Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has taken a conservative stance on gender-affirming care, calling it a “non-existential” issue. While he stated that this won’t be a major focus of his campaign, he has expressed support for banning certain treatments, such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy, for minors. Kennedy’s running mate, Nicole Shanahan, has also backed this stance, criticizing medical professionals for prescribing puberty blockers to children experiencing gender dysphoria. Shanahan believes that children are too young to consent to these treatments and dismisses the impact of gender dysphoria as simply part of the “awkward years” of adolescence.
Kennedy has expressed concerns about giving puberty blockers to minors, referring to them as “castration drugs” and labeling sex-change procedures as “surgical mutilation.” He believes that such treatments should be postponed until adulthood, citing concerns about minors not fully understanding the long-term consequences. Kennedy has previously spread misinformation about LGBTQ issues, including the unfounded conspiracy that environmental chemicals could be making children gay or transgender. This misinformation has been debunked by scientific research.
While many medical experts consider gender-affirming care a medical necessity, prohibitions in 23 states make comprehensive care difficult to access for transgender and gender-diverse individuals. Gender-affirming surgeries for minors are extremely rare and are typically viewed as adult procedures. Dr. Meredithe McNamara, an expert in adolescent care, notes that only about 3% of young people experiencing gender dysphoria are prescribed puberty blockers, with no evidence suggesting long-lasting harm. Lack of access to essential healthcare can have negative impacts on the health and well-being of transgender youth and their families.
Kennedy’s stance on gender-affirming care has sparked debate within the LGBTQ community and among medical professionals. While he sympathizes with those experiencing gender dysphoria, his concern about giving these treatments to minors has raised questions about the importance of timely access to evidence-based care. Critics argue that delaying treatment until adulthood could have negative consequences for transgender and gender-diverse individuals. Ultimately, the debate around gender-affirming care highlights the need for comprehensive access to healthcare services for all individuals, regardless of their gender identity.
As the campaign progresses, Kennedy will likely continue to face scrutiny for his views on gender-affirming care and other LGBTQ issues. It remains to be seen how his stance will impact his overall platform and appeal to voters. In the meantime, conversations about the importance of evidence-based medical care for transgender and gender-diverse individuals are crucial in raising awareness and ensuring equal access to healthcare services for all.
