One email included in the filings says that Levine’s chief of staff said the “biggest concern is the section … that lists specific minimum ages for treatment.” It adds: “She is confident, based on the rhetoric she is hearing in [Washington, D.C.] and from what we have already seen, that these specific listings of ages, under 18, will result in devastating legislation for trans care.”
An email states that Levine’s chief of staff asked whether “the specific ages can be taken out” and whether age-based recommendations can be “published or distributed in a way that is less visible.”
One email states that the “minimal ages for the various gender-affirming medical and surgical intervention are consensus-based” before WPATH ultimately removed it. Another document unveiled in the court filing was a 12-point strategic plan to promote the new guidelines, which admit there is a lack of evidence for their suggestions: “Now that we have reviewed the evidence, we are painfully aware of the gaps in the literature and the kinds of research that are needed to support our recommendations.”
Other emails show that WPATH’s Guideline Development Group suggested altering the language of the guidelines based on concerns that phrases like “insufficient evidence” and “limited data” could be used by Republican lawmakers to justify laws that prohibit doctors from providing sex-change drugs and surgeries for minors.
The filings also claim that the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) — the country’s largest association of pediatricians — threatened to oppose WPATH’s guidelines if they maintained the minimum age recommendations.
WPATH did not respond to a request for comment from CNA.
Credit: Source link
