puberty blockers: Last News

writing on behalf of the 8-1 majority, found that while “fit parents” have a right to raise their children without government interference, that right is not absolute.The ban on gender-affirming care was approved by Texas lawmakers on a largely party-line vote, with Republicans pushing for the restrictions.Under the law, doctors are prohibited from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapy to youth suffering from gender dysphoria. Doctors who violate the law are subject to disciplinary action and will have their medical license revoked by the Texas Medical Board.

said Democrats didn’t “whip” the NDAA vote or advise their caucus members to adopt a specific position, instead allowing individual members to vote their conscience.Jeffries claimed there were “a lot of positive things” within the NDAA that had bipartisan support but also acknowledged the bill contained some “troubling” positions.House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) hailed the bill’s various provisions, including a pay raise for junior service members and improved housing for military families. He also fully endorsed more controversial provisions, including the ban on gender-affirming care for minor dependents and a prohibition on the teaching of “critical race theory” at military academies.The bill now heads to the U.S.

Amid right-wing legislative moves as heated as any in the U.S., Britain’s Conservative government, via the Dept. of Health and Social Care, closed out May with an emergency ban on drugs collectively referred to as “puberty blockers,” as reported by the U.K.’s LGBT Them news site.

exceptions for intersex children or children with hormonal deficiencies, who would still be allowed to receive the exact same therapies that are prohibited for transgender children.Critics of such provisions say it exposes the hypocrisy of bills restricting gender-affirming care, in that only children identifying as transgender are targeted, while intersex children are instead “forced” to conform to a certain binary gender presentation for the comfort of larger society.Additionally, intersex children are often subjected to surgical interventions when they are just days old — which not only eliminates a patient’s ability to consent, but may increase a minor’s gender dysphoria if doctors and parents choose a gender presentation that does not match their gender identity.The ban on gender-affirming care was passed by Republicans in October, along with two other bills targeting transgender participation in high school and collegiate sports. At the time, Evers threatened to veto any measure targeting the LGBTQ community, as reported by AM news radio outlet WTMJ.“This type of legislation, and the rhetoric beget by pursuing it, harms LGBTQ people and kids’ mental health, emboldens anti-LGBTQ hate and violence, and threatens the safety and dignity of LGBTQ Wisconsinites,” Evers wrote in his veto message.

The News & Observer.The law bans minors from accessing gender-affirming treatments and threatens medical providers who assist transgender minors in accessing them with the loss of their license. It also prohibits state funds, including Medicaid dollars, from being used to cover the cost of gender-affirming care.

vacated a lower court’s injunction blocking state authorities from enforcing a similar law in Alabama.In a decision criticized by LGBTQ advocates, Circuit Judge Barbara Lagoa, a Trump appointee, ruled that the district court had applied the wrong standard when determining whether to issue an injunction blocking the law.Lagoa argued that there is no constitutional right of parents to “treat [one’s] children with transitioning medications subject to medically accepted standards,” as argued by plaintiffs.This comes even though the Supreme Court, in numerous other legal battles, has ruled parents possess a fundamental right to raise their children as they see fit.As a result of Lagoa’s opinion, the Alabama law was allowed to go into effect. State authorities can punish doctors who prescribe gender-affirming treatments to minors suffering from gender dysphoria.

Texas Tribune.The law was challenged by a group of plaintiffs, including five families with transgender children, three doctors specializing in transgender care, a national LGBTQ advocacy organization, and an organization for LGBTQ health professionals. The plaintiffs argued that the ban on gender-affirming care discriminates against transgender youth, infringes on parents’ right to make medical decisions they believe are in their children’s best interests, and violates doctors’ freedom to practice medicine.In her ruling, Cantú Hexsel agreed with the plaintiffs, finding that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in proving the law “interferes with Texas families’ private decisions and strips Texas parents … of the right to seek, direct, and provide medical care for their children.”“The evidence before the Court does not support the conclusion the Act protects the health or wellbeing of minors,” Cantú Hexsel wrote.

order issued Sunday, U.S. District Judge Sarah Geraghty, of the Northern District of Georgia, said the law’s provision prohibiting medical professionals from prescribing hormone therapy for such patients was “substantially likely to violate the Equal Protection Clause,” reports CNN.Under the law, which went into effect on July 1, medical providers are prohibited from recommending gender-affirming care to any minor, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, or gender confirmation surgery — the latter of which is rarely performed on minors.

WVLA.“In eight years as a Democratic governor with a Republican legislature, I have issued 319 vetoes. More than 99% of those vetoes have been sustained.

temporary injunction prohibiting the state from seeking to enforce Section 4 of Senate Bill 150, a sweeping anti-LGBTQ bill that, in addition to barring gender-affirming medical care for minors, restricts which restroom and locker room facilities transgender students can use, allowing teachers and other students to misgender trans-identifying minors, and prohibits certain types of classroom instruction on LGBTQ-related topics and topics related to sexuality, HIV, or other sexually-transmitted diseases.The measure was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear in March over concerns that it infringed not only on LGBTQ students’ right to freedom of expression and equal protection under the law, but the parental rights parents who choose to affirm their children’s identities.In issuing the injunction, Hale sided with the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky and the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which sued to overturn the law on behalf of seven families with transgender children.

similar law passed in Arizona last year that bans gender-affirming surgeries for minors — which is less severe than bans on all types of gender-affirming care that have passed in 18 other states over the past two years.The lawsuit challenging the law, signed by Gov. Eric Holcomb in April, was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of four transgender youth and their families, a physician who specializes in gender-affirming care, and a health care clinic offering itself out to individuals suffering from gender dysphoria, a condition where a person’s anatomy does not match the gender by which they identify. “Because Plaintiffs have some likelihood of success on the merits of constitutional claims, a preliminary injunction is in the public interest,” Hanlon wrote in his ruling.

rule, which prohibits minors from receiving hormone therapies, puberty-blocking drugs, or gender confirmation surgery, was adopted on March 16, based on guidance from the Florida Department of Health.The Florida Board of Osteopathic Medicine is expected to adopt an identical rule later this month, and the state has already barred Medicaid from covering gender-affirming treatments for transgender adults wishing to transition.That guidance discourages transgender minors from transitioning — not only medically, but socially, warning medical practitioners that minors with gender dysphoria should not be allowed to present or dress in a manner that does not match their assigned sex at birth.But those restrictions are now leading some parents of transgender or nonbinary minors to consider fleeing Florida in order to ensure their children can present themselves as the gender with which they identify.One of those parents, Heather St. Amand, a Tampa Bay area resident whose lived in the state for nearly her entire life, says the state’s recent decisions targeting those who receive gender-affirming care is motivating her to leave the state, reports Tampa Bay area CBS affiliate WTSP.“For my daughter, if she hadn’t received gender-affirming care when she did, I don’t know that she would still be here,” St.

debunked theory that claims young people — especially those assigned female at birth, and those who claim to have so-called “autism” or similar neurological or developmental disorders — will identify as transgender due to “social contagion” or peer pressure. The newly enacted law makes Mississippi the sixth state to pass either a complete or partial ban on gender-affirming care, although complete bans in other states, such as Alabama and Arkansas, have been halted as lawsuits challenging those laws work their way through the courts.Other states, such as Utah and Arizona, have enacted partial bans, blocking all surgical treatments on minors. Utah’s law also imposes a permanent moratorium on puberty blockers for any youth who has not already been receiving hormonal interventions for at least six months.The passage of the Mississippi law continues the trend of Republican-dominated legislatures and Republican governors taking aggressive action to prohibit doctors from providing gender-affirming care to trans-identifying minors.A similar law signed by South Dakota Gov.