for transgender youth preventing medical providers from prescribing hormone therapy to minors but maintaining patient access to puberty-delaying medications. For transgender adolescents, puberty can be a time of significant distress, with bodily changes that are upsetting, unwelcome, inconsistent with the way they see themselves, and can contribute to anxiety and depressive symptoms. Puberty-delaying medications allow adolescents in the early stages of puberty and their families more time to make decisions about their medical care with guidance from their trusted health care providers. Importantly, puberty-delaying medications have been used safely for more than three decades for various conditions like precocious puberty and endometriosis, and they not only have reversible effects on puberty but also are well-studied and have a good safety profile.
Despite assurances from the sponsors of SB 140 that they would not seek to further restrict medical care for transgender patients, these same lawmakers are now proposing SB 30, which would prohibit access to puberty-delaying medications for transgender youth while ensuring that cisgender youth can continue to benefit from this treatment.
Restricting these medications for transgender youth not only goes against the current scientific evidence, but it is also discriminatory against a particular group of adolescents. Furthermore, the mental health consequences for transgender youth that will occur because of this policy are quite severe and entirely preventable. Prohibiting health care professionals from providing necessary and life-saving treatment to our transgender patients is a stark example of government overreach and directly challenges our professional responsibility to prevent harm and reduce suffering for those entrusted in our care.
Provisions in SB 39 would also restrict access to health care for adult and pediatric transgender patients in two distinct ways. First, this bill denies coverage of gender-affirming care for Georgians who rely on the State Health Benefit Plan, which currently covers more than half a million state employees, teachers, retirees, and their dependents. This bill expands upon current restrictions and those proposed in SB 30 as it would be the first law proposed in Georgia that prevents transgender adults from accessing their medications and other treatments.
Additionally, SB 39 would prevent health care providers at state-owned or -operated medical facilities from providing gender-affirming care to any transgender patient regardless of their age or insurance plan. Due to the vague language used in the bill, the potential impact of this policy on the practice of health care professionals remains unclear. When questioned during a hearing in the Senate Committee on Insurance and Labor, Sen. Blake Tillery, the bill's sponsor, failed to assuage concerns that this policy could impact medical institutions throughout Georgia that receive any amount of state funding. Instead of trusting medical professionals in Georgia to assess and treat patients based on our best clinical judgement and medical treatment guidelines, lawmakers undermine our expertise by inserting themselves into the medical decision-making process in service of an ill-informed and explicitly harmful political agenda.
Gender-affirming health care for transgender people, which can include the use of puberty-delaying medication and hormone therapy, is considered the standard of care by every major medical and mental health association in the United States, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Endocrine Society, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the American Psychological Association, among many others. Numerous clinical studies have repeatedly demonstrated the positive and often life-saving effects of gender-affirming medical care. Transgender patients with access to the care they need have better mental health outcomes, including lower levels of depression and suicidal thoughts, as well as an improved sense of wellbeing. The substantial health benefits of gender-affirming care are indisputable based on scientific evidence and further supported by our clinical experiences caring for transgender patients. We fervently advocate for our patients to maintain access to medical care that helps improve their overall health and wellbeing.
Georgia currently faces substantial challenges with recruiting and retaining medical and mental health providers. More than 30 counties in Georgia have been identified as high need areas impacted by provider shortages. Laws that restrict health care professionals from practicing evidence-based medicine further exacerbate this problem. Many medical and mental health providers, regardless of specialty, have concerns for their safety, their patients' well-being, and the freedom to provide effective and compassionate care in states where lawmakers prioritize partisan politics over health care access and patient autonomy. Georgians across the state will ultimately suffer the consequences of provider shortages as a result of legislative overreach into health care decisions and aggressive efforts to criminalize medical care that is robustly supported by scientific evidence.
We, as health care providers in Georgia, stand in strong opposition to a political strategy that seeks to dehumanize transgender people and restrict the rights of adult and pediatric transgender patients to fully access the medical care that they need. The protection of personal freedom and choice are core values of our state and include decisions made in health care settings. We urge lawmakers to vote no on SB 30 and SB 39 and to stop all efforts to politicize medical care for transgender Georgians.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Oregon lawmakers scale back proposal for unemployment strike payments amid blowback
Hundreds of educators, parents and students joined a rally Nov. 1. 2023 at Roosevelt High School in north Portland to support striking teachers. Teachers like them could soon receive up to 10 weeks of unemployment benefits under a compromise negotiated by Oregon lawmakers.(Alex Baumhardt/Oregon Capital Chronicle) A particularly controversial measure that would give unemployment benefits to public and private Oregon workers during labor strikes survived a key Wednesday hearing after lawmakers agreed to cut the length of time in which workers on strike could cash checks by more than half. Senate Bill 916 would have limited striking workers to receiving benefits for 26 weeks, in line with the current caps on unemployment checks for Oregonians. But after the Senate rejected an amended version of the bill on Tuesday, a bicameral conference committee voted Wednesday to set a new cutoff at 10 weeks after a two-week waiting period. Committee members voted along party lines, with the sole Republican present voting against the amendments. 'I do feel like this is a massive compromise,' said Rep. Dacia Grayber, D-Portland, the bill's lead author. 'It's not something I'm entirely thrilled with.' The measure would be a first-in-the-nation move by Oregon, establishing a right to strike for public and private employees while ensuring them the ability to apply for unemployment benefits. Aside from traditionally strike-exempt public employees such as firefighters and police, workers such as nurses and teachers could claim benefits after two weeks of striking. The bill has been among this session's most controversial measures, laying bare deep divisions over how best to use the state's $6.4 billion unemployment insurance fund. The changes come after support for a Democrat-led bill collapsed in a concurring Senate vote on Tuesday amid concerns from Republicans and a key dissenting Democrat. It had already drawn opposition from school board leaders who help negotiate teacher strikes, business groups, and local government leaders who contribute to the state's unemployment fund. 'We have a healthy fund today due in no small part because all the agreements in the years have been honored,' committee member Sen. Daniel Bonham, R- The Dalles, told his colleagues before voting against the amended bill. 'It is a healthy enough fund that I don't know that this will be a massive draw on it, but again the kids will lose if teachers are incentivized to strike.' House Democrats got the bill over the finish line in their chamber last week, arguing that the benefits would be used sparingly and not as a tool to prolong strikes, but to shorten them. A change made in a House committee would cap benefits to eight weeks if the state's unemployment fund is at risk, and lawmakers also included an amendment that mandates deductions in backpay for benefits claimed by teachers during strikes. Grayber on Tuesday repeated a promise she has made to continue monitoring the bill's implementation if it were to pass, but also signaled that she hoped to move past concerns that the bill would promote misuse of the unemployment system or dramatically hamper school life and public facilities. She said she's been 'guided by the math' behind the bill from the beginning, a subtle nod to the estimates from the state's employment department that the bill would not change existing tax structures for businesses and government agencies paying into the state's unemployment funding. 'I have heard the opposition,' she said. 'I very much look forward to moving past what feels like a worst-case scenario focus that we've maintained for several weeks now.' Oregonians who have lost a job can currently apply for unemployment weekly checks ranging from $196 to $836. The bill would allow benefits to kick in immediately if workers are locked out of facilities by their employer during negotiations. Sen. Mark Meek, D-Gladstone, is a sponsor of the legislation, but withdrew his support when it came up short in a 15-14 Senate vote on Tuesday. In a brief interview after the hearing, he declined to comment on whether he supported the proposed changes. He referred to another attempt at a transportation and infrastructure funding bill that the Legislature has taken up in the final weeks of the session: 'If there's time to pass a transportation package, there's time to get this right,' he said. The new amendment pushes the bill closer to a similar law passed in Washington that caps benefits at six weeks, but which doesn't go so far as to protect public employees like Oregon's proposed legislation. New Jersey and New York have also passed laws in recent years to provide unemployment benefits to striking private sector workers, and California Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar effort in 2023 over fiscal concerns. Another bill extending benefits to striking workers in Connecticut is currently sitting on Gov. Ned Lamont's desk, but he is expected to veto it. The bill passed out of committee on a 4-1 vote. Rep. Lucetta Elmer, R-McMinnville, was excused. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
WATCH: Top Dem says he has 'never heard' his fellow party members call LA riots 'peaceful'
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said Wednesday that he had no recollection of his fellow Democratic Party colleagues referring to the anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles as "peaceful." "What do Democrats mean when they say the riots in L.A. are peaceful?" Durbin was asked by a reporter outside the Capitol. "I never heard them say that," Durbin responded, leading the reporter to ask Durbin whether he condemned the ongoing anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles, which some have said amount to riots. "I condemn violence, whether it's in the Capitol or in L.A.," Durbin shot back before being ushered away out of earshot. California Officials Are Trying To Deny La Riot 'Chaos' For 'Political Gain,' Sheriff Says The No. 2 Democrat in the Senate may not have heard any of his fellow party members use the word "peaceful" in their descriptions of the ongoing chaos in Los Angeles, but that doesn't mean they have not. Read On The Fox News App "A lot of these peaceful protests are being generated because the President of the United States is sowing chaos," Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said on Sunday's "Meet the Press" on NBC. Just the day before, President Donald Trump called on thousands of National Guard troops to go to Los Angeles to help quell the ongoing chaos, which has included attacks on law enforcement, property damage and looting. "The vast majority of protesters and demonstrators are peaceful," Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., said on MSNBC. "They're passionate." Sen. Cory Booker Calls Los Angeles Riots 'Peaceful,' Slams Trump For Deploying National Guard Rep. Nanette Barragán, a Democrat who represents California's 44th Congressional District, said on CNN's "State of the Union" program on Sunday that "We are having an administration that's targeting peaceful protests." Conservative critics also fired back after former Vice President Kamala Harris referred to the ongoing chaos as "overwhelmingly peaceful." "The country really dodged a bullet in November," Fox News contributor Guy Benson posted on X in response to Harris' social media post. In another post, Benson added, "Their official position is that they're appalled by what's happening in Los Angeles…because of Trump and ICE, not the violent rioters. In its current form, this party cannot be salvaged." Dozens Of Anti-ice Rioters Arrested In La As Trump Sends In National Guard To Quell Violence Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got heat for describing the situation in Los Angeles as "peaceful." "California Governor Newsom didn't request the National Guard be deployed to his state following peaceful demonstrations. Trump sent them anyway. It's the first time in 60 years a president has made that choice," Clinton posted on X. "Trump's goal isn't to keep Californians safe. His goal is to cause chaos, because chaos is good for Trump." While there were initially examples of some peaceful protests at the start of this nearly weeklong chaos, by the start of the weekend, property destruction and violence broke out and devolved into a situation that became increasingly violent over the next few days. Several officers were injured during the riot, which included rocks and other projectiles thrown at them, and dozens of people were arrested related to the protests and rioting. Looting has also been an issue, as has property damage, and on Tuesday evening Democrat Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass instituted a citywide curfew. In a rare intraparty dissent, Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., criticized his own party this week for failing to adequately condemn the violence in Los Angeles. "This is anarchy and true chaos," the Pennsylvania Democrat said in a Monday post on X alongside a picture of cars that had been destroyed by fire. "My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings and assaulting law enforcement." "I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations and immigration," Fetterman added. "But this is not that."Original article source: WATCH: Top Dem says he has 'never heard' his fellow party members call LA riots 'peaceful'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Durbin pushes to pass DACA bill ahead of 13th anniversary
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WCIA) — Sunday is the 13th anniversary of the DACA program. Senator Dick Durbin is spearheading the movement to turn the executive order into law. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals allows undocumented immigrants who entered the country as children protection from deportation. The program has helped more than 800,000 young people. 'They've gone to our schools, they've stood up every morning in the classroom and pledged allegiance to the same flag we pledge allegiance, and they aspire to be great and make America a greater country,' Durbin (D-IL) said at a news conference Wednesday. Illinois bill ending scam gym membership tactic heads to governor's desk The senior senator from Illinois is one of the biggest supporters of the program. He first introduced a bill on the senate floor in 2001 but has not been successful codifying it into law.'Sometimes we'd pass it in the Senate, but the House wouldn't,' Durbin said. 'Sometimes we couldn't get 60 votes, sometimes we could.' President Barack Obama enacted the program with an executive order in 2012. Critics said implementing it was an overreach of Obama's powers. 'The program essentially rewards parents for bringing their children to the United States illegally,' Ira Mehlman, the Media Director for Federation for American Immigration Reform, said. 'And anytime you reward illegal activity, the inevitable result is you're going to get more of it.' Immigrant advocates say Dreamers serve many essential roles in their communities. 'There's a lot of doctors, nurses, individuals like myself doing advocacy based work, and pretty much any career you can think of here, there are DACA workers in our community,' Maria Jimenez, the Executive Director of Immigrant Services of Champaign-Urbana, said. Illinois bill on governor's desk would require law enforcement to work with federal gun tracing database But as the Supreme Court debates the constitutionality of the program, they're facing anxiety over a possible future without the program. 'It would mean a great deal of instability for my family,' Jimenez said. 'I have a partner, I have two young kids I provide for, it would mean myself, my brother, my family members would all of a sudden not have the stability and safety from deportation.' The proposed legislation, American Dream and Promise Act of 2025, would give anyone who is 18 or younger who's been in the U.S. since 2021 protected status. It would also provide a pathway to permanent legal status if dreamers get a degree or serve in the military for at least two years. The full bill can be found here. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
