Penn Medicine halts gender surgeries for minors, complying with Trump’s federal funding ban
By isabelle // 2025-06-02
Copy
 
  • Penn Medicine will stop performing gender-affirming surgeries on patients under 19, complying with a federal order from President Trump.
  • The policy shift follows Trump’s ban on federal funding for institutions providing transition procedures to minors.
  • Critics argue irreversible medical interventions for minors lack sufficient evidence and may worsen mental health outcomes.
  • Financial motives have been exposed, with doctors admitting gender surgeries are highly profitable.
  • The decision reflects a broader cultural clash over gender ideology in medicine and the need to protect children from experimental treatments.
In a landmark decision that underscores the growing national debate over the ethics of pediatric gender transitions, Penn Medicine announced it will no longer perform gender-affirming surgeries on patients under 19, citing compliance with a federal order from President Donald Trump. The move follows Trump’s executive action banning federal funding for institutions that provide gender transition procedures to minors in a policy shift that has reignited discussions about the long-term consequences of medically altering young bodies.

Compliance with federal order ends controversial practices

Penn Medicine, one of the nation’s leading healthcare systems, confirmed it will cease all gender-affirming surgical procedures for minors, including plastic surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, urology, and otorhinolaryngology (head and neck surgeries). Chief Medical Officer PJ Brennan stated, "As a result of current guidance established by the federal government, Penn Medicine will no longer be able to provide gender-affirming surgical procedures for patients under the age of 19." While Brennan framed the decision as difficult, acknowledging the impact on patients and families, critics of pediatric gender transitions argue the move is long overdue. The Trump administration’s order, signed earlier this year, withholds federal grants from institutions that facilitate gender transitions for minors, effectively pressuring hospitals to reconsider these controversial procedures.

The dangers of irreversible medical interventions

A growing body of research suggests that so-called "gender-affirming" interventions carry severe risks, particularly for minors who lack the cognitive maturity to consent to life-altering treatments. Studies indicate that over 80% of children who experience gender dysphoria eventually outgrow it naturally, a phenomenon known as desistance. Yet medical institutions have increasingly pushed irreversible surgeries and hormone therapies, often without adequate mental health evaluations. Even more alarming, gender transition procedures fail to resolve the heightened rates of depression, self-harm, and suicide among gender-dysphoric youth. In some cases, these interventions may exacerbate psychological distress by reinforcing confusion rather than addressing underlying mental health issues. Detransitioners — individuals who regret their transitions — have emerged as vocal critics, detailing the physical and emotional harm caused by rushed medicalization.

Financial motives and activist-driven medicine

Beyond the ethical concerns, financial incentives have also fueled the push for pediatric gender transitions. A 2022 undercover investigation at Vanderbilt University Medical Center exposed doctors admitting that gender surgeries are highly profitable. Dr. Shayne Sebold Taylor was caught on video stating, "These surgeries make a lot of money." Such revelations have raised questions about whether profit, rather than patient well-being, has driven the rapid expansion of these procedures. Philadelphia City Councilmember Rue Landau condemned Penn Medicine’s decision, calling gender-affirming care "life-saving healthcare for young people." However, critics argue that halting irreversible surgeries on minors is a necessary safeguard against medical malpractice. The Trump administration’s funding restrictions reflect a broader effort to protect children from experimental treatments that lack long-term safety data. The policy shift at Penn Medicine is part of a larger cultural and legal clash over gender ideology in medicine and education. Earlier this year, the Trump administration accused the University of Pennsylvania of violating Title IX by allowing transgender swimmer Lia Thomas to compete on the women’s team. The controversy led to the suspension of $175 million in federal funding, signaling a hardline stance against policies that prioritize gender identity over biological reality. While major medical associations like the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) continue to endorse gender-affirming care, dissenting voices—including clinicians, researchers, and detransitioners—are challenging the narrative. Many argue that the medical establishment has abandoned evidence-based practices in favor of activist-driven protocols.

Protecting children from irreversible harm

Penn Medicine’s decision marks a turning point in the national debate over pediatric gender transitions. By complying with federal funding restrictions, the institution has taken a step toward safeguarding minors from irreversible medical interventions that lack sufficient scientific backing. For now, the move serves as a reminder that medicine must prioritize long-term well-being over political ideology — and that protecting vulnerable children from experimental treatments is a moral imperative. Sources for this article include: LifeSiteNews.com NBCPhiladelphia.com CBSNews.com
Copy