After aligning with the American Society of Plastic Surgeons in rejecting trans surgical procedures on children, it turns out the American Medical Association (AMA) is still on board with cross sex hormones and puberty blockers.
There was widespread public opinion after a de-transitioner successfully sued two doctors for malpractice—not to mention the impossible-to-ignore link between transgender youth and gun violence—the last nails in the coffin of the so-called gender-affirming care industry had been placed.
The AMA is instead drawing a line in the sand between surgery and puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones.
In February, Attorney General Steve Marshall of Alabama submitted a letter to the AMA, on behalf of 20 states, praising the organization for its position on pediatric sex-change surgeries while criticizing it for its inconsistent position with regard to puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone therapy.
“The American Medical Association has finally admitted what many have warned for years: its recommendations for surgeries on children were not grounded in solid evidence, despite telling doctors and families otherwise,” Marshall wrote in the letter.
“Yet the same weak science underpins puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones,” wrote Marshall. “You cannot dismiss one intervention as unsupported while continuing to push the rest.”
Physician Malpractice
“The trans industry for children will go away when huge malpractice settlements accumulate,” said Jane Orient, M.D. the executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
“There is no long-term evidence (say 10 years) for benefit—tons of evidence for painful complications and risks to bone, cardiac, and other health measures,” said Orient.
Orient questions says the focus should be on the moral principle, not evidence
“The real question of ethics is not a question of evidence. Sterilizing children is a violation of natural law and the Hippocratic ethic to do no harm. As is irreversible interruption of intellectual and physical maturation,” said Orient.
“Treatment without informed consent is assault and battery,” said Orient. “Minors and persons with serious mental health issues cannot give truly informed consent.”
While Orient says she puts hope in the legal battle ending gender interventions on children, it is important to draw a line in the sand.
“AMA backing may aid in legal defense, and AMA lobbying power may thwart legislative efforts to protect patients,” said Orient. “AMA is following the money, as is ‘The Science.’ Treatment may be ‘effective’ in sterilizing and crippling people, as in preventing them from reaching their potential manhood or femininity, but the question is a moral one. AMA abandoned the Hippocratic ethic long ago.”
Why the AMA Matters
The tides are turning regarding the pediatric transitioning movement, says Beth Parlato, senior legal counsel of the Independent Women’s Law Center
“The momentum is clearly shifting within the medical, legal, and political environments to acknowledge the irreversible harm this industry has done to children,” said Parlato.
The implications for doctors of the AMA taking a position on pediatric transitioning are significant, yet not impenetrable.
“Professional organizations, such as the AMA, may help a doctor argue that treatment fell within an accepted practice framework, and certainly guidelines are used in malpractice litigation as evidence on the standard of care,” said Parlato.
“However, this does not negate the doctor’s professional liability,” said Parlato. “Furthermore, since the AMA is currently playing both sides and hedging its position on surgical interventions and cross sex hormones for minors, their ‘backing’ isn’t going to influence the court in the event of a lawsuit.”
Not a Crutch
For practitioners of transgender medicine, AMA backing provides some litigation value, but not immunity.
“The courts still need to look at all factors within a lawsuit, such as informed consent, facts of the case, etc.,not just recommendations from a professional organization,” said Parlato. “I also believe that AMA backing is less meaningful due to its own position being inconsistent depending on the day.”
The overwhelming evidence against pediatric transitioning procedures is finally winning the day, says Parlato.
“The evidence that cross-sex surgeries and procedures, including cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers, have irreversibly harmed vulnerable children, cannot be ignored,” said Parlato
“Once this issue came under heavy scrutiny and court cases were filed, it became harder for medical professional organizations to ignore the evidence,” said Palato. “I think the AMA is hedging its position for its institutional self-protection.”
The roadmap forward for the AMA is simple, says Parlato.
“The AMA needs less ideology and the humility to admit that the evidence shows surgeries, cross-sex hormones, and puberty blockers are irreversible procedures harmful to children,” said Parlato. “At a minimum, the AMA must apply the evidence consistently.”
Harry Painter ([email protected]) writes from Oklahoma.
Internet Info:
American Society of Plastic Surgeons, “Position Statement on Gender Surgery for Children and Adolescents,” Feb. 3, 2026.
Harry Painter ([email protected]) writes from Oklahoma.
