Latest news with #genderaffirming
CNN
03-06-2025
- Health
- CNN
Judge blocks Trump from cutting off gender-affirming care for federal inmates
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to continue providing gender-affirming medication for transgender inmates in federal prisons, dealing the latest blow to a multi-pronged effort by the president to pull back federal support for transgender health care. 'All parties seem to agree that the named plaintiffs do, in fact, need hormone therapy,' US District Judge Royce Lamberth wrote. The preliminary injunction from Lamberth means that officials within the Bureau of Prisons cannot enforce guidance the agency's leadership issued earlier this year implementing President Donald Trump's order, which directed the agency to revise its policies to 'ensure that no Federal funds are expended for any medical procedure, treatment, or drug for the purpose of conforming an inmate's appearance to that of the opposite sex.' Lamberth, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, said a group of transgender inmates who had been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria and who challenged BOP's guidance implementing the president's order were likely to succeed on their claim that the agency violated federal rulemaking procedures. They will continue to receive drugs as prescribed, the judge said. 'Nothing in the thin record before the Court suggests that either the BOP or the President consciously took stock of—much less studied—the potentially debilitating effects that the new policies could have on transgender inmates before the implementing memoranda came into force,' Lamberth wrote in the 36-page ruling. 'The BOP may not arbitrarily deprive inmates of medications or other lifestyle accommodations that its own medical staff have deemed to be medically appropriate without considering he implications of that decision.' Though the case was originally brought by three transgender inmates, Lamberth agreed to certify a class that consists of all federal inmates who are currently taking hormone therapy medication to treat their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, defined as the psychological distress an individual feels when their gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. Not every transgender individual has gender dysphoria. There are currently about 1,000 people in federal custody who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Lamberth noted that the BOP was continuing to give more than 600 inmates their prescribed hormone therapy medications, despite Trump's prior order. The Justice Department had tried to explain how the BOP was acting differently than the order said they should, Lamberth noted. A federal government lawyer at a recent hearing 'argued that the BOP's policy is to provide hormone therapy to inmates as necessary to address medical needs other than 'conforming an inmate's appearance to that of the opposite sex,' such as to ameliorate anxiety, depression, or suicidality associated with gender dysphoria. Therefore, they argue, the BOP has the authority to provide not just some relief, but the very relief that the plaintiffs sought in their Complaint—to wit, restoration of their hormone therapy.' The case so far has highlighted the changing reality transgender inmates in federal prisons have faced since Trump took office in January. Three different inmates — Alishea Kingdom, Solo Nichols and Jas Kapule — sued because they had been receiving hormone therapy where they were held and also had gained access to some supplies, such as underwear and cosmetics, that would enable them to accommodate their genders. Kingdom is a transgender woman and was able to access feminine underwear and commissary items in addition to her hormone therapy medication, while Nichols and Kapule were able to have men's boxers and chest binders. The BOP stopped Kingdom's hormone therapy in February, causing her anxiety, hopelessness, panic attacks and suicidal thoughts, she told the court. But once she and the others filed the lawsuit, her hormone therapy was restored, Lamberth noted. Nichols similarly had his testosterone injections reduced in February, until the BOP reversed course and restored the full dosage by the end of that month, court filings say. Kapule never lost access to hormone therapy, according to the court records. The judge in the case decided the three inmates would suffer irreparable harm if he didn't step in with this ruling, according to his opinion. CNN has reached out to BOP for comment on the ruling.
CNN
03-06-2025
- Health
- CNN
Judge blocks Trump from cutting off gender-affirming care for federal inmates
A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to continue providing gender-affirming medication for transgender inmates in federal prisons, dealing the latest blow to a multi-pronged effort by the president to pull back federal support for transgender health care. 'All parties seem to agree that the named plaintiffs do, in fact, need hormone therapy,' US District Judge Royce Lamberth wrote. The preliminary injunction from Lamberth means that officials within the Bureau of Prisons cannot enforce guidance the agency's leadership issued earlier this year implementing President Donald Trump's order, which directed the agency to revise its policies to 'ensure that no Federal funds are expended for any medical procedure, treatment, or drug for the purpose of conforming an inmate's appearance to that of the opposite sex.' Lamberth, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, said a group of transgender inmates who had been medically diagnosed with gender dysphoria and who challenged BOP's guidance implementing the president's order were likely to succeed on their claim that the agency violated federal rulemaking procedures. They will continue to receive drugs as prescribed, the judge said. 'Nothing in the thin record before the Court suggests that either the BOP or the President consciously took stock of—much less studied—the potentially debilitating effects that the new policies could have on transgender inmates before the implementing memoranda came into force,' Lamberth wrote in the 36-page ruling. 'The BOP may not arbitrarily deprive inmates of medications or other lifestyle accommodations that its own medical staff have deemed to be medically appropriate without considering he implications of that decision.' Though the case was originally brought by three transgender inmates, Lamberth agreed to certify a class that consists of all federal inmates who are currently taking hormone therapy medication to treat their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, defined as the psychological distress an individual feels when their gender identity differs from their sex assigned at birth. Not every transgender individual has gender dysphoria. There are currently about 1,000 people in federal custody who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Lamberth noted that the BOP was continuing to give more than 600 inmates their prescribed hormone therapy medications, despite Trump's prior order. The Justice Department had tried to explain how the BOP was acting differently than the order said they should, Lamberth noted. A federal government lawyer at a recent hearing 'argued that the BOP's policy is to provide hormone therapy to inmates as necessary to address medical needs other than 'conforming an inmate's appearance to that of the opposite sex,' such as to ameliorate anxiety, depression, or suicidality associated with gender dysphoria. Therefore, they argue, the BOP has the authority to provide not just some relief, but the very relief that the plaintiffs sought in their Complaint—to wit, restoration of their hormone therapy.' The case so far has highlighted the changing reality transgender inmates in federal prisons have faced since Trump took office in January. Three different inmates — Alishea Kingdom, Solo Nichols and Jas Kapule — sued because they had been receiving hormone therapy where they were held and also had gained access to some supplies, such as underwear and cosmetics, that would enable them to accommodate their genders. Kingdom is a transgender woman and was able to access feminine underwear and commissary items in addition to her hormone therapy medication, while Nichols and Kapule were able to have men's boxers and chest binders. The BOP stopped Kingdom's hormone therapy in February, causing her anxiety, hopelessness, panic attacks and suicidal thoughts, she told the court. But once she and the others filed the lawsuit, her hormone therapy was restored, Lamberth noted. Nichols similarly had his testosterone injections reduced in February, until the BOP reversed course and restored the full dosage by the end of that month, court filings say. Kapule never lost access to hormone therapy, according to the court records. The judge in the case decided the three inmates would suffer irreparable harm if he didn't step in with this ruling, according to his opinion. CNN has reached out to BOP for comment on the ruling.
CBC
28-05-2025
- General
- CBC
Doctors group challenging constitutionality of Alberta transgender law
Social Sharing A group representing Canada's doctors is challenging the constitutionality of Alberta's legislation banning certain gender-affirming treatments for children under the age of 16, arguing it violates their Charter right to freedom of conscience. The Canadian Medical Association says it filed the challenge Wednesday in Alberta Court of King's Bench. The CMA says the move is meant to protect the relationship between patients and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions. "This is a historic and unprecedented government intrusion into the physician-patient relationship and requires doctors to follow the law rather than clinical guidelines, the needs of patients and their own conscience," the association said in a statement. The legislation was part of a trio of bills affecting transgender people that Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's government passed last year. The association is specifically challenging the bill that blocks doctors from prescribing hormone therapy and puberty blockers to children under 16 and bans gender-affirming surgeries for those under 18. The other bills ban transgender women from competing in amateur women's sports and make it a requirement for children under 16 to receive parental consent to change their names or pronouns at school. Smith has said the medical treatment legislation is necessary to protect children and ensure they don't make major decisions before they reach adulthood. Dr. Jake Donaldson, who is one of three Alberta-based doctors involved in the court challenge, said the law has put him and other doctors in a "state of moral crisis." "It is encroaching upon sort of the autonomy of physicians and our ability to provide what we believe is best, and individualized, evidence-based care for patients," the Calgary family doctor said in an interview. "It forces me to sort of stand on the sidelines and refuse to provide care to patients who would otherwise, in all likelihood, significantly benefit from it." Donaldson said he has roughly 40 young patients who receive the kinds of treatment the law outlaws, although an exemption clause in the legislation means those patients aren't being cut off. "From the standpoint of gender-affirming care, what we are able to do in the medical world is help people," Donaldson said. "There's good evidence behind what we're doing, [and] there are guidelines that we follow. Nobody's making decisions willy-nilly."
Irish Times
18-05-2025
- Health
- Irish Times
Affirming hormone treatment poses ‘greater risk than benefit' for increasing numbers, says gender service consultant
The proportion of people for whom gender-affirming hormone treatment is a 'greater risk than benefit' is increasing, a consultant from the National Gender Service has said. Representative groups for the transgender community have said the current system is 'failing our community' and have called for a new model of care. Dr Yagoub Gader, consultant endocrinologist at St Columcilles Hospital Loughlinstown , where the national service is based, said the evidence base for transgender healthcare is 'underdeveloped' and what does exist is 'of poor quality'. 'Therefore, it is impossible to reliably quantify the potential for risk and benefit in transgender healthcare. This applies for all aspects of transgender healthcare, including hormone therapy,' he said. READ MORE Gender-affirming hormone therapy involves people taking hormones such as oestrogen, testosterone or hormone blockers to help achieve physical characteristics that are more masculine or feminine. 'We do not recommend prescribing gender affirming hormone therapy in the absence of a comprehensive, holistic, multidisciplinary assessment, or if, after such an assessment, the apparent risks exceed the apparent benefits.' Dr Gader said 'clinical complexity is greater than it has ever been before', with people presenting for assessment with multiple unaddressed clinical needs. Therefore, he said, the proportion of people who are found to have 'greater risk than benefit' at the time of assessment is 'increasing'. 'When clinical risks and/or needs are identified, they are addressed either by referral to community services, other specialist services, or by the multidisciplinary team within the NGS,' he said. His statement was made in response to a parliamentary question from Labour health spokeswoman Marie Sherlock, who said the lack of recruitment in the area since 2020 'speaks volumes about the lack of seriousness and paralysis' with which the Health Service Executive and Department of Health are treating the National Gender Service. According to Dr Gader, the waiting time for a first appointment is four years, which the consultant described as 'unacceptably long'. 'Further investment and service development is needed to shorten waiting times. Autism specific supports would also be needed,' he added. Transgender Equality Network Ireland (TENI), an advocacy group, said its position is that transgender people who want to access transgender healthcare should be able to do so in a service that is safe, informed, and in their local area. 'While the service is currently seeing individuals who were referred four years ago, the wait-list has grown considerably since,' the organisation said. As of December 2024, there were more than 2,000 people on the wait-list, and the service only took 160 people off the wait-list last year, it added. This means individuals being referred now are facing a wait of more than 10 years before their first appointment, TENI said, adding that there has been a 'breakdown of trust' between the trans community and healthcare providers. The group said the assessment process should be functioning to 'identify additional needs so that those needs can be met', but instead 'those needs become barriers to accessing care'. A spokeswoman for BelongTo, a charity for LGBTQ+ youth in Ireland, said there is 'no active health service for trans young people'. 'Trans young people and their families cannot get the information, supports and referral pathways they need to understand whether accessing gender-affirming care is the right option for them or not,' the spokeswoman said. The HSE is developing a new Model of Care for transgender healthcare.
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Parents who refuse gender-affirming care for kids would be protected under NC bill
Prospective adoptive or foster parents in North Carolina could not be denied the placement of a child in their care because the parents oppose providing the child with gender-affirming and transition care, under two nearly identical bills moving through the state legislature. The bill would also mean that a biological, adoptive or foster parent's refusal to allow their child to receive such care — put another way, as it is stated in the bill, 'raising a child consistent with the child's biological sex' — would not qualify as abuse or neglect under law. House Bill 560 and Senate Bill 442, both titled the 'Parents Protection Act,' received approval in multiple committees Tuesday. The Senate plans to take its bill up on the floor Wednesday. Thursday is the General Assembly's 'crossover' date for this year's legislative session, or the day by which a bill must be approved by one chamber to remain in consideration for the rest of the session. Both bills are sponsored by Republicans, who control both chambers of the legislature. Sen. Amy Galey, a Burlington Republican and cosponsor of the Senate's bill, said in a committee Tuesday afternoon that the bill would protect parents' ability to 'care for children without the threat of losing supervision over that child because they refuse to affirm the gender identity of a child who is experiencing gender dysphoria.' The bill also 'shields parents who refuse to affirm gender transitioning from prosecution,' Galey told the committee. Parents could still be 'otherwise' prosecuted for child abuse or neglect, but their refusal to provide their child with gender-affirming care could not the be 'sole premise' of such a case against the parent, Galey said. Several Democrats questioned the need for the bill in committees Tuesday. 'Is this a problem in North Carolina, or are we solving a problem that doesn't actually exist here?' asked Sen. Julie Mayfield, an Asheville Democrat, in the Senate's rules committee. Galey, responding to Mayfield, said 'the situation has occurred in quite a few states now,' but that she was not aware of any instances in North Carolina. Earlier Tuesday, in another committee meeting, Galey cited legislation in California that would have allowed courts to consider, as one of many factors, whether a parent affirms their child's identity in making determinations about parental custody and visitation rights. Critics of that 2023 measure, which Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom ultimately vetoed, argued that it could have resulted in a child being taken from their parents — but legal experts and the bill's sponsor disputed that assertion, The Associated Press reported. Rep. Donnie Loftis, a Gastonia Republican who is a cosponsor of the House's bill, said in another committee Tuesday that the bill is a 'preemptive motion, for right now.' DHHS, Democrats oppose bill Under state law, children in foster care are guaranteed a 'bill of rights' for the quality and standards of the homes they are placed in. Among other requirements, the bill of rights states that children are entitled to 'a safe foster home free of violence, abuse, neglect, and danger.' Under the proposed Parents Protection Act, 'raising a child in a manner consistent with the child's biological sex, including any related mental health or medical decisions' would not be considered a violation of the bill of rights. Galey defended the bill by arguing that some parents might oppose gender-affirming care because of their religious beliefs, which could instruct them to believe that 'gender is a gift which is given from the Lord.' Those beliefs alone, Galey argued, should not prevent the parents from having a child placed in their care. If 'the person holding those beliefs wants to become a foster parent, I would ... assert that they should not be disqualified from that because they hold those beliefs.' But Janssen White, assistant secretary for government affairs at the state Department of Health and Human Services, noted that there are more parties involved in foster care than the foster parents themselves — including the child and the child's biological parents. White, who told senators that DHHS has concerns about the portions of the bill related to foster care, said biological parents retain 'the right to make decisions about how their children are raised.' DHHS officials are worried that the bill would undermine that right, White said. 'While foster parents serve a critical role in the child welfare system, the rights of all individuals and biological parents must must be maintained,' White said. DHHS is also concerned that the bill would undermine the ability of county-level social services agencies and courts 'to consider all necessary information when determining an appropriate placement that prioritizes the child's best interest, which is critical,' White said. Bill doesn't go 'both directions' Galey seemed to address that concern earlier in the Senate committee, when Mayfield asked her whether the bill would prevent the agencies that oversee foster care from placing a child with parents who are supportive of gender-affirming care, over a family who would not support such treatment. 'I think that we would all agree,' Galey replied, 'that in searching for appropriate care for a foster child, [departments of social services] should consider all relevant things which don't discriminate against people based on their religion or make them give up their personal speech.' Earlier Tuesday, Sen. Lisa Grafstein, a Raleigh Democrat, expressed concerns that the bill 'is not going both directions' — that is, it does not provide protections to parents who do support their child's gender transition, and who may be subject to criticism or claims of abuse from people outside of their family. Grafstein then noted that Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, in 2022 directed the state's Department of Family and Protective Services to investigate families who provided gender-affirming care to children, a move that has since been subject to court injunctions. Grafstein also questioned whether courts or social services agencies would be able to consider the 'supportiveness of the home' when those entities are deciding where to place a child, to which Galey responded by saying that 'the best interest of the child is the North Star.' 'This is why I think it should go both ways,' Grafstein said, adding that if the bill would prevent the consideration of a parent's opposition to gender-affirming care in placement decisions, 'then it should not be a factor that that family will provide gender-affirmative care.' 'If we're trying to address the concern that gender identity issues will come into play in the assessments, then I think there's a way for us to address that, you know, in a way that's neutral as to how the courts should view the family involved,' Grafstein said. The House's Wednesday calendar had not been announced late Tuesday, but it is likely the chamber will take up its version of the bill later in the week.
