By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Officials with the clinic, which has served LGBTQ+ Bostonians since 1971, say they made the move to avoid losing federal funding under the anti-trans Trump administration.
There is "quite good evidence" that people have benefited from the care, says scientist Gordon Guyatt.
It's the first New England state with a ban.
Kaiser will stop offering the surgeries as of August 29, but said that it will still offer other gender-affirming care.
Did the Skrmetti ruling give states carte blanche to discriminate against all transgender people?
The decision will impact LGBTQ+ populations in Idaho, North Carolina, Oklahoma and West Virginia.
Sotomayor said the ruling will invite "untold harm to transgender children and the parents and families who love them."
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services falsely claims such care is not evidence-based.
Kansas' gender-affirming care ban "impermissibly infringes" on parents' "fundamental right to the care, custody, and control of their children," a new lawsuit asserts.
The ban violates the rights to privacy and free speech guaranteed by the Montana Constitution, and it amounts to discrimination based on viewpoint, Judge Jason Marks wrote.
The new law also redefines sex, threatens doctors with the loss of their medical licenses, and allows minors to sue in court.
A new post on the White House website calls this care "chemical and surgical mutilation" and "immoral, unjust, and disproven practices." None of that is true.
The ban interferes with parental rights, according to a state-level court.
The recommendations, released by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany, come at a time when U.S. politicians erroneously claim that Europe is "pulling back" on transgender care.
Gender-affirming care is banned for transgender youth when it's mainly cisgender people who use it, and when it has a significantly lower regret rate than all other major surgeries, tattoos, and children.
Senate Bill 63 sought to ban gender-affirming care for transgender minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria while allowing the same treatments to continue for cisgender minors with other conditions.
He's going after diversity programs, transgender students, and more with executive orders that will most definitely be contested in court.
Trans children only want to be their authentic selves, and this action will have severe repercussions, John Casey writes.
The study comes at a time when opponents of this care have often exaggerated how common it is.
Government officials said the medication poses an "unacceptable safety risk," but study often referenced by British officials about the treatment has come under criticism.
