Features

/ / / /

As HHS secretary, RFK Jr. would be a direct threat to LGBTQ+ health

Among Donald Trump’s Cabinet nominees, it’s hard to choose who is the most dangerous to LGBTQ+ rights. But it’s easy to pick out who is the most dangerous to LGBTQ+ health: Robert Kennedy Jr. As the nominee to run the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Kennedy has the potential to make literal life-and-death decisions about the nation’s health. But his crackpot ideas are a direct threat to the very issues that can matter most to the LGBTQ+ community. 

Much has been made of Kennedy’s conspiracy-ridden, fringe beliefs. He believes that vaccines cause autism, even though abundant evidence has shown no link. He has said that COVID-19 “is targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people” and “the people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese.” He thinks fluoride in the water supply, which is proven to reduce dental disease, can cause everything from arthritis to bone cancer. He believes that Prozac is a reason for the outbreak of school shootings. 

But not as much has been made about how Kennedy’s ideas have dire implications for the health of LGBTQ+ Americans. For one thing, the would-be secretary of HHS is an AIDS denialist. In his 2021 book blasting former public health official Anthony Fauci, Kennedy sneers at the “theology that HIV is the sole cause of AIDS.”

“No one has been able to point to a study that demonstrates their hypothesis using accepted scientific proofs,” he says of the thousands of scientists who have demonstrated beyond a doubt the connection between the virus and the disease. 

Perhaps just as disturbing as the stench of homophobia that underpins what Kennedy thinks is the reason for AIDS. He cites “lifestyle exposures,” including poppers, “a popular drug among promiscuous gays.” All in all, it wasn’t the virus killing people but “compulsive homosexual behavior,” Kennedy told podcaster Joe Rogan just last year.

That was the argument that the right wing used during the Reagan administration to delay and deny helping the thousands of gay men who were dying. Kennedy seems happy to revisit it, which is a chilling hint at what he might do as secretary. 

For example, if MPOX comes back with a roar, what would Kennedy do? He’s already suggested that its emergency was a conspiracy among the WHO, Big Pharma, and Bill Gates. He already hates vaccines. Would he mobilize the force of the government to stop the spread of the disease in the gay community, when he seems prone to blame the victim to begin with?

Meanwhile, you can forget about federal help for an AIDS vaccine. Kennedy doesn’t believe in the virus and he doesn’t believe in vaccines, so he’s never going to support more funding for that effort. Worse still, he will be spreading doubt about HIV, potentially leading to unsafe behavior and an increase in infections.

Then there’s transgender health care. Kennedy is blatantly anti-trans. “I am against people participating in women’s sports who are biologically male,” Kennedy said on CNN.

Moreover, his ideas about gender dysphoria are every bit as bizarre as most of his other beliefs. He thinks chemicals in the water are making kids trans. 

“There’s atrazine throughout our water supply,” Kennedy insists. “If you, in a lab, put atrazine in a tank full of frogs, it will chemically castrate and forcibly feminize every frog in there. And 10 percent of the frogs, the male frogs, will turn into fully viable females able to produce viable eggs. If it’s doing that to frogs, there’s a lot of other evidence that it’s doing it to human beings as well.”

Kennedy shares this scientific theory with that well-known medical researcher, Alex Jones. 

It’s one thing for your crazy uncle to share his looney theories with you at the family dinner table. It’s entirely enough for him to have control of the federal apparatus where he can do something about them. 

Kennedy has said that youth experiencing gender dysphoria should not be allowed medical treatment until they are adults.  

“We must protect our children,” he said last May. That puts Kennedy squarely on the side of the rightwing effort to put legal restrictions in place around care for transgender youth. 

As secretary of HHS, he will be in a powerful position to issue guidelines that will make it harder – if not impossible – for trans youth to get medical care. He could take his beliefs a step further and push for even broader restrictions regardless of age. 

This is the man that Donald Trump wants to “go wild on health.” Even the servile Republicans in the Senate are having a hard time with Kennedy’s nomination.

But that doesn’t mean that his nomination won’t be approved. If Trump decides to make a show of his power, Republicans will buckle. 

Americans, especially LGBTQ+ Americans, will be the ones to suffer the consequences.

/ /

Trans inmates are being forced to cut their hair short & undergo breast exam’s in Florida

,

The ACLU of Florida is suing the state’s Department of Corrections over a new anti-transgender policy that will restrict trans prisoners’ access to gender-affirming medical care as well as their ability to express their gender identity.

According to a report from The Marshall Project and the Tampa Bay Times, a federal judge in Tallahassee held a preliminary hearing in the case on December 9. The ACLU of Florida has asked the judge to block enforcement of the policy, calling it an unconstitutional ban on gender-affirming care. A ruling is expected in the weeks ahead.

Under the new policy, Florida prisons will only provide inmates diagnosed with gender dysphoria with therapy. Trans inmates will not have access to gender-affirming hormone therapy except “in rare instances” when it is deemed “necessary to comply with the U.S. Constitution or a court decision.”

“Unaddressed psychiatric issues and unaddressed childhood trauma could lead to a misdiagnosis of gender dysphoria,” the policy claims. Gender-affirming hormone therapy, it continues, “may be requested by persons experiencing short-termed delusions or beliefs which may later be changed and reversed.”

Daniel Tilley, lead attorney from the ACLU of Florida, compared the policy’s therapy requirements to so-called “conversion therapy.”

In court documents, Danny Martinez, the state prison system’s medical director, said he based the department’s new policies on a 2022 report commissioned by Florida’s Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA). The report focused primarily on the effects of gender-affirming care on children and its findings contradicted the overwhelming consensus of all major medical organizations, which hold that gender-affirming healthcare is necessary and frequently lifesaving for transgender individuals suffering from gender dysphoria.

The 2022 report resulted in the state banning healthcare providers from billing the state’s Medicaid program for gender-affirming care. But in June 2023, a federal judge struck down the Florida Medicaid ban, finding that the AHCA report was “a biased effort to justify a predetermined outcome, not a fair analysis of the evidence,” and its conclusion was “not supported by the evidence and was contrary to generally accepted medical standards.”

The Florida Department of Corrections’ new policy was announced in September during meetings in which incarcerated transgender women were told that trans inmates would be “reevaluated” to determine whether they would still be allowed access to gender-affirming healthcare and other accommodations that they were already receiving. According to the Tampa Bay Times, inmates said they were not told how prison officials would determine whether they would still be allowed access to care. While so far no inmates reported being taken off hormone therapy, more than a dozen incarcerated trans women told the paper they had already been forced to cut their hair short.

In court filings and interviews, incarcerated trans women in Florida prisons also reported being subjected to breast examinations to determine whether or not they would still be allowed access to bras.

“It felt like I was being treated less than human,” Josie Takach, a trans inmate at a Florida men’s facility, said of the examination. Takach said her undergarments, now considered contraband, were confiscated. “I feel like I’m 12 years old again, sneaking around wearing a bra.”

Sara Maatsch, who is also incarcerated in a Florida men’s prison, said that her gender dysphoria diagnosis was now considered a serious psychiatric illness. She was told she would have to be moved to a more restrictive facility with fewer work and programming opportunities to continue receiving treatment.

Mariko Sundwall told The Marshall Project that after spending 10 days in solitary confinement for refusing to cut her hair, a prison barber buzzed her hair short while she was handcuffed.

“I’m very sad and depressed. I feel like they’re taking away my identity,” Jada Edwards, another trans inmate, said of the buzz cut she was forced to receive.

As The Marshall Project notes, previous court decisions have held that prisons in the U.S. are required under the Constitution to provide gender-affirming care as needed.

University of California San Francisco psychiatrist Dan Karasic, who helped develop international standards for treatment of transgender people, told The Marshal Project that Florida’s new anti-trans prison policies were “a fig leaf on [the state’s] efforts to ban gender-affirming care.”

“They are really trying to skirt the law, as determined by multiple courts, that gender-affirming medical and surgical care must be provided when medically necessary,” Karasic said.

The battle over Florida’s anti-trans prison policies follows the 2024 presidential campaign, which saw Donald Trump’s campaign target Democratic nominee Kamala Harris with ads claiming the Vice President “supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners.”

Subscribe to the LGBTQ Nation newsletter and be the first to know about the latest headlines shaping LGBTQ+ communities worldwide.

/ /

These Are the Groups Fighting Access to Health Care for Trans Youth

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments yesterday in the case of U.S. v. Skrmetti, a significant case that may profoundly affect the accessibility of health care for transgender youth and their families across the country, as well as the autonomy of health care providers to deliver such care.

The plaintiffs, families of transgender youth and a medical provider, are challenging Tennessee’s law banning health care such as hormone therapy and puberty-pausing medications for transgender youth under 18, even when that treatment is medically warranted and sanctioned by their parents. The same treatments are not banned for cisgender (non-transgender) youth. 

Following oral arguments, CNN’s Brianna Keilar hosted Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) president Kristen Waggoner. ADF was described as a Christian legal organization that is representing other states with similar cases. In fact, ADF is an anti-LGBTQ hate group, as designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and has a history of funding and representing cases targeting LGBTQ people, youth and protections. ADF has fought alongside the first Trump administration’s Justice Department to legalize discrimination against LGBTQ people:

  • at work (Bostock)
  • against same-sex couples trying to buy a wedding cake (Masterpiece)
  • couples looking to adopt children (Fulton)
  • 303 Creative, a case that the Washington Post reported included “manufacturing lawsuits” to find plaintiffs to sue, ending up with a website designer who was never asked to perform services for LGBTQ clients. 

No transgender people appeared to challenge Waggoner’s claims, including the baseless assertion that patients are incapable of understanding the consequences of medical care. Transgender youth seeking care must have parental consent to receive it.

ADF is among several groups with a long history of activism against LGBTQ Americans that filed amicus briefs in the Skrmetti case. Media reporting on the case and support for the bans that are supported by every major medical association can report on the records of the groups and their longstanding animus against LGBTQ people. GLAAD has documented these records on the GLAAD Accountability Project, including:

Family Research Council (FRC)

—Advocated for President Trump’s ban on transgender people in the military and bragged of White House connections just prior to the ban.

—Publishes brochures, videos, and other materials for parents and other school anti-trans activists, such as the 2016 “Parents Guide to the Transgender Movement in Education,” which misgenders trans people and encourages parents to oppose gender-affirming care backed by every major medical association as best practice, lifesaving care

—Supports so-called “conversion therapy,” and encourages children to ignore classmates’ pronouns, despite research showing that using accurate pronouns improves mental health. 

—Describes the Equality Act, which would provide comprehensive protections from discrimination for LGBTQ people as “unequal, unfair, and unjust.” 

—Filed an amicus brief to the Supreme Court against marriage equality in support of California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act, both since nullified.

—Baselessly claimed that “one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.” 

—Promotes the “ex-gay” movement as a way to combat LGBTQ civil rights measures and refutesthe claims of victims of abusive, so-called “conversion therapy.” 

—More on the Family Research Council

American College of Pediatricians

The American College of Pediatricians

—Fringe medical group that split with the mainstream American Academy of Pediatrics to protest its support of LGBTQ couples adopting children

—Colluded with the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) using junk science to propagate anti-transgender policy

—Made false claims about evidence-based gender-affirming care to support Texas authorities targeting families of transgender children

—Sued the Department of Health and Human Services with Alliance Defending Freedom objecting to gender-affirming care for any patient including children

—Made false claims about LGBTQ people’s mental health and fitness as parents, claims debunked by the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Psychological Association, and the American Medical Association

—Supports the discredited and dangerous practice of “conversion therapy” for LGBTQ youth

—Vile rhetoric falsely linking LGBTQ people to pedophilia and “grooming”

—False and baseless claims that “transgenderism” [sic] “increasingly looks like a cultish religion”

—More on The American College of Pediatricians

Kristen Waggoner (Alliance Defending Freedom ADF) and Lorie Smith
ADF’s Kristen Waggoner with plaintiff Lorie Smith

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

—Colluded with the American College of Pediatricians (ACP) to shore up anti-transgender policy efforts and legal arguments with junk science

—Multiple lawsuits, including false claims, to prevent transgender students from participating in sports

—Represented multiple educators who refused to use accurate pronouns and names of transgender students. Research shows using accurate pronouns and names reduces suicide risk for vulnerable youth.

—Testified in the Ohio legislature to spread misinformation about gender affirming care for youth, which is supported by every major medical association

—Argued in court for the criminalization of homosexuality in amicus briefs for the U.S. Supreme Court case Lawrence v. Texas

—As early as 2010 began sending letters threatening libraries to ban books with LGBTQ inclusive content and characters

—Represented “conversion therapy” practitioners in lawsuits, a practice discredited by mental health and medical professionals as harmful and ineffective.

—Helped draft bills in Idaho, Montana, and other states targeting trans youth participation in school sports

—Drafted the model “Student Privacy Act” legislation that led to a wave of “bathroom bills” in 2017

—Defended state-enforced sterilization for transgender Europeans

—For years has promoted the idea of “homosexual agenda,” a purportedly evil plan to abolish Christianity and, eventually, civilization through LGBTQ people’s efforts to secure legal equality

—Falsely declared that LGBTQ people are more likely to engage in pedophilia

—Multiple efforts to legalize discrimination against LGBTQ couples by businesses

—More on Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF)

Women’s Liberation Front

—Advised Ohio lawmakers on strategies to advance bills banning transgender students from using bathrooms matching their gender identity, and prohibiting transgender health care for youth.

—Created the “Women’s Bill of Rights,” legislation that defines sex strictly as the biological sex assigned at birth, and excludes transgender identities. Versions of this bill have been introduced in multiple states (and have reached the U.S House and Senate) to restrict the rights of transgender individuals.

—In an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, misgendered the plaintiff writing, “Simply, Aimee Stephens is a man.” 

—Opposes the Equality Act

—Filed a joint brief in opposition to a lower court ruling in favor of Gavin Grimm, a trans boy who desired to use the boys’ restroom at his high school.

—More on Women’s Liberation Front

These organizations’ so-called “concerns” about trans kids are not new, and their anti-LGBTQ actions represent a longheld pattern. These groups have a long history of promoting discrimination against queer and transgender people. 

The media have a responsibility to do their homework on their guests including researching and including the history of groups advocating against LGBTQ people. The GLAAD Accountability Project has profiles of public figures and groups and their records of targeting LGBTQ people. Journalists should challenge any unfounded and baseless claims. Media coverage of the issues facing transgender people should include the voices of transgender people.

Every major medical association and world health authority supports healthcare for transgender people. Accurately report there is widely-held consensus about the safety and efficacy of this mainstream care. Statements from medical associations and world health authorities here.

/ /

Defense bill banning trans care for minors could put some families in ‘survival mode’

The House passed a massive defense spending bill Wednesday with a provision that bars the military’s health care program from covering transition-related care for minors. If it passes, some families said it would be devastating and could force them out of the military.

The National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass $895 billion bill, sets Pentagon and defense policies for the next year. Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., pushed to add the new provision regarding trans care, which states that “affirming hormone therapy, puberty blockers, and other medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization may not be provided to a child under the age of 18” under Tricare, the military’s health program. 

The bill passed the House 281-140 Wednesday, with 200 Republicans and 81 Democrats voting yes, while 124 Democrats and 16 Republicans voted no. The Senate will vote on the bill next week, and then it will be sent to President Joe Biden — who would need to veto the entire package if he wanted to block the trans care element.

If the NDAA is signed into law, it would mark one of the first times Congress has aggressively attempted to pass a federal statute targeting trans people. 

Johnson called the bill’s passage in the House “an important win for our troops,” noting that it would provide pay increases to about half of enlisted servicemembers and improve military housing, among other investments. 

“We also believe it’s important to refocus the Pentagon on military lethality, not radical woke ideology,” he said in a statement Wednesday. “This legislation permanently bans transgender treatment for minors, prohibits critical race theory in military academies, ends the DEI bureaucracy, and combats antisemitism.”

However, some military families with trans children disagree that the provision regarding trans care will improve the military.

One active duty member of the Air Force, who has served for more than two decades and has a trans daughter who is receiving treatment for gender dysphoria through Tricare, said the bill sends a “mixed message,” because it could help some military families while harming others.

“The reason why the military has some of the amazing benefits that we do is so that when we are called to action or we are called to war, we can focus entirely on the mission and the task at hand, because we know that our family and our home life is secure and safe,” said the service member, who requested anonymity out of fear of facing repercussions at work for speaking to the press. “If you want to ensure we remain the world’s most effective fighting force, you should not take away care for our military members and their dependents.”

The service member and his spouse said their teenage daughter came out to them about four years ago. About two years ago, she underwent at least six months of psychological evaluations and received other doctors’ opinions before beginning hormone therapy.

“Once she was able to receive the gender-affirming care, it was like the puzzle pieces fell into place,” the service member’s spouse said. “We could see her, she was happy, her grades got better, she started to make so many more friends. It was beautiful. It was a veil that got removed, and then you could fully see your kid and celebrate them.”

The service member said that if the NDAA passes with the provision regarding trans care for minors, he would consider finding supplemental insurance or paying out of pocket for his daughter’s care, but that doing so would strain his family’s budget. He said the out-of-pocket costs would vary depending on whether they can get supplemental insurance. The average cost of estrogen without insurance can fall between $20 to $200 per month depending on the dose and delivery method. 

The restriction and its associated out-of-pocket costs, his spouse added, would put some military families “into survival mode instead of being ready for the mission ahead.”

The service member said that the restriction would definitely “affect my decision whether we continue to serve.” 

“I have a strong desire and propensity to continue to serve and to continue to give back to the military, but if I lose access to care for my family, my family’s got to come first,” he said.

Johnson did not return a request for comment regarding the potential effects of the provision on some military families. 

It’s unclear how many families would be affected by the provision. But Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the former Armed Services chairman who is now the panel’s ranking member, said on the House floor Wednesday that there are about 4,000 minors currently within the military health system whose care would be taken away by the restriction. 

“[B]lanketly denying health care to people who need it — just because of a biased notion against transgender people — is wrong,” Smith said in a statement Tuesday. “The inclusion of this harmful provision puts the lives of children at risk and may force thousands of service members to make the choice of continuing their military service or leaving to ensure their child can get the health care they need.”

Cathy Marcello, the deputy director of the Modern Military Association of America, an organization that advocates for LGBTQ members of the military and veterans, said hundreds of the families the organization supports are frightened by the potential restriction. She added that Modern Military estimates that there are currently about 10,000 trans youth between 6 and 22 with parents who are in the military, based on the Defense Department’s estimate that there are 1.6 million military children.  

“Families are deciding right now if they will be able to afford care on their own, or if they can get out, or if they should live apart,” Marcello said. 

She added that 95% of the group’s membership reported altering their military career in some way because of state laws targeting LGBTQ people, according to a recent small internal poll of about 300 member families. She said the Tricare restriction would further affect where service members can live and how long they serve.

“Military families with trans kids have been serving for decades and it’s never been an issue,” she said. “To say to these many thousands of families that your sacrifice isn’t good enough, that your multiple combat deployments aren’t good enough and we don’t want you is unconscionable.”

/ /

Montana Supreme Court allows transgender care for minors to continue

The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a lower court ruling that temporarily blocked a state law prohibiting transition-related health care for minors. 

The suit, which was filed by two transgender teens and their families, as well as two providers of transition-related care, will now go to trial before Missoula County District Court Judge Jason Marks, who initially blocked the law in September 2023. 

The American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal, an LGBTQ legal advocacy group, which are representing the teens and providers, said the decision was a victory for the state’s trans youths. 

“Fortunately, the Montana Supreme Court understands the danger of the state interfering with critical healthcare,” Kell Olson, an attorney for Lambda Legal, said in a statement. “Because Montana’s constitutional protections are even stronger than their federal counterparts, transgender youth in Montana can sleep easier tonight knowing that they can continue to thrive for now, without this looming threat hanging over their heads.”

Chase Scheuer, press secretary for Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, said the office looks forward to “defending the case on its merits, which will include recent scientific developments ignored by this court.” 

“The Supreme Court has abandoned Montanans once again to rule in favor of their out-of-state political allies,” Scheuer said in an emailed statement. “In upholding the district court’s flawed decision to temporarily block a duly enacted law, the Supreme Court put the wellbeing of children — who have yet to reach puberty — at risk by allowing experimental treatments that could leave them to deal with serious and irreversible consequences for the rest of their lives to continue.”

Doctors treat gender dysphoria — the distress that results when a person’s gender identity is in conflict with their gender assigned at birth — on a case-by-case basis, but minors who do pursue medical transition begin puberty blockers, which temporarily stop puberty, at its onset. 

Montana’s Republican-controlled Legislature passed a law in April 2023 prohibiting health care providers from using puberty blockers, hormone therapy and surgery to treat minors with dysphoria. The law also prohibits Medicaid from covering such treatments for trans minors.

When Marks issued a preliminary injunction against the law last year, he wrotethat it was likely unconstitutional and that “barring access to gender-affirming care would negatively impact gender dysphoric minors’ mental and physical health.” 

He also noted that the same Legislature, which described puberty blockers and hormone therapy as “experimental,” had passed a law giving patients, including minors, the right to receive treatment with experimental drugs if they consent and the treatment is recommended by a health care provider, The Associated Press reported. 

In upholding the injunction, Montana Supreme Court Justice Beth Baker wrote in the majority opinion that the Legislature “did not make gender-affirming care unlawful,” nor “did it make the treatments unlawful for all minors,” as minors can still receive the treatments for other reasons. 

“Instead, it restricted a broad swath of medical treatments only when sought for a particular purpose,” Baker wrote, adding that the law “puts governmental regulation in the mix of an individual’s fundamental right ‘to make medical judgments affecting her or his bodily integrity and health in partnership with a chosen health care provider.’”

All seven state Supreme Court justices agreed with the decision to uphold the injunction. Two issued a separate concurring opinion, arguing that the court should have made clear that discrimination based on transgender status is a type of sex discrimination prohibited by the equal protection clause of Montana’s Constitution. One issued a partial dissent, arguing that the court should’ve allowed the portion of the law prohibiting Medicaid coverage of trans care for minors to take effect, because “there is no current federal mandate for Medicaid funding of gender-affirming care.” 

Montana is one of 26 states that has passed a law restricting transition-related care for minors, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ think tank. Montana garnered international headlines last year when state lawmakers were debating the law. State Rep. Zooey Zephyr, the first trans woman elected to Montana’s Legislature, was censured in a party-line vote after telling her colleagues that they would have blood on their hands if they supported the restriction on trans care.  

The U.S. Supreme Court took up such restrictions for the first time last week, when it heard arguments over a similar law in Tennessee. It is expected to issue a decision this summer.

/ /

This trans woman was forced into electroshock therapy. She just won a settlement.

,

A 28-year-old trans woman in China has won her lawsuit against the hospital and doctor that subjected her to three months of traumatic and painful electroshock conversion therapy treatments, the Guardian reports.

The woman, a performance artist who goes by the name Ling’er, said she hoped the victory would help others in the LGBTQ+ community protect their rights. 

“In China, the situation for transgender people is not very optimistic,” she said. “There’s a lack of protection for this group.”

Ling’er asserted in her suit that the enforced conversion therapy treatments had violated her personal rights. Her victory came with a small award of about $8,000 U.S.

Ling’er was taken to a hospital in Qinhuangdao City in 2022 after coming out to her parents as transgender the previous year. They were “very opposed” to her gender identity, Ling’er said, and “felt that I wasn’t mentally stable. So they sent me to a mental hospital.”

There, she was tied to a bed with restraints and diagnosed with “anxiety disorder and discordant sexual orientation.” Ling’er identifies as heterosexual.

She was kept in hospital for 97 days over her objections and subjected to seven sessions of electroshock therapy.

“It caused serious damage to my body,” Ling’er said. “Every time I underwent the treatment, I would faint … I didn’t agree to it, but I had no choice.”

Chinese law dictates patients can’t be forcibly subjected to psychiatric treatment barring a threat to their safety or others’.

Ling’er’s hospital physician said in testimony that she might pose a risk to the safety of her parents if they killed themselves because of her gender identity, according to a report in Chinese media.

The night before the electroshock treatments, Ling’er was restricted to a diet of bread and milk. During the treatments, her arms and legs were fixed and something was taped to her hands, Ling’er recalled. With each session, “as soon as the power was turned on, I fainted.” She says she suffers from heart arrhythmias in the aftermath.

During her internment, Ling’er was forced to cut her long hair and conform to a male gender identity.

“For three months, they forced me to wear men’s clothes step by step. It was painful and helpless for me,” she said.

There are a few precedents for Ling’er’s legal victory.

In 2017, a gay man in Henan province was awarded a small settlement after he was forced to stay in a psychiatric hospital for 19 days and take medications to “treat” his homosexuality.

In 2014, a judge ruled a facility falsely claimed it could “cure” a man’s homosexuality when he was subjected to hypnosis and electroshock therapy without consent.

While China removed homosexuality from an official list of psychiatric disorders in 2001, it retained a diagnosis for “sexual orientation distress,” leaving the door open for therapies claiming to cure it.

After she was discharged and returned home, Ling’er discovered that her parents had removed her women’s clothes and cosmetics and prepared a men’s wardrobe for her.

Months later, after Ling’er’s parents confiscated her hormone pills, she decided to leave her hometown. She packed a small pink suitcase, she said, found a place to stay for one night, and left by car the next day.

/ /

Experts detail what LGBTQ+ healthcare may look like under Donald Trump’s new administration

,

With President-elect Donald Trump just under two months away from taking office and a slew of troubling cabinet appointments making headlines — including anti-vax crank Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health & Human Services (HHS) Secretary — LGBTQ+ Americans are understandably concerned about what a second Trump administration will mean for our rights and healthcare.

In a recent interview with the Washington Blade, Human Rights Campaign (HRC) director of HIV and health equity Torrian Baskerville acknowledged the fears many LGBTQ+ people, particularly those who are Black, trans, and/or living with HIV, are experiencing around healthcare in light of both Trump’s rhetoric and the proposals laid out in Project 2025.

“While we are desiring and hoping for the best,” he said, “the reality is that things that we have seen, at least the rhetoric, hasn’t been hopeful. And so we’re just hoping that there are guardrails in place that help to maintain and control as best as possible some of the things that may be going on.”

Speaking prior to Trump’s announcement of Kennedy as his pick for HHS secretary, and of Marty Makary and former Rep. Dave Weldon (R-FL) to lead the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), respectively, HRC senior public policy advocate Matthew Rose weighed in on the importance of the incoming President’s choices for those positions.

“HHS will be very important for us,” Rose told the Blade. “Who they put at the Office of Civil Rights at HHS will be incredibly important for us. The Assistant Secretary for Health has, under Democratic administrations, and in Republican administrations, been a champion for us, sometimes.” Admiral Brett Giroir, Trump’s Assistant Secretary for Health during his first administration, Rose noted, “did what he could for us.”

While Rose said he’s less concerned with Trump’s pick to lead the National Institutes of Health — “unless they find someone really, really crazy” — he said that the FDA appointment “is a worry because it could change just how we view drugs and drug regulations and how those get approved.”

Trump’s pick for director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is also a concern, Rose said, “because the people who make the budget decide how money gets spent.”

On Monday, Trump nominated Russell Vought, described as a “key architect” of Project 2025, for his OMB director. In a recent interview with Democracy Now, ProPublica reporter Molly Redden indicated that Vought is likely to use the position to block funding for programs and organizations — like Planned Parenthood — that don’t align with Project 2025’s radical right-wing agenda.

When it comes to HIV care and prevention, Rose looked to the first Trump administration: “The HIV community has continuously reminded Republicans that Donald Trump did create the Ending the HIV Epidemic initiative that has helped move the needle,” he said. “And so there is some promise there. They aren’t all full-on, like, anti-PrEP all the time, but they are wary of it.”

However, Rose predicts potential conflict between efforts to curb the HIV epidemic and Project 2025’s anti-LGBTQ+ agenda. 

“Those same people who said, ‘Wow, these HIV numbers are really bad and we should do something about it’ were like, ‘But we hate all these LGBTQ people and their health, and so we’re not going to have any non-discrimination [rules], and we don’t care if we kick them off their health care, and we don’t care if they’re invisible in society,” Rose explained. “Given where the epidemic has always been in the community, it’s hard to end the HIV epidemic without talking about LGBTQ people and the resources that we use in the community, and the lives that we live, and the lives that we have.”

Rose said he also expects “greater deference” in the new administration to religious exemptions and so-called conscience clauses, which allow healthcare providers to refuse to provide certain services that conflict with their religious beliefs.

Rose also noted that every budget produced during the first Trump administration “decimated funding for the CDC and HRSA and HHS in all of the HIV line items.”

“He didn’t wholesale eliminate anything, but he shaved those things down to bare bones,” Rose said.

Access to PrEP and other contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act’s preventive services coverage requirement could also be in even greater jeopardy. Experts expect the ongoing legal battle in Braidwood vs. Becerra — a legal case challenging the Affordable Care Act’s requirement for insurers to cover preventative healthcare — to eventually reach the Supreme Court, and Rose thinks the new Trump administration could reverse the Biden administration’s position supporting the landmark healthcare law’s requirement that insurance providers cover PrEP.

“We’re actually very concerned about the government reversing its role,” Rose said. “Changing the position on Braidwood is pretty quick and easy for them to do. They can pull out of that pretty fast.”

“It’s still an active case,” he added, “and we don’t know what’s going to happen if the U.S. government switches its position on it. I imagine that state attorneys general, who have been tracking the case, would step in, but we’ll have to see what their capacity looks like.”

Rose indicated that it will likely take a while for the incoming Trump administration to upend healthcare. “There’s just a lot of regulation to get through,” he said. While the new administration is ready to implement its immigration policies on day one, Rose said he expects “less acute pain” in the realm of healthcare in the early day.

But even Trump’s immigration policies will impact public health, causing a “chilling effect” for undocumented immigrants or those living in mixed-status families who need to access care.

Baskerville also noted that concerns about safety that Trump’s rhetoric inspires, particularly among trans people and undocumented immigrants, may be a major roadblock for those communities seeking the care they need in the years ahead. 

“If folks aren’t feeling safe at home, if they’re not feeling safe in their communities,” he explained, “they’re not going to access any of the healthcare, or any of the other things, and feel like they’re empowered to do that.”

/ /

Ohio governor signs bill restricting trans students’ school bathroom use

Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed a bill Wednesday banning transgender students from using school restrooms that align with their gender identities. The Republican-majority state Senate pushed forward SB 104, also known as the “Protect All Students Act,” in a 24-7 party-line vote.

“No school shall permit a member of the female biological sex to use a student restroom, locker room, changing room, or shower room that has been designated by the school for the exclusive use of the male biological sex,” and vice versa, the bill reads.

The bill defines “biological sex” as the “biological indication of male and female, including sex chromosomes, naturally occurring sex hormones, gonads, and nonambiguous internal and external genitalia present at birth, without regard to an individual’s psychological, chosen, or subjective experience of gender.” The bill adds that a birth certificate may be used as proof of biological sex if it was “issued at or near the time of the individual’s birth.”

SB 104 applies to Ohio’s public K-12 schools, as well as colleges and universities. Other states have passed laws that seek to regulate which restrooms trans people can use, as well, including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Utah. 

The bill also mandates that Ohio schools cannot have restrooms or locker rooms that are open to all genders, excluding family facilities or single-occupancy facilities. Exceptions to the bill include children under 10 who are being assisted by family members, school employees whose job duties require them to enter all restrooms or people with disabilities who are being assisted.

 DeWine, a Republican, conducted a legal review before he signed the bill, according to The Associated Press. 

The American Civil Liberties Union condemned SB 104 in a statement after it passed in the state Senate, deeming it “anti-trans” and urging DeWine not to sign it.

“If allowed to go into effect, SB 104 will create unsafe environments for trans and gender non-confirming individuals of all ages. This bill ignores the material reality that transgender people endure higher rates of sexual violence and assaults, particularly while using public restrooms, than people who are not transgender,” Jocelyn Rosnick, policy director for the ACLU of Ohio, said in a statement.

Senate Democratic leader Nickie J. Antonio urged DeWine to veto the bill in a letter published Nov. 15. 

“Sponsors of the legislation declare that the bill is about safety. However, this bill does nothing to make anyone safer. Instead, it will make trans people less safe and fail to increase the safety of all students,” Antonio wrote. “There’s a line between being passionate and understanding and being concerned about safety. Given that trans kids already face discrimination and bullying in schools, this bill could exacerbate the issue.” 

The Center for Christian Virtue, which describes itself as Ohio’s largest Christian public policy organization, had called on DeWine to sign the bill, hailing it as preserving privacy. 

“Today is a huge victory for children and families in Ohio. Amended SB104 is common-sense legislation that will guarantee the only people entering young ladies’ private spaces are female, not men claiming to be female,” the organization’s policy director, David Mahan, said in a statement after the Senate passed the bill.

Mahan did not specify whether a man claiming to be female has ever entered a women’s restroom in Ohio, and he did not respond to requests for comment. 

There is no evidence that letting transgender people use public facilities, like restrooms, that align with their gender identities increases assaults or privacy violations, according to a 2018 study published in the journal Sexuality Research and Social Policy. Another study, published in the journal Pediatrics in 2019, found that transgender youths are at higher risk of sexual assault when they are not allowed to use restrooms that fit their gender identities.

Ohio House Republicans attached the legislation about restrooms to proposals regarding report card data for Ohio’s college credit program for high school students. 

Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, the executive director of GLSEN, which advocates for LGBTQ students, condemned the law in a statement following DeWine’s signature.

“Extremist politicians are panicking because transgender students exist,” Willingham-Jaggers said. “Bathroom bans do not work: they isolate transgender youth, exacerbate harassment and unsafe conditions, and encourage schools to engage in harmful and stigmatizing gender-policing at the bathroom door.”

/ /

Discrimination is major factor affecting trans+ people’s mental health, says study

,

New research has revealed the impact of transphobia on transgender and non-binary people’s mental health.

The study, “State of Trans+ Mental Health 2024,” surveyed more than 2,000 people across 75 countries, with 68 per cent of respondents saying they had been diagnosed with a mental-health condition. On average, one in every six suffered with depression and anxiety. More than 51 per cent experienced “poor or very poor” mental health.

More than 80 per cent of those who responded said a lack of social acceptance was one of their main challenges, while a similar number, 79.8 per cent, put gender dysphoria as one of their biggest hurdles. Fear of discrimination (70.7 per cent) and family rejection (59.9 per cent) were also mentioned. 

The report, published by LGBTQ+ mental wellness app Voda, found that just 14.7 per cent had a positive experience when accessing healthcare, while 40.7 per cent had difficulty even doing so.

An overwhelming majority of respondents emphasised the importance of mental-health services for trans people being created by transgender and non-binary individuals, with nearly 84 per cent highlighting the need for therapists or mental-health professionals to also transgender or non-binary.

Jaron Soh, Voda’s co-founder and chief executive, said: “This report is a call to action to recognise the significant gaps in mental-health provision for trans+ individuals, and [to] work toward creating inclusive, affirming services that address their needs.”

/ /

Federal government eases rules on organ transplants between donors and recipients with HIV

,

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has eased the regulations on kidney and liver donations between HIV-positive donors and HIV-positive recipients, something that HHS says will increase access to these organs.

A rule on interpretation of the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act removes requirements for clinical research and institutional review board approval for such donations, “based on research demonstrating the safety and effectiveness of kidney and liver transplants between donors and recipients with HIV,” says an HHS press release. The rule became final Wednesday.

“We continue to do everything in our power to increase access to life-saving organs while addressing health inequities faced by people with HIV,” HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in the release. “This rule removes unnecessary barriers to kidney and liver transplants, expanding the organ donor pool and improving outcomes for transplant recipients with HIV. This evidence-based policy update demonstrates our commitment to ensuring all Americans have access to the care they need.”

“Research shows that kidney and liver transplants between donors and recipients with HIV can be performed safely and effectively,” added Adm. Rachel Levine, assistant secretary for health. “This policy change reflects our commitment to following the evidence and updating our approaches as we learn more. By removing research requirements where they are no longer needed, we can help more people with HIV access life-saving transplants.”

The HOPE Act, passed in 2013, allows for organ donation by people with HIV only to those who are already living with the virus. Under the act, “donors with HIV must not have evidence of opportunistic infections and recipients must have a stable CD4+ T-cell count and established HIV suppression and control on effective antiretroviral therapy,” the new rule explains.

Research has demonstrated “that the safety and outcomes of kidney and liver HOPE Act transplants are well established, with over 517 HOPE Act kidney and liver transplants conducted to date,” the new rule notes. The requirements for these transplants that were revoked by the new rule created an unnecessary barrier, according to HHS.

HHS published the proposed rule in the Federal Register in September and received 56 public comments on it before it became final.

Also Wednesday, the National Institutes of Health, part of HHS, published a notice seeking public comment on a proposed revision to its research criteria for HOPE Act transplants of other organs, such as heart, lung, and pancreas. “This effort aims to streamline the HOPE Act research requirements and continue to build an evidence base of outcomes data on HOPE Act transplants of organs other than livers and kidneys,” the press release says. Comments are due by December 12.

1 2 3 4›»