Chat with us, powered by LiveChat
top of page

Gender Industry Hypocrisy

Gender Activists Say Children Can't Consent to Therapy, But They Can Consent to Medicalization

I recently attended a hearing for Utah House Bill 92. This bill was designed to protect children who are confused about their identity from dangerous experimental medical interventions . These interventions include:

  • the use of Lupron, a puberty blocker that induces a developmental delay, on children as young as eight years old,

  • cross-sex hormones used as an elective cosmetic intervention on children as young as eight years old, to masculinize or feminize their appearance,

  • cosmetic surgeries, such as double mastectomies, performed on girls as young as twelve years old, and

  • castration of boys as young as sixteen years old.

All of these interventions induce permanent, irreversible changes on vulnerable children.

While testimony was being given regarding the bill, those in favor of these interventions claimed that children were old enough to consent to life-changing medical interventions. Gender industry activists claimed that the legislature had no right to dictate patient care, and contended that it was unacceptable for these children to wait until they are eighteen to access these interventions.

Ironically, less than two years earlier, in March of 2019, these same activists made just the opposite claims when testifying on Utah House Bill 399, legislation that would require therapists to affirm children’s gender identity. These activists then claimed that children were unable to consent to talk therapy, that it was the government’s responsibility to dictate the kind of therapy a child could access. They declared that any child who needed something other than affirmative therapy could wait until s/he is eighteen to access it.

How is it that a child can consent to a developmental delay but not to mental health therapy? Why is it okay for the government to ban a therapist from helping a child understand possible underlying causes of gender dysphoria, but it's not okay to protect children from harmful experimental interventions? And why is it okay to force a child to wait until s/he is eighteen to access appropriate mental health services, but that same child is incapable of waiting to get cosmetic interventions that permanently alter the body?

Gender industry activists clearly have an agenda: Deny children therapy that will help them manage and resolve their feelings of discomfort and send them to gender clinics where they will become medicalized for life, providing the gender industry a windfall of income.


Erin Brewer is a partner with Partners for Ethical Care. Contact Dr. Brewer via


bottom of page