House Republicans Introduce Bill to Block Federal Funding for Hospitals Performing Sex-Change Surgeries on Minors
A new bill introduced by House Republicans aims to restrict federal funding to hospitals that provide sex-change surgeries and hormone therapies to minors. Spearheaded by Representative Dan Crenshaw of Texas, the legislation targets the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program, which allocates funds to medical centers to support the training of new pediatric physicians. The bill has garnered support from interest groups Do No Harm and Genspect, organizations that advocate for evidence-based medical practices and challenge prevailing narratives surrounding gender-affirming care for minors.
Crenshaw framed the bill as a measure to uphold basic medical ethics and protect vulnerable children from potentially harmful interventions. He argued that some medical centers have prioritized ideology over genuine patient care, leading to a betrayal of those who have been silenced and harmed by the system. "We’re standing for basic medical ethics and recognizing those who have been silenced and betrayed by a system that put ideology ahead of genuine care," Crenshaw stated. "Medicine should be grounded in truth and healing—not in false promises that cause lasting harm."
The legislation proposes to reauthorize the Children’s Hospital Graduate Medical Education Payment Program through fiscal year 2030. However, it includes a provision that would prohibit the allocation of funds to any children’s hospital that, during the preceding fiscal year, provided specific procedures or drugs to individuals under 18 years of age for the purpose of changing their body to no longer correspond to their sex.
This would effectively deny federal funding to hospitals that offer gender-affirming care, including surgeries and hormone therapies, to transgender minors.
Do No Harm Medical Director Dr. Kurt Miceli echoed Crenshaw’s concerns, asserting that taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund what he characterized as "unscientific sex-change procedures on minors." He emphasized the importance of protecting children by ensuring that federally funded graduate medical education programs do not engage in practices that are deemed harmful. "The American taxpayer should not fund hospitals that perform unscientific sex-change procedures on minors," Miceli stated. "Representative Crenshaw’s bill is important to help protect our children by ensuring federally funded graduate medical education programs do not engage in these harmful practices."
The bill’s introduction coincides with what conservatives have termed "DeTrans Awareness Day," a day dedicated to raising awareness about individuals who have detransitioned, or reversed their gender transition. The issue of transgender medical care for minors has become a contentious battleground in the ongoing culture war between the right and left, with both sides holding firm to their respective positions.
The debate extends beyond medical interventions to encompass transgender minors’ participation in school sports. This issue has sparked heated debate, with some Democrats expressing reservations about what they perceive as the party’s intolerance of dissenting viewpoints on the matter.
Notably, California Governor Gavin Newsom recently voiced his opinion on the issue of biological men competing in women’s sports. In a podcast interview with conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Newsom acknowledged that allowing transgender men to participate in women’s sports is "deeply unfair." "I think it’s an issue of fairness. I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness," he said.
The proposed bill is expected to face strong opposition from Democrats and LGBTQ+ advocacy groups, who argue that it would deny essential medical care to transgender youth and undermine their right to self-determination. These groups contend that gender-affirming care is medically necessary and can significantly improve the mental health and well-being of transgender individuals. They also assert that decisions regarding medical treatment should be made by patients and their families in consultation with qualified medical professionals, not by politicians.
The debate over transgender medical care for minors is complex and emotionally charged, involving deeply held beliefs about gender identity, parental rights, and the role of government in healthcare decisions. The outcome of this legislative effort will likely have significant implications for transgender youth and the medical professionals who provide them with care. It is important to note that both sides of this debate present data and perspectives aimed at supporting their claims. The long-term effects of hormonal and surgical interventions on minors are still being studied, while the potential psychological harm of denying gender-affirming care is also a critical consideration.
