Trump order restricting sex-change procedures for minors in line with 'do no harm,' doctor says
President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) to restrict "chemical and surgical" sex-change procedures for minors, prompting both pushback and applause. Now, medical experts and destransitioners are weighing in on its implications.
The EO, titled "Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation," implemented changes to the federal government’s policies regarding funding and sponsorship of sex-change operations and procedures.
"It is the policy of the United States that it will not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called ‘transition’ of a child from one sex to another," the EO states.
The administration, in the order, stated that across the U.S., medical professionals are "maiming and sterilizing a growing number of impressionable children under the radical and false claim that adults can change a child’s sex through a series of irreversible medical interventions."
"Countless children soon regret that they have been mutilated and begin to grasp the horrifying tragedy that they will never be able to conceive children of their own or nurture their children through breastfeeding," the executive order states. "Moreover, these vulnerable youths’ medical bills may rise throughout their lifetimes, as they are often trapped with lifelong medical complications, a losing war with their own bodies, and, tragically, sterilization."
Dr. Marc Siegel, senior medical analyst for Fox News, said the EO takes the U.S. in the direction that other countries, including the UK and most of the European Union, have gone. Siegel said his concern is in regard to superimposed political ideology and his guiding principle as a doctor to "do no harm."
"You have a child, they're having gender confusion. Did they get enough mental health counseling? Did they get a chance to develop? Are they being pressured politically by somebody in society, their parents? And then, most importantly, is the intervention leading to something that's not reversible?" he asked.
Siegel broke down the treatments that will be banned for minors, including puberty blockers and surgery, under the EO.
"Puberty blockers, the main one is Lupron, which we use for prostate cancer, enough said," Siegel said. "I mean, it interferes with bone growth, it can potentially interfere with fertility if it's combined with hormones and it can interfere with thinking and cognition. I don't believe that we can say the puberty blockers with hormones don't have long-term side effects, they do."
"Surgery, we're talking about mastectomies, we're talking about upper and lower surgeries. I think that that's something that's not reversible and it should never be done on children," he added. "Proponents of this will say, 'Well the longer you wait, the more the child suffers.' I think that there's conflicting research on that. I'm not convinced of that."
Detransitioner and activist Chloe Cole, who went through her own medical gender transition between the ages of 12 to 16, started taking Lupron at the age of 13, then testosterone as a replacement hormone for the hormones she wasn't producing.
"At 15 years old, I underwent a radical double mastectomy, which typically is reserved for patients who either have breast cancer or have the breast cancer gene," Cole told Fox News Digital. "But I did not have either and this was no ordinary mastectomy either … and reconstruction is not a guarantee for every patient because it is never done with that in mind."
"Obviously, this caused a lot of damage to my body and compromised my health not only at the time, but has also left me with lasting health effects," she added. "I'm now 20, almost 21 years old, and it's been 4 or 5 years since I have been on everything and I went through everything, and it's probably going to affect me for life."
Siegal said he doesn't take the same stance when it comes to adults. But, when it comes to minors, "I don't even need to see someone who says, ‘I wish I had my breasts back’ to know that it's the wrong thing," he said.
SIX SERVICEMEMBERS CHALLENGE TRUMP'S TRANSGENDER MILITARY EXECUTIVE ORDER
"I think that it's the wrong thing for a lot of reasons, one of which is that the person at that age is not really in the right space to already be making that decision," he added. "Some states are allowing it without parental approval, but I don't even think it should be done with parental approval."
Cole said the EO is "incredibly exciting news" as it is the federal government's first attempt at cracking down on "abusive medical ideology against children," but she reiterated that a lot of people are misinterpreting the EO as a ban.
"It is not and it doesn't address private institutions that are performing these either," she said. "But it's an incredible first step in tackling this on the federal level and it's going to make a way for other, bigger interventions on the federal level."
To the people who claim that children cannot live without these treatments because they are being forced to go through puberty and will ultimately face a lifetime of unhappiness, Cole said they are "making the assumption that a transgender identity is innate."
"When you let these children grow up without any intervention and without affirming their transgender identity, but guide them in other ways to adulthood through their identity, then almost every time they will end up desisting," she said. "They will end up reintegrating with their bodies, become comfortable with themselves and they will drop the transgender identity."
"Which is the best-case scenario, because by allowing a child to embark on this path, you're basically guaranteeing them a life of sterility, health issues and slavery to the pharmaceutical and health care industries," she added. "They will be dependent on medication and follow-up surgeries, potentially for life."
But, some experts disagree. Erica Anderson, a transgender clinical psychologist, told Fox News Digital that the EO includes some "inflammatory language" that is used to evoke certain connotations.
"It's too extreme and it reveals no subtlety, no appreciation for the complications that are going to ensue and the fact that there's a there's a number of people in society who will be pushing back," Anderson said. "I've never been in favor of bans, I have been a proponent of caution and I'm worried about the public population that's affected by such orders."
"The idea that you could roll back what has happened in society by a presidential order, while a powerful idea, is more difficult to accomplish in practical terms than I think maybe anybody at the federal level realizes," Anderson added.
ACLU LAWYER CALLS FEMALES ‘NON-TRANSGENDER WOMEN’ IN RANT ABOUT TRUMP EXECUTIVE ORDER
Anderson, who has been sounding the alarm about the approach of colleagues that have affirmed medical and social treatment for gender dysphoria among children and teens in the U.S. in recent years, previously told Fox News Digital that mental health issues like a history of abuse, developmental problems, anxiety or depression should be considered.
Notably, the EO also rescinds all policies relying on guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which progressive groups have considered the North Star for transgender care in recent years. Within 90 days, the Secretary of Health and Human Services is tasked with publishing a review of the existing literature on best practices for promoting the health of children who assert gender dysphoria, rapid-onset gender dysphoria or other identity-based confusion.
"My observations have been the status quo is not serving us well," Anderson said. "There's been excesses on the part of people who have been advocates for unbridled access to all kinds of accommodations for gender-varying people."
"I have opposed those," Anderson added. "I also have opposed outright bans… so I don't have a simple solution… This is like taking an ax instead of a scalpel to the problem, and I'm not in favor of it."
Cole said the Trump EO is not the end of the fight, even though the detransition movement has made a lot of progress in recent years.
"We still really are only at the end of the beginning of our battle and there is so much more progress that we have to make until we ensure that no child in the U.S. is ever going to go through this again," she said. "Because this fight only ends when children are no longer being abused on our soil. Ever."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments last month challenging a Tennessee law banning transgender medical treatments for children in December. A ruling in the high-profile case is expected by July 2025. Over two dozen states have enacted similar bans restricting minors from accessing transgender medical treatment.
Fox News' Louis Casiano and Alexa Moutevelis contributed to this report.