New Legislative Proposals in Michigan Target Gender-Affirming Care for Minors
Recent legislative developments in Michigan have sparked significant debate as state lawmakers propose restrictions on medical treatments for transgender minors. Two bill packages introduced in the state legislature aim to ban gender-affirming care for individuals under 18.
The proposed measures, referred to as “protecting minors from chemical and surgical mutilation,” seek to prohibit healthcare providers from administering puberty blockers and hormone therapy to minors whose gender identity does not align with their birth-assigned sex. This legislation echoes a similar executive order by former President Donald Trump that threatened to cut federal funding from institutions offering such care to patients under 19.
Additionally, the bills would outlaw gender-affirming surgeries for minors, a procedure that occurs at a rate of 2 in 100,000, according to a 2024 study. Another aspect of the legislative package mandates insurance coverage for those seeking to reverse previous gender transition procedures and establishes violations of these provisions as grounds for investigation by the state’s Department of Health and Human Services.
Proponents of the bills argue that the scientific consensus on transgender care for minors is not yet established. However, Emme Zanotti from Equality Michigan counters this claim, stating that the standards of care are “a whole process of ethical, well-vetted standards where there’s a conversation happening between a young person, their parents or their guardians, and a medical professional.”
Medical professionals often rely on guidelines from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), with standards dating back to 1979 and the latest version released in 2022. The bills distinctly target gender-affirming procedures for transgender minors, excluding cisgender minors from the prohibition, as noted in a statement by bill sponsor Thomas Albert (R-Lowell).
Earlier this year, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel cautioned healthcare providers that discontinuing gender-affirming care for minors might be considered discriminatory under state law.
While the act doesn’t criminalize these medical practices, Albert mentioned in a press release that it allows for civil litigation against providers violating the act. Zanotti argues that this approach is intended to “intimidate providers from providing scientifically evidenced essential health care.”
The legislative package follows a similar bill introduced by Michigan House Republicans in March. According to Rep. Brad Paquette (R-Niles), the latest proposals are more refined and emphasize medical practice. The sponsors collaborated with experts who contributed to a recent federal report from the Department of Health and Human Services, which questions the current scientific consensus and suggests alternatives resembling conversion therapy, a comparison made by advocates.
Paquette noted that evolutionary biologist Colin Wright, known for his critical views on gender-affirming care, was among the consultants, although his opinions are at odds with most medical literature. Numerous medical organizations, including the American Association of Pediatrics, have criticized the federal report. However, the Michigan Psychological Association and the Michigan State Medical Society have not issued statements regarding the legislative proposal.
Thomas Albert’s office clarified that the federal report didn’t influence the Senate bill package, which aligns with similar legislation in other states like Ohio and follows Trump’s executive order.
Zanotti criticizes the bills, asserting, “There’s so many red flags in this legislation. And that’s because it’s not good faith public policy that’s meant to protect working families in Michigan. It’s a political agenda and nothing else.”
—
Read More Michigan News
