logo
Bills targeting transgender medical care continue to move through the Legislature

Bills targeting transgender medical care continue to move through the Legislature

Yahoo02-04-2025

Opponents of legislation that would place restrictions on transgender Georgians gathered across from the state Capitol in January. Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder
As the 2025 legislative session comes to a close, transgender Georgians continue to be relentlessly targeted by state legislators, including with Senate Bill 30, Senate Bill 39, and Senate Bill 185, all of which would restrict access to evidence-based medical care. Despite opposition from medical, mental health, and legal experts, the Georgia Senate passed these bills, handing them off to the House for consideration.
SB 39, a vaguely worded and wide-ranging bill, inserts lawmakers directly into the patient provider relationship. It would prevent access to any health care deemed 'transition related' for more than half a million state employees and their dependents who rely on the State Health Benefit Plan, as well as others who receive care that is state funded. The breadth of its impact regarding state associated funding is unclear, and perhaps that is the point, allowing its sweeping prohibition to be as widely applicable as possible. Likewise, what qualifies as 'transition-related' care is similarly unclear, risking the restriction of funds for a wide range of medical care. At a House Health Committee hearing on March 26, when questioned about whether SB 39 would prevent access to mental health care, Sen. Blake Tillery, the bill's sponsor, stated 'If not aligned with one's sex at birth, then I think yes.'
To push through the myriad of anti-transgender legislation prior to the end of the session, SB 39 has adopted language from SB 185, a bill that specifically prohibits gender-affirming care for transgender adults who are incarcerated in Georgia, including medications that were previously prescribed by their medical provider. To protect the health of transgender individuals, we must prevent these bills becoming law.
As medical and mental health providers, we believe all patients deserve access to high quality, evidence-based medical care. For many transgender people, gender-affirming care is essential and lifesaving. Numerous studies demonstrate the indisputable benefits of gender-affirming care for transgender patients, including reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression, less psychological distress, lower risk of suicidal thoughts, and better interpersonal relationships. Every major medical and psychological association in the U.S., including the American Medical Association, the Endocrine Society, the American Psychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, among others, recognize the evidence basis supporting the medical and psychological necessity of gender-affirming care. These bills inappropriately insert legislators into medical decision making, infringing on the rights and well-being of transgender patients.
Taking away individuals' access to gender-affirming therapies while in prison constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and increases the likelihood of abuse and detrimental health consequences. Abrupt cessation or forced weaning of medically necessary, ongoing treatment is a health risk. Physical effects of hormone withdrawal are accompanied by psychological distress, which may manifest as anxiety, depression, and suicidality. These bills risk the forced detransition of individuals who may have consistently taken gender-affirming hormone therapy for years. This physically and psychologically damaging experience is unnecessary and profoundly harmful.
Transgender people often endure significant discrimination, economic insecurity and, in some cases, homelessness. These vulnerabilities make it more likely that transgender individuals will face criminalization and incarceration. Within the criminal legal system, transgender people experience further marginalization and discrimination. It is common for transgender individuals to be dangerously and illegally placed in prison facilities misaligned with their gender, increasing risk of harassment and violence. They are also less likely to receive necessary services, including personal care items and essential medical care. At least one in three transgender people in prisons and jails have reported being sexually assaulted. The danger is much greater for transgender females, with almost 50% reporting harassment, physical violence, or sexual assault while incarcerated. These statistics are likely an underestimate as some prison staff facilitate and perpetuate violence towards transgender individuals, making it dangerous to report abuse. Often, the only 'protection' offered is solitary confinement, which exacerbates stigma and may result in serious mental health consequences.
The U.S. Department of Justice has determined that Georgia's prisons fail to reasonably protect incarcerated people from harm, violating their constitutional rights. SB 185 would prohibit the state from funding medically necessary gender-affirming therapies, including hormone therapy, for transgender people who are incarcerated. All people who are incarcerated in Georgia have a right to medically necessary care, not only those deemed deserving by state politicians. Multiple lawsuits brought against the Georgia Department of Corrections as well as departments in several other states have resulted in courts ruling that transgender individuals who are incarcerated have a right to access gender-affirming care. Prior discrimination lawsuits involving transgender people in Georgia have cost taxpayers more than $4 million since 2015, including cases brought by transgender people who were unable to access medical care while incarcerated. SB 39 and SB 185 run counter to established precedent and medical expertise. This would not only worsen the health of transgender individuals in Georgia but also continue a track record of costly litigation paid for with taxpayer dollars.
The bills are dangerous and discriminatory and create new problems for the state while addressing none. By dismissing medical expertise and interfering with the patient-physician relationship, the Georgia Legislature once again seeks to make Georgians' health decisions for them. Lawmakers should devote their time and the state's resources to improving healthcare gaps currently impacting millions in our state. This legislation targets the rights and wellbeing of transgender people, who are made vulnerable by widespread societal stigmatization. Under the guise of fiscal responsibility, this paternalistic legislation seeks to politicize medical care at the expense of a marginalized patient population. It is incumbent upon all Georgians who respect a patient's right to make their own medical decisions with their physician and oppose state sanctioned discrimination against minoritized groups, to contact our state legislators and urge them to oppose any legislative efforts to harm transgender Georgians.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Stop Posting, and Start Legislating—A Message to the GOP from Gen Z
Stop Posting, and Start Legislating—A Message to the GOP from Gen Z

Newsweek

time22 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Stop Posting, and Start Legislating—A Message to the GOP from Gen Z

We remember. We remember the Paul Ryan years. We remember the lofty promises, the press conferences with tax cut charts, the selfies with Trump in the Roosevelt Room. And we remember the disappointment—because when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and White House, barely anything bold got done. The border wasn't secured. Obamacare wasn't repealed. The swamp wasn't drained. The only thing that moved quickly was the clock—and opportunity slipped away. The bills stalled. The hearings dragged. The excuses piled up. And in the end, the status quo won. Again. A Make America Great Again (MAGA) baseball hat supporting President Donald Trump is pictured. A Make America Great Again (MAGA) baseball hat supporting President Donald Trump is here we are again. President Donald Trump is back in the Oval Office. Conservatives have momentum. The political stars are aligned like they haven't been in years. And yet? The same old D.C. inertia is setting in. Congress is snoozing through a once-in-a-generation opportunity to deliver real change. There's no sense of urgency. No fire. No strategy. Just more performative politics as usual. The difference is: this time, we're paying attention. Gen Z conservatives didn't get off the couch and show up to the ballot box to watch history repeat itself. We're tired of politicians who post more than they produce. House and Senate Republicans—stop acting like influencers and start acting like lawmakers. You don't get to post selfies with Elon Musk or tweet your appreciation to DOGE if you won't even codify basic spending cuts like the DOGE Act. You can't coast on vibes while the country's on fire. You were sent to legislate, not livestream. You weren't elected to trend on X—you were elected to fix what's broken. Brilyn Hollyhand and President Donald Trump are pictured at the University of Alabama on May 1, 2025. Brilyn Hollyhand and President Donald Trump are pictured at the University of Alabama on May 1, 2025. Photo Courtesy of the White House Despite facing one of the most pivotal moments in modern political history, Congress still isn't working full weeks. Many lawmakers fly in Tuesday afternoon and are wheels-up by Thursday. Three-day workweeks in the middle of a national crisis? That's not leadership—that's laziness. Meanwhile, families across America are grinding five, six, even seven days a week just to stay afloat. Blue-collar workers don't get to call it a week by Wednesday night. Neither should the people writing our laws. If our representatives can't even put in a full week's work during a make-or-break presidency, maybe they don't deserve the job. I will never forget my first ever dinner with a U.S. senator. It was my 12th birthday, and we were in D.C., eating downtown after I had recorded some episodes of my podcast on Capitol Hill. He leaned across the table to me and said, "Brilyn, the first thing you're going to learn in this business is that in politics there are work horses and show horses. The work horses bring home the pork for the state that sent them there. The show horses run to the TV cameras. Be a work horse, and only join a cable show when you have an accomplishment to tout." That stuck with me—and I'm reminded of it right now more than ever. Because D.C. is overflowing with show horses. They gallop into every hearing, prance onto every panel, and leave before the hard work begins. This isn't just about optics. This is about outcomes. Republicans were given a second chance to do what they promised the first time. It's not enough to give speeches about the border. Close it. It's not enough to post videos in front of the IRS. Defund it. It's not enough to warn about weaponized government. Dismantle it. This is the moment to act, not admire the problem. Stop playacting reform—deliver it. The base isn't looking for another firebrand quote; we're looking for a signed bill. We're not asking for the moon—we're demanding that you work. Get off the couch. Get off cable news. And get legislation on the president's desk. Defund the weaponized bureaucracy. Close the border. Cut the waste. Stop acting like your job is to coast to retirement and start acting like your job is to represent us. If you need inspiration, look outside the Beltway—real Americans are hustling every day without fanfare. Why can't Congress? Gen Z is watching. And we have receipts. We're the most online, most informed, and most fed-up generation to ever engage in politics. We can see through the talking points. We recognize when someone's all flash and no follow-through. And we're not afraid to call it out—publicly, loudly, and often. You can't gaslight us with headlines. You can't distract us with Instagram posts. We see the floor schedule. We track the votes. We know the difference between working and pretending. If the GOP wastes another Trump term, it won't just be a policy failure—it'll be a generational betrayal. My generation won't forget. We didn't come this far just to watch you do nothing, again. We showed up because we believe in a different future—one that isn't dictated by lobbyists, legacy institutions, and leadership that loves the camera more than the country. Clock in, Congress. Or clock out—and make room for someone who will. Brilyn Hollyhand is an 18-year-old political commentator, chairman of the Republican National Committee's Youth Advisory Council, and bestselling author of One Generation Away: Why Now is the Time to Restore American Freedom. For more of his hot takes you can follow him on socials @BrilynHollyhand or visit The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

‘Bottle bill' battle intensifies as R.I. legislative session enters home stretch
‘Bottle bill' battle intensifies as R.I. legislative session enters home stretch

Boston Globe

time27 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

‘Bottle bill' battle intensifies as R.I. legislative session enters home stretch

Bottles placed in recycling bins end up being crushed and spread on the Central Landfill, leaving Rhode Island with a 'despicable' 17 percent recycling rate, she said. 'That's pathetic for a state like us, the Ocean State,' McEntee said. 'Something needs to change drastically.' But that's where the disagreement begins. McEntee and Senator Mark P. McKenney have introduced Advertisement 'I think all of us here today are sick and tired of seeing our communities littered with drink bottles, liquor nips, and other pieces of the trash,' McEntee said. " It's long overdue that Rhode Island enters the modern age of waste disposal and reuse by combining the proven and successful strategies of a bottle bill program." Get Rhode Map A weekday briefing from veteran Rhode Island reporters, focused on the things that matter most in the Ocean State. Enter Email Sign Up But the Greater Providence of Chamber of Commerce and other business groups are waging a high-profile 'Our members support increasing the state's recycling rate but not by imposing a financial burden on local businesses and consumers,' the Rhode Island Business Coalition said in written testimony. 'By adding a 10-cent fee to nearly every beverage sold in the state, these proposals would raise prices for retailers working to keep their shelves stocked — and for families simply trying to afford everyday essentials like bottled water and soft drinks." Related : Advertisement Bottle bills have been introduced off and on in Rhode Island since the early 1980s, but they have run into stiff opposition from the national beverage companies and local retailers. The most recent push began in 2023. McEntee, a South Kingstown Democrat, and McKenney, a Warwick Democrat, co-chaired a special legislative commission that delved into the issue for 18 months. Jed Thorp, director of advocacy for the environmental group Save the Bay, said the commission held 13 meetings, and the House and Senate have had about 15 hours of committee hearings on the topic. 'Every person in the state who's wanted to weigh in on this has been heard,' he said. 'At this point, it is time to vote on this bill. It is time to get this done.' Thorp said the study commission heard from experts from across the country. 'Through all of those hearings, it has become clear that yes, bottle bills work,' he said. 'Bottle bills we know are effective at both reducing litter and improving recycling.' Thorp said advocates listened to opponents who said they support bottle bills if they are crafted in the right way. For example, retailers said they did not want to have to take back the empty containers. So the bill would require a producer responsibility organization to instead create a system that might involve 'bag-drop programs' or 'reverse vending machines,' he said. But on Wednesday, a coalition of 73 small business owners signed onto a letter urging Governor Daniel J. McKee, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi, and Senate President Valarie J. Lawson to reject the 'bottle bill.' Advertisement 'This legislation will raise costs for businesses and Rhode Island families at a time when many are already struggling with high prices due to inflation,' the coalition said. 'The cost of living and doing business in Rhode Island keeps going up, and this legislation would make matters worse.' The coalition includes businesses such as Eastside Mart in Providence, Iggy's Food Mart in Warren, Ollie's Pub in Warwick, and Sam's Food Store Woonsocket. While 10 cents per container may not sound like much, a 12-pack of soda would cost an extra $1.20, the coalition said. 'Rhode Island consumers and businesses cannot afford a bottle tax,' the letter stated. Both McEntee and McKenney disputed the idea that the 10-cent deposit amounts to a tax. 'This isn't a bottle tax,' McKenney said. 'I've been paying taxes for years, and I've never gotten all my money back. With this — real easy — you return the bottles, you get the money back." Ten states have bottle bills, including 'It's not like this is reinventing a wheel,' McKenney said. 'This is done in many states. My gosh, in Europe it's done in countries left and right.' Sam Tracy, director of legislative affairs for the CLYNK bottle recycling company, spoke at Thursday's news conference, saying the company's technology is used in five of the 10 bottle bill states. He said he also was representing a coalition of businesses that support legislation combining a 'bottle bill' with extended producer responsibility. That coalition includes Poland Spring, Guinness, and Red Bull, as well as local businesses like the Hot Club, and Frog & Toad, both in Providence. Advertisement With the 2025 legislative session entering its final weeks, the fate of the 'bottle bill' hangs in the balance. So what do legislative leaders have to say? Lawson, who is a cosponsor of the Shekarchi also issued a statement Friday, saying he appreciates the legislative commission's work during the past the past two sessions. 'I am reviewing all the options, looking at what other states are doing, and talking with the Senate,' Shekarchi said. 'I am fortunate to be receiving advice and guidance on this issue from former DEM Director Janet Coit, and will continue to consider the options.' Edward Fitzpatrick can be reached at

The Trump-Musk feud is painfully awkward for the GOP
The Trump-Musk feud is painfully awkward for the GOP

Business Insider

time39 minutes ago

  • Business Insider

The Trump-Musk feud is painfully awkward for the GOP

Rep. Tom Tiffany seemed to be at a loss for words. "I don't have anything to say," the Wisconsin Republican told me as we descended the steps outside the House chamber. "Let's wait for the next tweet." I was hoping for a bit more, so I pressed on. "It is what it is," he said with a slight laugh. It was the last vote of the day, and House Republicans were eager to get out of there. Their counterparts in the Senate had managed to leave town for the week just as the nasty — and for some, long-anticipated — feud between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump was getting underway. What began as a disagreement over the "Big Beautiful Bill" had taken a strange turn. By this point, Musk had replied " yes" to a post that included a reference to impeaching Trump, claimed responsibility for the president's 2024 victory, declared that tariffs would cause a recession, and said that Trump is in the "Epstein files." Trump had floated taking away Musk's government contracts, said that the billionaire "went CRAZY," and insinuated that the tech titan suffered from "Trump Derangement Syndrome." As Tiffany faltered, a Democratic colleague pounced. "So Tom," Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin interjected as he walked by, "Elon or Trump? Who's gonna win?" The Republican congressman's tepid laughter grew into a guffaw. We all waited for the response. It never arrived. "I've got the press here," an exasperated Tiffany said. "What do you want me to say, Mark?" Many Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill found themselves in some version of Tiffany's position, unsure what to say about the vicious war of words unfolding online. "Is Mercury in retrograde?" asked Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado. For months, Trump and Musk have appeared largely in lockstep. Republicans had become accustomed to brushing off and explaining away questions about the former DOGE leader's machinations in the executive branch, as they had with Trump for nearly a decade. Now, with the two men very publicly at odds, it was a time for choosing. But Republicans weren't all that eager to choose. And at least one who did quickly reconsidered. "Enough Elon. Put the phone down and go outside and play," Republican Rep. Greg Murphy of North Carolina wrote in a post on X that was deleted minutes later. Rep. Ryan Zinke, a Montana Republican who served as Secretary of the Interior during Trump's first term, initially offered praise for Musk when asked about the feud. "I respect, obviously, the President. I respect Elon Musk," Zinke said. "Very, very bright." When informed about Musk's response to the post referencing Trump's impeachment, Zinke let out a sharp sigh. "Yeah, that's a bridge too far," he said. "You know, I'm sorry that his tour of duty ended that way." "This is a sign of the times that you see some of this stuff being done in public," Republican Rep. Scotty Perry of Pennsylvania said. "People over the course of history who wanted to save the republic had different viewpoints about how to do it." Several Republicans on Thursday used social media to subtly make their allegiance to Trump known, even without explicitly criticizing the world's richest man. One of them was Republican Rep. Abe Hamadeh of Arizona, who posted a photo of himself with Trump on X as the drama with Musk unfolded. America First — now and forever. 🇺🇸 — Abe Hamadeh (@AbrahamHamadeh) June 5, 2025 Was it a veiled message? Hamadeh laughed and looked down when asked about it. "President Trump's my president," he told me. "People voted for him. I supported him. President Trump is the reason why we're all here." He later added that he "appreciated" Musk's contributions. For Democrats, it was a told-you-so moment. "None of it surprises me, to be honest," Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the DOGE subcommittee, told me. "You sell your soul to the devil, or you pay your way into it, and this is what you get." The only Republican who seemed to be genuinely enjoying himself was Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, who's had his fair share of feuds with Trump and voted against the "Big Beautiful Bill" for largely the same reason that Musk decided to critique it. "I tell my colleagues," Massie said, "if I get hit on Independence Avenue, and they have to deliver my eulogy, just say he was having his best day ever."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store