The Entire Transgender Craze Leads Back To One Group, And They’re Playing Hardball


Sarah Weaver Social Issues Reporter
Font Size:

The World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) is stonewalling a judge’s subpoena of internal documents related to how the medical organization came up with its guidelines for gender confused minors.

WPATH, a leading advocate for child sex changes, was subpoenaed in March by a federal judge in Alabama after the organization’s guidelines were repeatedly referenced to argue against the state’s restrictions on sex changes for minors during a lawsuit. WPATH has attempted to quash the subpoena, which a judge denied in March. The court case challenges Alabama’s law banning sex changes for individuals under 19. While WPATH argued it was a non-party to the case, the U.S. District Court Judge Liles Burke said in a March ruling that the nature of its guidelines was of “crucial import in this litigation.”

“They’re just doing everything they possibly can to not release them,” Jay Richards, Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, told the Daily Caller. (RELATED: Senate To Vote On Biden Nominee Who Supports ‘Queer Justice’ And ‘Gender-Equitable Relationships’)

“At issue in Alabama is the evidence base for the affirmative care model, and in particular, what studies show about the effectiveness of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for treating minor children who suffer from gender distress,” Joseph Burgo, Vice-director of Genspect, told the Caller. “WPATH insists that its recommendations are science-based and supported by studies demonstrating that the medical approach is effective.”

Experts and advocates who spoke with the Daily Caller in March alleged that the subpoena could cause the entire medical organization to “come crashing down.” They said the subpoena would expose the process, or lack thereof, by which WPATH comes up with its often-cited guidance for transgender children, especially kids.

WPATH recently pushed to remove any minimum age requirement to undergo sex change surgeries or cross-sex hormone therapy. Amy Tishelman, one of the authors of the 8th edition of WPATH’s guidelines, said WPATH changed the guidelines so doctors wouldn’t “be sued because they weren’t following exactly what we said.” Leading hospitals across the country use this guidance to craft their medical practices, including Johns Hopkins, Stanford and Brigham and Women’s. (RELATED: DAMAGED: The Transing Of America’s Kids)

In 2022, WPATH set standards of care for those with a “eunuch” gender identity, recommending hormone suppression, orchiectomy (removal of the testicles) to stop production of testosterone, orchiectomy with or without penectomy to alter the body to match their self-image and orchiectomy followed by hormone replacement with testosterone or estrogen. WPATH even cited information from the Eunuch Archive, an online forum which contains stories of child castration, pedophilia and sexual torture.

“Their credibility will be sunk once it becomes clear that activist demands heavily influenced its recent Standards of Care,” Burgo told the Caller. “How else can you account for the introduction of ‘eunuch identity’ in SOC8, without any evidence to support its existence?” (RELATED: High-Profile ‘Drag Queen’ Responds After Rape Accusations From Former Co-Worker)

“I believe WPATH is stalling because their guidelines and recommendations are actually activist-driven and go against the science,” Burgo said. “Systematic reviews conducted by Finland, Sweden, Norway and the UK, as well as by the medical board in the State of Florida, all found that the evidence base supporting medicalized treatments for minor children is essentially non-existent.”

“I mean, the fact that their guidelines can kind of fluctuate and change in real time…tells you okay, have there been randomized control trials on eunuch status?” Richards said. “What does this even mean? I really think what needs to happen is that this idea that an advocacy organization can pretend to claim to speak for science, that is the thing that I think needs to be exposed. And I think if people are honest and the media and the courts are honest, that’s going to happen.”

The United States is out of step with European countries in regard to its guidelines for gender dysphoric youth. England’s National Health Service (NHS) advised against social transition for children, and banned puberty blockers in most cases in October. The country shut down its only clinic that provided transgender procedures to minors in July, over concerns that doctors were performing procedures without considering the mental health of the children.

The Norwegian Healthcare Investigation Board (NHIB/UKOM) decided in March that transgender surgeries, hormones and puberty blockers are experimental. Finland and Sweden have also found that there is insufficient evidence that the benefits of cross sex hormones, surgeries, and puberty blockers outweigh the costs for children, advocating a cautious approach towards these treatments for minors.

An amicus brief filed by 17 state attorneys general in Florida pointed out this discrepancy in detail. The amicus brief was filed as a judge similarly subpoenaed WPATH for internal communication regarding its transgender guidance as part of an ongoing lawsuit between activist medical organizations and the state regarding its ban on child sex changes.

“In my view, all of this is more than just about general principles concerning a non party not being bothered by a lawsuit,” John Graham, a lawyer in Birmingham, Alabama, said of WPATH’s appeals. “I think this is very much an ideological and I would say, spiritual fight for them. This is what they’re about, is promoting LGBTQ agenda in all its forms.” (RELATED: Biden Admin Tells Catholic Hospital To Put Out Sanctuary Candle Light In Violation Of Religious Beliefs)

Richards said that the subpoena will reveal that WPATH’s guidelines are based more on transgender activism than serious medial science. “I am absolutely certain they did not do a serious analysis of the literature,” Richards said. “I know they didn’t because we can compare their guidelines to the actual systematic reviews that had been done and you’d note the disparity.”

“I suspect they just didn’t do it because they’re so confident of their position, because it’s an ideologically composed organization. It’s an advocacy organization — this idea that it’s a board set up to analyze the preponderance of evidence in the literature, I mean, it’s bizarre.”

The Daily Caller has reached out to WPATH for comment on this report.