Many organizations applauded this decision, including the American Medical Association (AMA), according to the New York Times, and agreed that these surgeries should wait until adulthood.
Because of this, 20 state attorneys general have sent a letter to the AMA regarding their position on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone procedures on children, according to Fox News. The AMA backed off the surgeries because of lack of “clear evidence,” but they have not followed through with a similar strong stance against hormone treatments. The letter shows concern that they continue to have this stance as there is also no sufficient evidence for the hormone blockers.
The problem lies in the fact that, as the letter acknowledged, when the AMA makes a recommendation, patients and doctors listen.
Alabama A.G. Steve Marshall, author of the letter, spoke with Tony Perkins on Washington Watch. He says that first of all, the AMA needs to be an organization that is not championing political advocacy. Instead, they should be defining what is the best medical practice for doctors around the country.
“We were obviously very pleased to be able to see that the AMA endorsed the position of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons — that we're not going to take scalpels to the bodies of kids and understand that there is no basis for being able to do that absent a political agenda on the Left,” says Marshall.
He states that now they need to recognize what science says.
“That there's no basis for puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones being used to deal with gender affirming care,” states Marshall.
Tell us how you really feel
The AG’s letter offers a chance for the AMA to clearly state its position.
“Do they stand with science? Do they stand with what we've seen has been the overwhelming trend coming from Europe, to identify this as experimental treatment of kids and to be able to make it loud and clear to physicians across our country that this is not what we need to be doing to our children?” Marshall asks.
Roughly half the country has gender protection laws like Alabama and Tennessee, and Tennessee the law has been validated by the Supreme Court. But more needs to be done,” Marshall says.
“We still have children throughout our country right now that do not have the protections, and our consumer protection laws are universal across our 50 states. The AMA has the opportunity to send a message to physicians,” says Marshall.
That message, he says, is for those that are working in states that allow the continued experimentation on children … they will face great risk financially as they harm children in ways not validated by science.
Critics points out that, days after the New York trial awarded $2 million to a de-transitioner because of malpractice, these medical organization came out with their statement. That makes it easy to conclude that money is the driver behind these recent policy announcements.
Marshall agrees that the organizations are recognizing a new vulnerability.
“You've seen it even with larger hospital facilities in many of our blue states, suddenly backing up from allowing these clinics to take place in their facilities. I think it’s a liability concern driving this, not philosophical.”
Exposing WPATH was the beginning
He says the Right’s victory lies in exposing WPATH, or the World Professional Association for Transgender Health. They set, he states, the “so-called standards of care for physicians across the world in this area.”
Right-leaning media coverage has played a significant role in increasing scrutiny of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), particularly following the 2024 release of the so-called "WPATH Files"— leaked internal communications that have been widely cited by conservative outlets.
That coverage has contributed to political and institutional responses such as National Health Service (NHS) England distancing itself from WPATH standards as it cited the CASS Review, which criticized WPATH’s lack of developmental rigor and transparency.
There has also been a Congressional investigation launched by Republicans in 2024 into alleged political interference in WPATH guidelines.
“We exposed it for the fraud that it was. When we saw that there were no science and no evidence to back up these standards of care, no longer could physicians of an ideological perspective hide behind these international standards as a way of avoiding liability,” states Marshall.
Because the ASPS weighed in on the conversation in relation to surgeries, he says that the AMA now has a chance to do the same thing with these hormones.
“We think children justify being able to be protected in this way, and we're excited to be able to see their responses,” concludes Marshall.
