Protecting Minors from Medical Malpractice Act of 2025This bill makes a medical practitioner who performs a gender-transition procedure on an individual who is less than 18 years of age liable for any physical, psychological, emotional, or physiological harms from the procedure for 30 years after the individual turns 18.Additionally, if a state requires medical practitioners to perform gender-transition procedures, that state shall be ineligible for federal funding from the Department of Health and Human Services.Under the bill, gender-transition procedures generally include certain surgeries or hormone therapies that change the body of an individual to correspond to a sex that is discordant with the individual's biological sex. They exclude, however, interventions to treat (1) individuals who either have ambiguous external biological sex characteristics or lack a normal sex chromosome structure, sex steroid hormone production, or sex steroid hormone action; (2) infections, injuries, diseases, or disorders caused by a gender-transition procedure; or (3) a physical disorder, injury, or illness that places an individual in imminent danger of death or impairment of a major bodily function.
If enacted, SB209 would create a legal framework that could have significant implications for healthcare providers and minors seeking gender-affirming care. The bill allows individuals to file civil suits up to 30 years after turning 18, which could encourage legal challenges against practitioners and potentially dissuade them from providing such services. Additionally, it prohibits federal funding from being allocated to states that require medical practitioners to perform gender-transition procedures, effectively incentivizing states to align their laws with the stipulations of this bill.
SB209, titled the 'Protecting Minors from Medical Malpractice Act of 2025', seeks to impose substantial restrictions on gender-transition procedures for minors. It establishes a private right of action allowing individuals who receive such procedures to sue the medical practitioners for any harm resulting from these treatments. The bill defines 'gender-transition procedures' broadly, encompassing puberty-blocking drugs, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries intended to alter an individual’s physical characteristics to conform with their gender identity. The legislation emphasizes protecting children from what its proponents describe as potentially harmful medical practices.
The bill has sparked considerable debate among legislators, healthcare professionals, and advocacy groups. Proponents argue it is necessary to shield vulnerable minors from irreversible medical choices that they may regret later in life and to uphold the principle of medical accountability. Conversely, opponents contend that it infringes on personal freedoms, impedes healthcare access for transgender youths, and undermines the ability of medical practitioners to make informed, case-by-case decisions in line with established medical standards. This opposition raises ethical concerns about children's rights to receive necessary medical care and the autonomy of families in making healthcare decisions.