American Medical Association: Don’t Operate On Gender Confused Kids
Gender-confused minors should not go under the knife, a major surgical group said in a new policy statement.
The American Medical Association (AMA) appears to have backtracked from its prior support for removing healthy reproductive organs and other body parts from gender-confused children.
The reversal came after the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) officially came out against “gender surgery for children and adolescents” in a “position statement” released on Tuesday.
“ASPS recommends that surgeons delay gender-related breast/chest, genital, and facial surgery until a patient is at least 19 years old,” the group stated. The decision followed questions about the alleged benefits of the surgeries. The group similarly made waves in 2024 when it expressed concerns about the procedures in a comment to City Journal.
The new statement cited the fact that most children outgrow their gender confusion as another reason to delay putting an individual under the knife.
The plastic surgeons’ association cited a 2025 report from the Department of Health and Human Services, which found minimal evidence in favor of operating on gender-confused individuals.
However, the group says it opposes efforts to formally prohibit these surgeries on minors, calling it “criminalization of medical care.”
The official stance may have forced the hand of a major medical group that for years has endorsed surgeries for gender-confused kids.
The American Medical Association told National Review, “the evidence for gender-affirming surgical intervention in minors is insufficient for us to make a definitive statement.”
“[T]he AMA agrees with ASPS that surgical interventions in minors should be generally deferred to adulthood,” the group told National Review.
Despite evidence being low for both surgical and chemical interventions, the AMA apparently maintains its support for transgender drugs.
The American Medical Association agrees with the ASPS about surgeries.
If the AMA was wrong about surgeries, could it also have been wrong about hormones? pic.twitter.com/r79xtvP1r0
— Leor Sapir (@LeorSapir) February 4, 2026
Secretary of Health Robert F. Kennedy Jr. thanked the American Society of Plastic Surgeons for taking a “stand” on this issue.
“We commend the American Society of Plastic Surgeons for standing up to the overmedicalization lobby and defending sound science,” Secretary Kennedy stated. “By taking this stand, they are helping protect future generations of American children from irreversible harm.”
Do No Harm, a medical reform group, also praised the new policy statement.
Chairman Stanley Goldfarb, a former associate dean at the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school, called it a “thoughtful, scientific, and well-reasoned statement,” in comments sent to Legal Insurrection.
Other groups praised the ruling and suggested adults should also be protected against the procedures.
“Those over 19 actually deserve decent medical care, too,” Democrats for an Informed Approach on Gender wrote on X.
[Featured image via YouTube]
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How can regulations against adults making what are body modifications (like tattoos and piercings) be constitutionally sound? A person’s body is the most personal thing they own. We are against mandated vaccines and other medical interventions performed without consent based on this principle. How can any form of body modification (no matter how ridiculous, useless, or misguided we may consider it personally, that is, for ourselves), be banned for adults because we, personally, have no authority to make such decisions for others (and therefore have no such authority to transmit to the government)?
FYI, when I was 21, I had to have a psychiatric evaluation before my healthcare provider consented to performing a vasectomy. Vasectomy is a great stand-in for sex change, because both involve (potentially) irreversible surgical intervention and have an impact of reproductive ability. This much I might be willing to regard as sound, because only persons of sound mind should be allowed to do something like this to themselves, in part to protect the healthcare provider from future claims of malpractice (performing life-altering surgery on someone they should have known had a reduced capacity to make such choices for themselves). (BTW, at 69 I still consider my decision to have a vasectomy to be the smartest decision I have ever made. All these decades gone by, and I have yet been unable to imagine myself as a parent.)
good for you that you knew early on you didnt want to be a parent and took proper action
which is why I also state
have your abortions
dont have others pay for it and dont expect that someone might tell you they dont like that you did so
There is a huge difference between choosing surgery on yourself, and choosing to have your child murdered! Your body belongs to you; your child’s body does not.
“How can any form of body modification (no matter how ridiculous, useless, or misguided we may consider it personally, that is, for ourselves), be banned for adults”
You WILL notice that this suggestion came from “Democrats for an Informed Approach on Gender” — people who can see that a particular extreme is undesirable, yet unable to reason from first principles what a consistent and rational response should be, because they don’t possess those principles.
But this is the sort of thing that will always happen in a country where it is now considered “common sense” by nearly everybody that an adult’s access to common pharmaceuticals remains unavoidably gate-kept by a professional elite, despite the patient’s will and personal resources.
No, that did not come from Democrats for an Informed Approach on Gender, it came from me. I wrote that. It’s a position I’ve held for decades. “Democrats” didn’t say what I said. They are quoted saying, “Those over 19 actually deserve decent medical care, too.” Arguably true (at face value, but they likely equate “deserve” with “someone else should pay for it”), but also quite different from an argument based on bodily autonomy. Bodily autonomy works both ways – you should control what medical care you both accept/desire and what care you reject. Leftists want to mandate some forms of medical care (vaccines, in particular). OTOH, conservatives defend their bans on recreational narcotics.
“A person’s body is the most personal thing they own.”
According to the Bible, we do not “own” our bodies. They belong to God because he created them, and because Jesus paid for us by his death.
This is why suicide is considered a sin – the sin of theft.
This is true, but US law is not and can’t be based on the Bible. Just as the USA can’t make idolatry a crime — let alone a capital crime — it can’t enforce that Biblical principle either. Which is why suicide and attempted suicide are no longer crimes, as they were in a different era when the first amendment didn’t get much respect.
You are wise in many ways, but you don’t seem to understand the connection between religion and law.
And for those so-called doctors and parents who already have mutilated their children in such manner, we will not stop until we have the legal means to hunt you down, prosecute, and punish you for your crimes against children just like we hunt down, prosecute, and punish 101 y.o. Auschwitz tower guards and book keepers for their crimes against humanity.
We will not stop. Doctors and parents will be punished in this life, or the next.
The US constitution does not allow ex post facto laws. And that’s a principle of English law that goes back all the way to 1485, when Parliament rebuffed Henry VII’s attempt to prosecute for treason those who fought on the losing side at Bosworth Field.
Great moments in obviousness! And you are there!
The sad part about this is that it requires any debate whatsoever.
Those who would perform such surgeries are irredeemably evil and should be treated as such.
A trip through a woodchipper comes to mind.
These surgeries are crimes which should be severely punished, but no human is irredeemable. And your bloodthirstiness is over the top.
Physicians are held to a high standard of care. We are not just technicians who do whatever we are requested and/or paid to do, even if it is contrary to a reasonable standard of care. If a delusional patient believes he would be happier as an amputee confined to a wheelchair, just like a loved one, we would not consider amputating a perfectly normal leg just because he wants it done and we know, technically, how to perform an amputation. While one can make an analogy to other things like vasectomy and plastic surgery that seem to fit, it fails when we apply common sense, or what I call the “giggle test.”
All of your post makes sense except for the first three words.
Physicians are clearly NOT held.
When your child says, “Mama, I want to be a cowboy,” you buy them a hat.
When your child says, “Mama, I want to be a princess,” you buy them a pink dress.
When your child says, “Mama, I want to be a different gender,” you take them to the surgeon.
well in the lefty household the first 2 would be met with a severe response
When your child says, “Mama, I want to be a princess,” you buy them a pink dress.
You buy her a tiara or a crown. She probably already has a pink dress.
She, not ‘they’
‘They’ and ‘them’ ruin the point you’re trying to make.
How stunning and brave to come out against this insanity right after a gigantic multimillion dollar lawsuit judgement.
“AMA President Rip Van Winkle said today in a prepared statement…”
Seems like now that a multimillion dollar lawsuit was successful against doctors for doing trans surgeries to a minor they Medical Association will tell them STOP. Money is the driver of medicine.
good vs bad morals
money doesnt change that
nottt backtracking at all
the dollar signs and the fear of the morally correct doj coming after them
those who proposed such violent actions to violate the ethical codes of do no harm…should be brought up on charges
I suspect this decision by the AMA may have been influenced by the recent $2 million award to a young girl whose breasts were removed as a minor. Most malpractice insurance companies have probably stopped insuring these types of surgeries, especially castrations and hysterectomies of minors.
… American Society of Plastic Surgeons for taking a “stand” on this issue.
Thank you for putting “stand” in scare quotes. I doubt the ASPS has any conception of objective truth.
So they want to protect adults from themselves?! They want to force their notion “decent medical care” on adults who don’t want it? I guess they are genuine Democrats after all!
It is surprising to me as a physician that the American Marxist, er, Medical Association is willing to adopt a position different from that of the American Assho, er Academy of Pediatrics on the subject of gender transition surgery. AAP is definitely *NOT* the most “data-driven” organization around, nor is AMA for that matter. AMA’s membership includes less than 15% of American physicians precisely because of its egregious leftist politics. AAP is even more to the left. Neither my husband nor I belong to AMA, however my husband (pediatrician) does belong to other pediatrics organizations other than AAP, and I belong to other physician organizations appropriate to my subspecialties. Looks like AMA trying to hold on to their coding empire again.
Leave a Comment