Hospitals pause gender-affirming care after executive order

Last month, Trump issued an executive order that directed federal departments and agencies to ensure hospitals and medical institutions that received federal funding stop providing gender-affirming care to individuals under the age of 19. This care includes puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or surgical procedures for transgender and gender nonconforming children.

"It is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another and it will rigorously enforce all laws that prohibit or limit these destructive and life-altering procedures," the order reads.

In response to the order, several major U.S. hospitals suspended gender-affirming medications and gender-affirming procedures for those under 19. Virginia Commonwealth University Health, Children's Hospital of Richmond, Children's National Hospital, Denver Health, Children's Hospital Los Angeles, and NYU Langone were among the hospitals that stopped providing gender-affirming care or canceled appointments for the services.

Other hospitals, such as Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, are currently reviewing the order to determine the potential impact to their patients. "Our team will continue to advocate for access to medically necessary care, grounded in science and compassion for the patient-families we are so privileged to serve," Lurie said in a statement.

Protests and lawsuits emerge in response

After some hospitals suspended gender-affirming care, patients and family members marched in protest. According to Axios, protestors marched at UVA Health in Virginia and Children's National Hospital in Washington, D.C., over the weekend. There were also hundreds of people who marched to NYU Langone's Tisch Hospital to protest the cancellation of gender-affirming care for children.

In response to the executive order, over a dozen Democratic attorneys general issued a joint statement emphasizing their support for gender-affirming care for transgender youth. The statement was signed by the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. 

"Gender-affirming care is essential, life-saving medical treatment that supports individuals in living as their authentic selves," the attorneys general wrote, adding that the executive order "is wrong on the science and the law."

In New York, state attorney general Letitia James (D) also sent out a letter to healthcare providers and other organizations warning them that complying with the White House's executive order could violate state antidiscrimination laws.

"Regardless of the availability of federal funding, we write to further remind you of your obligations to comply with New York state laws," the letter states. "Electing to refuse services to a class of individuals based on their protected status, such as withholding the availability of services from transgender individuals based on their gender identity or their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, while offering such services to cisgender individuals, is discrimination under New York law."

The American Civil Liberties Union, Lambda Legal, ACLU of Maryland, and private law firms Hogan Lovells and Jenner & Block filed the suit on the behalf of two transgender young adults and five families of transgender children. PFLAG National, as well as GLMA, the largest national association of LGBTQ+ and allied health professionals, are also plaintiffs in the case.

According to Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and healthcare strategist for Lambda Legal, the executive orders are "morally reprehensible and patently unlawful."

"The federal government — particularly, this administration — has no right to insert itself into conversations and decision-making that rightly belongs only to patients, their families, and their medical providers," he said in a statement. "This broadside condemns transgender young people to extreme and unnecessary pain and suffering, and for minors, it subjects their parents to agonized futility in caring for their child — all while denying them access to the same medically recommended health care that is readily available to their non-transgender peers."

Currently, most major medical associations, including the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Psychological Association, all support access to transition care for children and oppose restrictions to these services.