Texas A&M University’s decision to stop providing hormone replacement therapy through the school is not surprising to those who have followed growing concerns about the science supporting what is known as gender-affirming care.
According to reporting from The Texas Tribune, A&M was rare, if not unique, among Texas’ public universities in providing hormone therapy to students who decide to transition.
Even as gender-affirming care — from social transition to hormone therapy to surgery — has become increasingly common, the practice has raised political and scientific concerns.
The reason A&M gave the Tribune for the decision to stop hormonal therapy was a “growing student population and the resulting strain on the A.P. Beutel Health Center.”
That may be. But there are other good reasons for a public university to hit pause on providing life-altering drugs to students while there are still deep and unresolved questions about the medical efficacy of the treatment these drugs support.
While most major American medical organizations have voiced support for gender-affirming care, several European nations, including England, France and Sweden, have taken a hard look at the science and have stepped away from the practice for minors except in very limited circumstances.
A groundbreaking report from England’s National Health Service concluded that for “most young people, a medical pathway will not be the best way to manage their gender-related distress.”
A&M students seeking care are presumably adults, and they have every right to pursue medical care they believe they need. But there are hints that the care they were receiving might put the university at future risk.
The Tribune interviewed one student who received hormone replacement therapy through the school and recalled “how easy the process was.” It involved “an information session with a doctor [who] explained potential risks, health changes and personal medical considerations.”
We don’t know what the student’s course of care was exactly. But a single meeting with a single doctor prior to getting life-altering drugs could very well put A&M at risk of liability.
Hormone therapy can have profound permanent effects on the body, including sterility. There is a growing population of people known as detransitioners who often say they should never have been advised to undergo gender-affirming care.
A law firm has opened in Dallas for the express purpose of handling cases from detransitioners.
Texas A&M has a responsibility to its students. But providing this level of medical intervention should only be done in close concert with doctors who are deeply engaged in a patient’s mental and physical well-being.
That is not the purview of a student health clinic. A&M’s decision, for whatever reason, may spare the university great grief in coming years.
We welcome your thoughts in a letter to the editor. See the guidelines and submit your letter here. If you have problems with the form, you can submit via email at letters@dallasnews.com