Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s rule restricting gender-affirming care for transgender minors and adults faces legal challenges.
Missouri’s ACLU, Lambda Legal, and Brian Cave Leighton Peisner Law Firm filed a lawsuit in St. Louis County Court on Monday to block the emergency guidelines from going into effect on Thursday. Among other allegations, the lawsuit says Bailey goes far beyond his power to regulate consumer protection issues by pushing the rules.
Lambda Legal staff attorney Nora Huppert said, “He took the law on refrigerators and used it to track transgender people and tell doctors and other health care providers how they can practice.” I am telling you what
LGBTQ advocates say the rules represent The broadest restrictions on the ability of transgender adults to undergo hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgeryThe rule requires that transgender minors and adults receive 15 individual therapy sessions on an hourly basis for at least 18 months, have documented gender dysphoria for 3 years, and are screened for autism. It stipulates that you cannot receive gender-affirming care unless you have received it. They also state that people must “treat” and “solve” mental health conditions.
“This is truly unprecedented, as the policy targets access to gender-affirming care for vast categories of transgender adults statewide,” Huppert said. “This is the first effort of its kind to governmentally communicate what providers can and cannot do.”
Bailey said the rule is intended to help people be more informed before embarking on gender-affirming care. was repeated.
“These organizations are running into the courts for continuing ideologically based procedures disguised as drugs rather than ensuring patients are protected by common sense safeguards,” Bailey said. rice field.
In an interview last week, he said he was confident his rule would hold up in court, adding: We are standing up to make it happen,” he added.
Since the rules were released earlier this month, some People have sought gender-affirming care Because the guidelines have clauses that exempt those already in care. However, some health experts say the rule is so onerous that it may discourage providers from providing care to anyone, including existing patients.
Huppert said it was important to fight Bailey’s rule in court not only to ensure access to treatment for Missourians, but also to discourage other states from enacting similar guidelines. said.
“There have been attempts to mimic, develop, and expand on what other states are doing, to be even crueler and less rational in the way they pursue gender-affirming care.” Upert said.
Copyright 2023 St. Louis Public Radio. For more information, please visit the following URL: st louis public radio.
