Amsterdam, the capital city of the Netherlands seems well on its way to accomplishing its goal of zero HIV transmissions by 2026. Only nine cases of HIV were reported in Amsterdam last year, thanks to heavy investment in pre-exposure prophylactics (PrEP), a drug protocol that prevents HIV transmission, and other HIV-prevention efforts.
While scientists have announced that a half dozen people may have been cured of HIV worldwide, the process is painful and expensive. It generally requires a bone marrow transplant after a cancer diagnosis. Dutch health authorities have found a way to circumvent the curing process that prioritizes prevention rather than treatment.
The Dutch AIDS Fund’s report of only nine new cases proves that the city’s investment in PrEP and other prevention strategies, which started in 2019, has had an impact. 128 people in Amsterdam were infected in 2019. PrEP can be used by people who don’t have HIV to prevent the virus from gaining hold of their immune system. When taken by people with the virus, it lowers the viral load to undetectable levels and makes it transmissible.
Health authorities worldwide have particularly recommended the drug for gay men, sex workers, and other people who are at risk for transmission.
In addition to PrEP, health officials have collaborated with politicians and HIV-care workers to create and promote easily accessible services and programs for key at-risk populations, including men who have sex with men (MSM), people with a migration background, and people who inject drugs. Many clinics and hospitals in the city offer HIV testing and immediately provide anyone who tests positive with medication to lower viral loads to undetectable (and thus, untransmittable) levels.
According to Aidsfonds-Soa Aids Nederland, the number of new HIV infections in the city had decreased by 95% since 2010. Approximately 98% of city residents living with HIV have been diagnosed, 95% of those have received medication treatment, and 96% of those on treatment have suppressed the virus to untransmittable levels.
“After more than 40 years of working together to stop the spread of HIV, this is great news,” said Mark Vermeulen, the executive director of Aidsfonds-Soa Aids Nederland. “It really is possible to end HIV and AIDS. Amsterdam is proving to everyone that it can be done.”
Just months after coffee colossus Starbucks was accused of erasing Pride from store locations across the country, the company is being sued by a lesbian and gender non-conforming employee who claims she was passed over for promotion because she is “gay” and “looks like a boy.”
Jahmelia “Jay” Peters is suing Starbucks, claiming the company denied her a promotion at a White Plains, New York store despite previous experience in the role due to her sexuality, gender identity, and gender expression.
One store manager allegedly threw out Pride decorations rather than display them.
The store manager promoted a woman he was pursuing for sex instead, the suit claims.
The civil action, filed in New York Supreme Court, alleges unlawful discrimination and retaliation. Peters is seeking compensatory damages for lost wages and emotional distress, including back and front pay, as well as punitive damages for the manager’s “outrageous conduct.”
According to the complaint, Peters’ boss told store colleagues that she would not be promoted because she was “gay” and “looks like a boy.” Peters was subsequently fired while on break for questioning the manager’s decision.
Peters says she has yet to receive her final paycheck in what the suit characterizes as a final act of retaliation from the company.
The suit describes how a cisgender, straight female employee at the store whom the manager had taken an “inappropriate flirtatious interest in” was promoted to shift leader over Peters, despite having less experience and expressly stating that she did not want the promotion.
According to Peters’ lawyers, this was not the only woman in the store that the manager had sought to curry favor with in order to have a sexual relationship; he often shared intimate, flirtatious text messages with other straight female employees in the store.
“This is a human rights issue,” said Bennitta Joseph, Peters’ counsel with Joseph & Norinsberg LLC. “Ms. Peters was denied the civil right to fair treatment in the workplace based on her gender expression, identity, and her sexual orientation.”
The allegation comes just months after more than 3,500 Starbucks workers in 150 store locations went on strike in June, claiming regional managers in more than 100 Starbucks locations in Missouri, Arkansas, and Oklahoma shut down Pride displays after “consulting with upper leadership.”
Starbucks denied the allegations, saying it never asked any stores to remove their Pride decorations, and accused the union representing Starbucks employees, Starbucks Workers United, of spreading false information as a bargaining “tactic.”
A group of trans and non-binary activists have filed legal claims against Florida’s bathroom ban in an effort to brand it “unconstitutional.”
The Center for Constitutional Rights announced on Friday (29 September) that Six activists and a feminist group had, with help from legal counsel, filed a motion for a temporary restraining order against Florida’s bathroom ban.
If passed, the restraining order would allow plaintiffs and other members of the community to use the bathroom while protesting against transphobia at the National March to Protect Trans Youth in Orlando on 7 October.
Trans woman and member of the organisation Women in Struggle, Melinda Butterfield, said that the protest is “long overdue” and that the order would allow it to go ahead without fear of prosecution.
She reportedly plans to fly to the state on 2 October where she will spend the week helping to prepare for the march. During that time, she will have to use the women’s bathrooms, risking arrest, but is scared to do so for fear of being confronted for simply using public facilities.
“The State of Florida believes it can eradicate the lives and identities of trans, gender nonconforming, intersex, and queer people through numerous pieces of legislation,” attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights, Zee Scout, said in a statement.
“This law is an unconstitutional reaction to the growing acceptance of these communities.
“This state cannot erase viewpoints that it dislikes. It cannot force people to accept its idea of sex and gender… It cannot demonise these communities by referring to them as ‘demons,’ ‘mutants,’ and ‘imps’.”
Florida lawmakers passed the bill banning trans and non-binary people from using bathrooms consistent with their gender identity in May where it was signed by Republican state governor, Ron DeSantis.
the bill’s passing marks yet another to be approved at a state level in the US since the beginning of 2023, with at least 568 anti-trans bills being introduced across 49 states in America.
The Transgender Rights Initiative director at Southern Legal Counsel, Simone Chriss, said that it was another “politically-motivated manoeuvre” in a “relentless” attack on trans Floridians.
“SLC denounces the state’s weaponisation of fear and misinformation to strip away the rights of [transgender, gender nonconforming, and intersex] Floridians under the guise of protecting others.”
The second of two Florida men identified as the “kingpins” in a massive scheme to supply counterfeit HIV medication to U.S. pharmacies, suppliers, and patients has pleaded guilty.
Armando Herrera pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to introduce adulterated and misbranded drugs into interstate commerce, the Department of Justice announced earlier this week.
The scheme was to find discarded HIV pill bottles, fill them with fake meds, and reseal them before selling them to unsuspecting victims.
According to the DOJ, Herrera and his co-conspirator, Lazaro Roberto Hernandez, set up companies in Florida, Texas, Washington, and California, which they used to primarily distribute adulterated HIV medication, along with other drugs, to wholesale pharmaceutical suppliers, which then sold the bogus drugs to pharmacies where they were distributed to patients. They also created false documentation to make it look like the drugs were acquired legitimately.
Hernandez pleaded guilty to his role in the scheme in April and was sentenced to 180 months in prison in July.
In 2021, biopharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences warned that knock-off versions of its Biktarvy and Descovy medications were circulated through pharmacies due to unauthorized distributors. Both medications are used to treat people living with HIV. Descovy is also used as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent HIV-negative people from contracting the virus.
The operation allegedly involved illegally acquiring pills manufactured by Gilead and repackaging them in used bottles purchased for cash, often from people who were homeless or suffering from drug addiction. The bottles were then resealed to appear unopened and then sold. Adulterated pills were found to contain potentially dangerous drugs, like the powerful antipsychotic Seroquel.
In June 2022, Hernandez was arrested and charged with distributing more than $230 million in adulterated HIV drugs. The following October, Gilead identified Herrera and Hernandez as the “kingpins” in the scheme.
“Gilead’s ongoing investigation revealed that these two kingpins directed the initial sale of the counterfeits through suppliers created solely to sell counterfeit medications,” the company said in a statement at the time.
According to the DOJ, Herrera is scheduled to be sentenced on December 21 and faces up to five years in prison.
In a 5-2 vote, the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that all judges in the state must respect the pronouns of the parties that come before their court. The rule will be implemented beginning on January 1. While it prevents judges from disrespecting a person’s pronouns, it does allow them to refer to a party as “attorney” or “plaintiff” along with their last name should they want to avoid pronouns altogether.
“Courts must use the individual’s name, the designated salutation or personal pronouns, or other respectful means that is not inconsistent with the individual’s designated salutation or personal pronouns,” the decision stated.
Michiganders have moved to address rising anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment by exercising their civic rights. And it’s working.
As such, Justice Elizabeth Welch emphasized that the new rule “does not force anyone to violate their beliefs,” the Associated Pressreported.
“We serve the entire public and are required to treat those who come before us with civility and respect,” Welch also said. “The gender identity of a member of the public is a part of their individual identity, regardless of whether others agree or approve.”
Justice Brian Zahra, who opposed the rule along with Justice David Viviano, stated that his belief that the judicial branch should not get involved in a “fluid political debate.”
“Such hubris has no place within the operation of a judicial branch of state government,” he said.
Michigan has experienced a series of victories for the LGBTQ+ community over the past couple of years. Last July, the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark decision that businesses, landlords, and others cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation or gender identity, even though the state’s civil rights legislation doesn’t specifically mention those categories.
This past March, Michigan also became the 22nd state to pass comprehensive anti-discrimination protections for sexual orientation and gender identity. The bill amended the 1976 Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA) to include LGBTQ+ people among its protected groups.
And this summer, Michigan passed a bill banning conversion therapy for minors, which was signed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) in July.
US presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy has caused uproar among the public after describing being transgender as a “mental health disorder.”
The comment, which came during Wednesday night’s (27 September) second GOP debate, completely disregards official guidance from all major medical and mental health associations.
As transphobic rhetoric continues to sweep across the United States, it was likely that the topic of LGBTQ+ rights was going to crop up at some point during the presidential election run, but those tuned into the debate were disgusted to hear the Republican candidate’s views.
Candidates were asked their opinions on the contentious parental rights debate, which has seen a growing number of school districts debate whether to introduce policies that would inform parents if a student goes by a gender identity that doesn’t match the gender on their birth certificate.
When it came Ramaswamy’s turn to speak, he said: “Transgenderism, especially in kids, is a mental health disorder… It is not compassionate to affirm a kid’s confusion. That is not compassion, that is cruelty.”
This comment directly contradicts guidance from the American Psychiatric Association which says diverse gender expressions “are not indications of a mental disorder.”
The Republican candidate also made baseless claims that a lack of a parental notification policy in schools would increase the risk of suicide among young people.
LGBTQ+ advocacy groups have warned that introducing parental notification policies would be more likely to put young people at risk, particularly if their parents are not supportive of their wishes to transition.
Ramaswamy then claimed to have spoken with two young women who said they regretted undergoing gender-affirming surgeries and promised the “ban genital mutilation and chemical castration.”
In fact, it is incredibly rare for gender-affirming surgeries, when made available to transgender and gender non-conforming individuals, to result in feelings of regret.
According to a 2021 review of 27 studies involving almost 8,000 teenagers and adults across Europe, the US, and Canada who had gender-affirming surgeries found that an average of just one per cent expressed regret.
Those tuned in to the debate were devastated to see baseless anti-trans rhetoric being spread on such a public platform and took to X (formerly Twitter) to condemn Ramaswamy and other candidates who expressed similar beliefs.
“We will stand up for trans people every day,” commented one viewer. “Absolutely disgusting to hear Vivek Ramaswamy call it a mental health disorder.”
Both Tennessee and Kentucky have been given the go-ahead by a federal appeals court to outlaw gender-affirming care for minors.
Earlier in 2023, both states passed legislation to restrict a number of rights for transgender youth, including access to gender-affirming care.
Both were challenged in court by the families of transgender children in each state and the American Civil Liberties Union, who had argued that bans on gender-affirming care discriminated on the basis of sex.
Bans on gender-affirming care have been upheld in both states. (Getty Images)
On Thursday (28 September), the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals voted 2-1 to honour both states’ appeals, allowing the restrictive bans to go ahead, Reuters reports.
In both states, these bans will prohibit medical providers from treating transgender minors with gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers, hormones and, in rare cases, surgery.
Gender-affirming care for minors has been backed by all major medical associations, including the American Medical Association (AMA) which reaffirmed this summer that they “unequivocally support the health and welfare of people who identify as LGBTQ+, which includes trans and gender diverse people seeking and undergoing gender-affirming care.”
Such treatment can often be life-saving for people suffering from gender dysphoria, and young people will be put at serious risk by having their access blocked.
Despite the overwhelming evidence in favour of gender-affirming care for minors, Chief Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote in his ruling: “This is a relatively new diagnosis with ever-shifting approaches to care over the last decade or two.
“Under these circumstances, it is difficult for anyone to be sure about predicting the long-term consequences of abandoning age limits of any sort for these treatments.”
A crowd of people, many of whom are young, gather to protest the passing of SB 150 on 29 March 2023 at the Kentucky state capitol. (Getty)
Judge Sutton was joined by Judge Amul Thapar in his vote to allow the bans to go ahead.
In opposition was Judge Helene White, who had argued that neither Tennessee nor Kentucky should pass “constitutional muster” or “intrude on the well-established province of parents to make medical decisions for their minor children.”
Commenting on the ruling, the ACLU of Tennessee said: “This is a devastating result for transgender youth and their families in Tennessee and across the region.”
“Denying transgender youth equality before the law and needlessly withholding the necessary medical care their families and their doctors know is right for them has caused and will continue to cause serious harm. “
Meanwhile, the ACLU of Kentucky said in a separate statement: “Today’s decision is heartbreaking for trans youth across the state. It ignores evidence from medical experts & the trial court who agree that this care is necessary, effective, appropriate, & banning it undermines parents’ right to direct the upbringing of their children.”
“No one should have to decide between their health care and their home.”
Both ACLU chapters pledged to take further action in defence of their clients and the rights of all transgender people in their respective states.
Yellowing teeth. Wrinkling skin. A dry as hell cough. We’ve all seen the ads showing the dangers of smoking cigarettes. In middle school, our teachers would pass out red ribbons and “D.A.R.E.” us to be drug-free. “Just Say NO” still lingers in my brain all of these years later.
We’ve also seen at least one person close to us who has smoked a cigarette, had one too many shots of alcohol, or used some other form of substance to cope with the stresses of daily life. With the FDA declaring youth vaping an “epidemic” in 2018, it is clear that the scare tactics didn’t work. What schools didn’t teach us as kids is truly how stressful and hard being an adult (or even a kid for that matter) is and just how easy it can be to turn to a substance such as tobacco to ease your stress… especially if you are LGBTQ+.
September is National Recovery Month, and anyone on the road toward recovery from a substance addiction should be applauded. What many people get wrong about addiction is the belief that it is a matter of choice. I draw parallels between the experiences of queer people finding ways to cope in our hate-filled world and the experiences of one of my family members who became addicted to alcohol during the 2008 recession.
This family member’s addiction to alcohol was as much of a choice as they had in losing their job. It was as much of a choice as their father who abused them growing up. An addiction to tobacco is as much of a choice as it is to be discriminated against for being queer.
I had the (dis)pleasure of recently attending the Orange Unified School District (USD) Board meeting where they passed a forced outing policy that will undeniably put trans and non-binary students at increased risk for homelessness and depression.
The disgusting display of bigotry from the MAGA supporters and Proud Boys who shouted “groomers” at the top of their lungs made me thankful that I am not a teenager who is just discovering my own identity at an Orange USD school. Needless to say, I believe it’s harder to come out now than it was in 2014 when I graduated high school. It was ironic to see so many people who said to the Board that they wanted to “protect our kids”, all the while supporting a policy that had the potential to increase teen smoking, suicide and depression. A study by the Trevor Project showed that queer youth who had at least one accepting adult were 40% less likely to report a suicide attempt in the past year.
With increased stress, people look for ways to tangibly cope. People look for ways to ease the pain and trauma. One of the tangible ways used by many in our community is reliance on tobacco products. The rush of nicotine can calm a headache… at least in the short term. Nicotine is a powerful drug that can make you feel more at ease and calm when you first start to use it. But as you become more and more reliant on nicotine, your mind and body slowly grow more and more dependent on it to the point where you can’t function without it.
For decades, the Tobacco Industry has targeted the LGBTQ+ community through advertisements featuring drag queens, and for decades, tobacco companies have relied on this path towards nicotine to fill their pockets with cash. They know full well that many of us live with trauma because they relish in it by funding ads and Pride events to grow their queer consumer base. This targeting has led to dire consequences for our community. For instance, many doctors will postpone trans-affirming care for people who smoke because tobacco can make it harder for the body to heal from surgeries. More generally, tobacco is a leading cause of premature death in queer people.
All of this doom and gloom can make it seem like it’s a lost cause to even attempt to fight giant corporations such as Juul or Philip Morris. But just as the LGBTQ+ rights movement has always done no matter what we’ve faced, we are fighting back. We need to go beyond the “Just Say NO” rhetoric; we need systemic change. We need to do the actual work to address why people even start to use tobacco in the first place.
Increased LGBTQ+ rates of tobacco use are a symptom of larger systemic issues. It is a lack of accessible mental health care, livable wages, and stable housing. We Breathe, a program of the LGBTQ+ Health and Human Services Network, aims to create systemic change and reduce tobacco’s place in LGBTQ+ lives.
What good is stopping someone from smoking if they are still depressed, stressed, and anxious? All of which increase other health issues such as heart attack and stroke later in life.
Many of my peers who are also working to eliminate tobacco from all Californian’s lives (Endgame as it’s called) are trying to do so without the slightest idea of how to speak to queer people. We Breathe is working to change that. For more information on how to get involved with We Breathe, contact roda@health-access.org.
Ryan Oda (he/him) is the We Breathe Coordinator for The California LGBTQ HHS Network, working to reduce tobacco’s impact on the LGBTQ+ Community. Ryan earned his BA in Political Science at Cal State Long Beach in 2019.
The CA LGBTQ Health & Human Services Network directs We Breathe, the Statewide Coordinating Center to reduce LGBTQ tobacco-related disparities. We Breathe provides expertise on working with LGBTQ communities, preventing and reducing tobacco use among LGBTQ Californians, and addressing tobacco-related health disparities within LGBTQ communities, to help funded projects reach their goal to eliminate tobacco use by 2035 in California.
If you or someone you know is trying to quit using tobacco, call Kick It CA at 800-300-8086 or visit https://kickitca.org/quit-now to speak to a Quit Coach.
If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org. The Trans Lifeline (1-877-565-8860) is staffed by trans people and will not contact law enforcement. The Trevor Project provides a safe, judgement-free place to talk for youth via chat, text (678-678), or phone (1-866-488-7386). Help is available at all three resources in English and Spanish.
A Montana law banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors is temporarily blocked, a state judge ruled Wednesday, just four days before it was to take effect.
District Court Judge Jason Marks agreed with transgender youth, their families and healthcare providers that a law passed by the 2023 Montana Legislature is likely unconstitutional and would harm the mental and physical health of minors with gender dysphoria.
The preliminary injunction blocking the law will remain in effect until a full trial can be held on the issue, but Marks has said he expects his decision will be appealed to the Montana Supreme Court.
“Today’s ruling permits our clients to breath a sigh of relief,” Akilah Deernose, executive director of the ACLU of Montana, said in a statement. “But this fight is far from over. We look forward to vindicating our clients’ constitutional rights and ensuring that this hateful law never takes effect.”
Montana is one of at least 22 states that have enacted bans on gender-affirming medical care for minors and most face lawsuits. Some bans have been temporarily blocked by courts, while others have been allowed to take effect.
All the laws ban gender-affirming surgery for minors. Such procedures are rare, with fewer than 3,700 performed in the U.S. on patients ages 12 to 18 from 2016 through 2019, according to a study published last month. It’s not clear how many of those patients were 18 when they underwent surgery.
In Montana’s case, transgender youth argued the law would ban them from continuing to receive gender-affirming medical care, violating their constitutional rights to equal protection, the right to seek health and the right to dignity.
Their parents said the law would violate their constitutional rights to make medical decisions for their children and two medical providers said it would prevent them from providing effective and necessary care to their patients.
“Montana’s ban is a direct assault on the freedom and well-being of transgender youth, their families, and their medical providers,” Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the American Civil Liberty Union, said in a recent statement.
The law sought to prohibit the use of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgical treatments for gender dysphoria, while still allowing cisgender minors to receive puberty blockers to treat early puberty or surgical procedures to treat intersex conditions.
Allowing the ban to take effect would cause irreparable harm to transgender minors who are receiving treatment, in part by exacerbating the anxiety and depression they feel because their body is incongruent with their gender identity, Picasso argued during a Sept. 18 hearing for the preliminary injunction.
The state countered that beginning the treatments put transgender children on a “path of no return.”
“A child cannot possibly consent to the treatment that permanently and irreversibly changes secondary sex characteristics, nor can a child consent to future infertility and sterilization, future sexual dysfunction and a lifetime of hormone treatments and other forms of medicalization and resulting complications,” Assistant Attorney General Russell argued.
As Republican-led states have rushed to ban gender-affirming care for minors, some families with transgender children found a bit of solace: At least they lived in states that would allow those already receiving puberty blockers or hormone therapy to continue.
But in some places, including Missouri and North Dakota, the care has abruptly been halted because medical providers are wary of harsh liability provisions in those same laws — one of multiple reasons that advocates say care has become harder to access even where it remains legal.
“It was a completely crushing blow,” said Becky Hormuth, whose 16-year-old son was receiving treatment from the Washington University Gender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital until it stopped the care for minors this month. Hormuth cried. Her son cried, too.
“There was some anger there, not towards the doctors, not toward Wash U. Our anger is towards the politicians,” she said. “They don’t see our children. They say the health care is harmful. They don’t know how much it helps my child.”
Since last year, conservative lawmakers and governors have prioritized restricting access to transgender care under the name of protecting children. At least 22 states have now enacted laws restricting or banning gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors. Most of the bans face legal challenges and enforcement on some of them has been put on hold by courts.
All the laws ban gender-affirming surgery for minors, although it is rare, with fewer than 3,700 performed in the U.S. on patients ages 12 to 18 from 2016 through 2019, according to a study published last month. It’s not clear how many of those patients were 18 when they received the surgeries.
There’s more variation, though, in how states handle puberty-blockers and hormone treatments under the new bans. Georgia’s law does not ban those for minors. The others do. But some states, including North Carolina and Utah, allow young people taking them already to continue. Others require the treatments to be phased out over time.
These treatments are accepted by major medical groups as evidence-based care that transgender people should be able to access.
James Thurow said the treatment at the Washington University center changed everything for his stepson, a 17-year-old junior at a suburban St. Louis high school who is earning As and Bs instead of his past Cs, has a girlfriend and a close group of friends.
“His depression, his anxiety had pretty much dissipated because he was receiving the gender-affirming care,” Thurow said. “He’s doing the best he’s ever done at school. His teachers were blown away at how quickly his grades shot up.”
For its part, the center said in a statement that it was “disheartened” to have to stop the care. Its decision followed a similar one from University of Missouri Health Care, where the treatment for minors stopped Aug. 28, the same day the law took effect.
Becky Hormuth holds boxes containing testosterone in Wentzville, Mo., on Sept. 20, 2023. Jeff Roberson / AP
Both blamed a section of the law that increased the liability for providers. Under it, patients can sue for injury from the treatment until they turn 36, or even longer if the harm continues past then. The law gives the health care provider the burden of proving that the harm was not the result of hormones or puberty-blocking drugs. And the minimum damages awarded in such cases would be $500,000.
Neither state Sen. Mike Moon, the Republican who was the prime sponsor of the Missouri ban, state Sen. Justin Brown nor state Rep. Dale Wright, whose committees advanced the measure, responded immediately to questions left Thursday by voicemail, email or phone message about the law’s intent.
In North Dakota, the law allows treatment to continue for minors who were receiving care before the law took effect in April. But it does not allow a doctor to switch the patient to a different gender dysphoria-related medication. And it allows patients to sue over injuries from treatment until they turn 48.
Providers there have simply stopped gender-affirming care, said Brittany Stewart, a lawyer at Gender Justice, which is suing over the ban in the state. “To protect themselves from criminal liability, they’ve just decided to not even risk it because that vague law doesn’t give them enough detail to understand exactly what they can and cannot do,” Stewart said.
Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, the executive director of the Campaign for Southern Equality, said it’s not just liability clauses that have caused providers to stop treatment.
Across the South, where most states have adopted bans on gender-affirming care for minors, she said she’s heard of psychologists who wrongly believe the ban applies to them and pharmacists who stop filling orders for hormones for minors, even in places where the laws are on hold because of court orders.
“It’s hard to overstate the level of kind of chaos and stress and confusion it’s causing on the ground,” she said, “particularly … for people who live in more rural communities or places where even before a law went into effect, it still took quite a bit of effort to get this care.”
Her organization is providing grants and navigation services to help children get treatment in states where it’s legal and available. That system is similar to networks that are helping women in states where abortion is not banned get care.
But there’s one key difference: gender-affirming care is ongoing.
For 12-year-old Tate Dolney in Fargo, North Dakota, continuing care means traveling to neighboring Minnesota for medical appointments. “It’s not right and it’s not fair,” his mother, Devon Dolney, said at a news conference this month, “that our own state government is making us feel like we have to choose between the health and well-being of our child and our home.”
Hormuth’s son is on the waiting list for a clinic in Chicago, at least a five-hour drive away, but is looking at other options, too. Hormuth, a teacher, has asked also her principal to write a recommendation in case the family decides to move to another state.
“Should we have to leave?” she asked. “No one should have to have a plan to move out of state just because their kid needs to get the health care they need.”
In the meantime, the family did what many have: saving leftover testosterone from vials. They have enough doses stockpiled to last a year.
