In a move that has sparked controversy and concern among LGBTQ+ advocates, the Department of Health and Human Services (H.H.S.) has announced a review of policies related to gender-affirming care for transgender youth. This review, which comes on the heels of several states passing laws restricting access to such care, has raised fears that the federal government may be considering similar measures.
According to a statement released by the H.H.S., the review will focus on ensuring that federal funds are being used in accordance with the law and will examine whether current policies adequately protect the well-being of transgender youth. While the department has not yet announced any specific changes to existing policies, critics worry that the review could pave the way for additional restrictions on gender-affirming care.
Gender-affirming care, which includes hormone therapy and surgery to help transgender individuals transition to their identified gender, has been shown to have significant benefits for mental health and overall well-being. Studies have found that transgender youth who receive gender-affirming care are less likely to experience depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation.
Despite the proven benefits of gender-affirming care, several states have recently passed laws that restrict access to these treatments for minors. In Arkansas, for example, a law was passed earlier this year that prohibits doctors from providing gender-affirming care to anyone under the age of 18. Similar laws have been proposed in other states, prompting outrage from LGBTQ+ advocates and medical professionals.
Critics of the H.H.S. review argue that it is a thinly veiled attempt to appease conservative lawmakers and anti-LGBTQ+ groups. They point to the recent wave of anti-trans legislation as evidence that transgender rights are under attack in the United States. According to Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, the H.H.S. review is “part of a broader effort to erase transgender people from public life.”
Supporters of the review, however, argue that it is necessary to ensure that federal funds are being used responsibly and that the well-being of transgender youth is being protected. They point to concerns about the long-term effects of hormone therapy on young people and argue that more research is needed to fully understand the implications of gender-affirming care.
The debate over gender-affirming care is not limited to the United States. In the United Kingdom, for example, a recent court ruling made it illegal for children under the age of 16 to consent to puberty blockers, a common form of gender-affirming care. The ruling has sparked a heated debate among medical professionals, with some arguing that it will harm transgender youth and others supporting the decision as a necessary safeguard.
As the H.H.S. review moves forward, it is likely to continue to generate controversy and debate. LGBTQ+ advocates are calling on the Biden administration to reaffirm its commitment to transgender rights and to reject any attempts to restrict access to gender-affirming care. Meanwhile, conservative groups are pushing for tighter restrictions on these treatments, citing concerns about the long-term effects on young people.
The outcome of the H.H.S. review remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the debate over gender-affirming care is far from over. As policymakers, medical professionals, and advocates continue to grapple with these complex issues, the well-being of transgender youth hangs in the balance.