Maryanne Demasi, reports

Maryanne Demasi, reports

Share this post

Maryanne Demasi, reports
Maryanne Demasi, reports
Gender-affirming care for minors under fire in sweeping US report
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More

Gender-affirming care for minors under fire in sweeping US report

Federal investigators found that thousands of children received irreversible medical interventions despite weak evidence, ethical lapses, and inadequate safeguards.

Maryanne Demasi, PhD's avatar
Maryanne Demasi, PhD
May 04, 2025
∙ Paid
137

Share this post

Maryanne Demasi, reports
Maryanne Demasi, reports
Gender-affirming care for minors under fire in sweeping US report
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More
19
29
Share

Paediatric gender dysphoria has rapidly emerged as one of the most divisive and urgent issues in medicine today. In the past decade, the number of children and adolescents identifying as transgender or nonbinary has soared.

In the US alone, diagnoses among youth aged 6 to 17 nearly tripled—from around 15,000 in 2017 to over 42,000 by 2021—signalling a seismic shift not only in culture but in clinical practice.

A graph of a number of patients with numbers

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Children diagnosed with gender dysphoria—a condition defined by distress related to one’s biological sex or associated gender roles—are increasingly being offered powerful medical interventions.

These include puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and, in some cases, irreversible surgeries such as mastectomy, vaginoplasty, or phalloplasty.

An umbrella review from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) states that “thousands of American children and adolescents have received these interventions,” despite a lack of solid scientific footing.

While advocates often claim the treatments are “medically necessary” and “lifesaving” the report concludes “the overall quality of evidence concerning the effects of any intervention on psychological outcomes, quality of life, regret, or long-term health, is very low.”

It also cautions that evidence of harm is sparse—not necessarily because harms are rare, but due to limited long-term data, weak tracking, and publication bias.

This 409-page report delivers a scathing review of the assumptions, ethics, and clinical practices driving gender-affirming care in the US.

This post is for paid subscribers

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Maryanne Demasi
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share

Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More