As we approach the potential vote on New York State’s Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), on Nov. 5, we confront a pressing issue: the potential unintended consequences of prioritizing equality, particularly concerning the well-being of our children.
While the ERA may or may not ultimately end up on the ballot on the general Election Day, because of a recent lower court ruling, and pending appeal, New Yorkers deserve to understand its impacts. One can be sure, that as long as the current governor and attorney general remain in office, the so-called ERA is not going anywhere. Our children need an informed and active electorate.
The proposed amendment expands fundamental rights, including for minors, encompassing categories such as “sexual orientation,” “gender identity,” and “gender expression.” This extension of rights to minors could empower courts to enforce policies allowing minors to undergo transgender medical interventions without parental involvement.
Irrespective of one’s stance on transgender health care, there are legitimate concerns regarding the safety and long-term effects of such interventions for children and adolescents grappling with gender dysphoria. The proposed changes in the ERA diverge from guidance provided by both international and domestic health care authorities, endangering both children and the health care professionals responsible for their well-being.
Many European nations, once pioneers in transgender health care, have adopted a more cautious approach, particularly concerning youth, citing insufficient evidence supporting the long-term safety of these interventions. Recent actions, such as the U.K.’s National Health Service banning puberty blockers for treating transgender minors, underscore these concerns.
Similarly, Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare determined that the risks of such treatments for minors outweigh the potential benefits, emphasizing the need for more research into their impact.
Regardless of political leanings, there is a valid debate on ethically and safely treating youth gender dysphoria. While some advocate for restrictions on transgender participation in sports and reconsidering LGBTQ education in schools, others advocate for unrestricted care for trans youth, sometimes dismissing mental health counseling as transphobic.
Despite claims that the ERA primarily addresses abortion access, it also encroaches upon parental rights and promotes a radical gender ideology.
Many children facing sexual orientation or mental health challenges are being steered towards transitioning, potentially due to societal acceptance or hopes of alleviating their struggles. However, comprehensive mental health treatment can address these issues, with approximately 80% of childhood gender dysphoria cases resolving by puberty.
The ERA disregards the international and domestic calls to reevaluate how we approach dysphoria in youth, leaving many parents and medical professionals apprehensive about exploring alternative options.
Some parents have faced pressure from health care providers to blindly affirm their child’s desires, with one parent recounting a therapist’s remark: “‘Do you want a dead son or a live daughter?’” Nurse Aaron Kelly, a trans man, experienced similar coercion in a clinic that prioritized immediate hormone treatment over addressing patients’ mental health concerns. When he questioned the treatment of the youth, he was forced to leave his position.
This coercive approach can result in irreversible consequences, as seen in the high discontinuation rate of hormonal therapy and its long-term effects, such as infertility.
Around 30% of hormonal therapy patients discontinue treatment within four years and are left with effects that are often irreversible. One professional who was medically injured by this “gender-affirming care” reflected, “You’re made to believe these slogans… Evidence-based, lifesaving care, safe and effective, medically necessary, the science is settled — and none of that is evidence-based.” The care that these patients are receiving is experimental and we are still just seeing the lifelong implications.
The ERA grants children the right to undergo life-altering medical interventions lacking robust scientific support, bypassing parental authority. Instead, we can support children without resorting to such measures, respecting parental involvement in their health care decisions.
As we strive for equity and justice, we must scrutinize the motivations and consequences of proposed legislation, particularly when it impacts our state Constitution. Is it truly about expanding human rights or political gain?
We owe our kids an understanding of policies that affect them and to vote against those that undermine their best interests.
Stockton is a mother and a member of the Coalition to Protect Kids-NY.
