You need not live in Oregon to submit public comments until November 26th, so please do. You can write to the Rules Coordinator Karen Winkel at karen.j.winkel@dcbs.oregon.gov. Subject line: Public Comment opposing 2025 Gender-Affirming Treatment Rules
I suggest using Lisa's piece to craft your email. If helpful, here is what I wrote to her, thanks to a notice from the LGBT Courage Coalition yesterday. (The hyperlinks don't stay in the cut and paste, but not the most important thing). Some parts I just used their sample letter, such as the Insurance Commissioner promising that detransitioners needs would be addressed, but I assume that is accurate.
Dear Karen Winkel:
I’m writing to submit a public comment to Oregon’s Insurance Commissioner about his proposed rules on gender-affirming treatment.
If enacted, these rules would be harmful to Oregonians. They would prevent ethical medical practitioners from providing the best support to their patients by forcing them to adhere to unscientific and harmful ideological guidelines.
These new rules are not informed by scientists or public health experts, but by activists with extreme and unpopular agendas. They go well beyond what the legislature authorized last year in HB2002.
While HB2002 simply required insurers to cover “medically necessary” care prescribed by a licensed provider and deferred clinical questions to the medical community, the Insurance Commissioner’s proposed rules go much further. They define “accepted standard of care” as adhering to WPATH-8, a controversial document developed by transgender rights activists. As covered in the New York Times, Economist, The BMJ, and a briefing filed by the Alabama Attorney General with the US Supreme Court, WPATH-8 is heavily influenced by a radical political agenda.
WPATH, the organization which created these "standards of care," has been increasingly discredited as an authoritative source for policy direction. It is a grave mistake to follow their guidance as a lode star for gender-distressed people. Too many have already been harmed by WPATH's "guidance." As an example, in WPATH-8 there are no mandated age limits for surgeries and medicalization for gender distressed youth. WPATH-8 also removed a section on ethics and included a section on "Eunuch Gender Identity."
Neither the Insurance Commissioner nor his staff possess any medical expertise or licensure. Their agency regulates financial institutions, not healthcare. Furthermore, no licensed health care professionals were included on the advisory committee that helped draft these rules – rules that now define a legally binding clinical standard of care for the practice of medicine regarding individuals experiencing gender distress.
In addition, while the Insurance Commissioner promised the legislature that he would use this new law to require insurers to pay for “detransition” services, the proposed rules are completely silent on this issue. Further, no detransitioners were included in the advisory group that helped write the rules.
Please research WPATH further before putting the lives and well-being of Oregonians at risk. Please talk to detransitioners and listen to their stories. Do not implement these rules as they stand.
Sadly, I doubt they will read any of them. It's a matter of showing up and being part of a tally. I agree this will likely pass no matter how many take the time to contact them. But I also believe it's our duty to be on the permanent record using the democratic process to make a public comment with our opposition to these terrible rules, in whatever way works for each person. Bullet points etc. are great! But a haiku would also be fine, as long as they are added to the tally of names of Americans against these changes.
This is excellent Lisa. In particular this piece provides an informative, well-researched review of the background on WPATH that should be tremendously helpful for those who are not yet conversant with these issues, which is, unfortunately, still far too many people. I hope it will be widely read and shared.
"And that they rejected an amendment that would cover detransition care—which was proposed by a Republican."
—> This part, to me, is the strongest proof of nefarious longer-term planning behind "gender" "medicine"—going beyond agency and policy capture, into corruption of the main principles that underlie medical insurance (public and private alike).
Specifically, insurance has long been expected to cover the consequences of (to put it simplistically) mistakes, bad decisions, or bad judgments—whether by practitioners, or even by the patient herself/himself.
.
On practitioner mistakes/misconduct: Typical insurance plans DO underwrite the reconstructive surgeries needed to repair botched cosmetic surgery—even though cosmetic surgery itself (other than "gender-affirming care" of course) is not covered by any U.S. health insurer.
(If "gender-affirming" surgeries remain legal—for adults—after a modicum of sanity is restored, then obviously they should be reclassified as the cosmetic procedures that they are and stripped of all insurance coverage. Detransition care, on the other hand—including lifetime supplies of hormones for anyone who has had the body's original sources of sex-axis hormone production removed—ought to be underwritten.)
.
And even if one is inclined to view "transition" more cynically as caused by the patient's own misjudgment (an insane opinion to hold about pediatric patients), then it would still fall into the same purview as injuries caused by other kinds of risk-taking behavior—ALL of which are covered by American medical insurers, in the same way and to the same extent as injuries that are in no way the patient's own 'fault'.
So once again, even if we were to go by trans activists' BS claims that detransitioners "were never rlly trans", it would STILL be a singular, one-of-a-kind violation of the basic principles of medical insurance to exclude detransition coverage.
We the women of Scotland (Where Women Won’t Wheesht ) are watching the US post election - many of us took an educated guess that Trump would win knowing as we do just how angry and upset females everywhere are about the loss of rights not to mention the denial of material reality - good luck to everyone over the pond we stand with you in this crazy fight
I'm working with a group that has written a federal bill to address this and other problems caused by gender ideology. We hope to intercede before Trump swoops in and "saves the day" with a presidential signing statement. Trump still uses expressions like "sex assigned at birth." We believe if he takes a limited approach with poorly crafted, inaccurate language, it will make the problem worse. Attorneys general in blue states will simply sue over his signing statement and tie the issue up for years more. Youth in Oregon and other Democratic-led states will still suffer. We want to build a broad based coalition from the Left and Right to engage Americans in support of a comprehensive solution from female athletics to privacy and other sex-based rights.
If you want to connect to help this effort, message me via substack.
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer.
Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned.
However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (primarily women).
Others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
Finally, it's past time for the LGB community to separate themselves from the trans activists who are trying to take away the rights of women to fairness in sports and to privacy and safety in their restrooms, locker rooms and prisons. They also advocate for the chemical and surgical mutilation of children many of whom would grow up gay.
Their actions are evil and the
understandable negative reaction to the harm they are causing is spilling over to innocent people who are just going about their business, marrying and leading their lives.
Consider this: One of Ray Blanchard's famous case studies, natal male now returned to identifying with his biology, is gone as a case study. Sam Kaye, of Call Me Sam YouTube channel, was cited as possible "genetic link" case, because his father had "transitioned" and Sam became "Maya" in his 20s after a tumultuous childhood and young adulthood. Makes you wonder how many other cases are now detransitioned, completely evaporating the "evidence" WPATH loves to cite. I'm waiting for Blanchard and Cantor to acknowledge this problem with their published research from the past, as I tagged both with this information on X. Then I was suddenly put in X time out. I recently started developing the Wellness Checklist after helping a teen boy out of Pink Mist rabbit hole in just 6 weeks of critical thinking work. Conclusion: "Paul" was influenced by early exposure to porn on his smart phone. A reflection he offered, not prompted by me. He's gardening with Grandma, playing board games with Mom and Dad and doing the Primal Fitness workouts. It's a miraculous list, that Wellness Checklist!
In NY, rather than tying abortion rights to so-called "gender affirming care" as was done in Oregon, Prop 1 did something worse. People were lied to - in every single summary of this proposition to change our state constitution - and told that Prop 1 protected women's abortion rights, when it does no such thing. Instead, it enshrines "gender Identity" - a made-up concept with a circular definition that is unfalsifiable and unverifiable - in law as a protected class. Of course, this will be used to protect rules that have already been put in place to put males in female sports and spaces, to teach children about "gender identity" in public school, and to medically alter vulnerable young pre-teens, teens and adults to appear like the opposite sex, while negatively impacting their health. So, Oregon or NY, we're in trouble!!!!
In the comments, people could not believe that this is actually historically accurate. What is even MORE crazy, is that gender medicine is doing pretty much the same thing!
This is not supported by anything near a majority of Americans. If Oregon voters want this fine, but let them live with the costs which are likely to be substantial and other - more important for sure - the almost predictable negative human consequences. In my opinion, American health and medical associations and their support for this kind of legislation just to enrich their members are disgraceful. I would encourage Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy focus their government efficiency efforts on them. They are a disgrace to America.
Oregon voters voices are drowned out by the Portland and Eugene areas. I have suspected for a while we are a more purple than blue state-Trump got 45% of the votes here. I’m also inclined to be suspicious of that fact that there has not been a republican governor here in about as many years as we’ve been a vote by mail only state. In my county the Republican Party is strong and cohesive and making a difference. We have successfully shut down the schools in our county and neighborhood counties schools from hosting drag queen shows with our taxpayer dollars, by simply bombarding the principals with polite but firm phone calls. It can be done here but it takes hard work.
Lisa is a journalist, not an activist, so it's not appropriate for her to push a lobbying effort, but see my comment above with an email address and my own letter. I can't find a link with a clear action and templates to share anywhere. I got an email from both the LGBT courage coalition and DIAG about this, but the suggestion to contact the committee is only in my email, and I can't find an action to link to on either of their sites.
If you don’t mind, I’d like to offer an editorial linguistic comment. I find the strike through font is confusing, and think it’s more direct to say MTF or FTM. Former names in parentheses.
It’s the language shenanigans that are infuriating for people like me who studied grammar intensively. I reject the way they construct their arguments for grammatical gymnastics. No room for free thinkers when joining what is essentially a cult.
You need not live in Oregon to submit public comments until November 26th, so please do. You can write to the Rules Coordinator Karen Winkel at karen.j.winkel@dcbs.oregon.gov. Subject line: Public Comment opposing 2025 Gender-Affirming Treatment Rules
I suggest using Lisa's piece to craft your email. If helpful, here is what I wrote to her, thanks to a notice from the LGBT Courage Coalition yesterday. (The hyperlinks don't stay in the cut and paste, but not the most important thing). Some parts I just used their sample letter, such as the Insurance Commissioner promising that detransitioners needs would be addressed, but I assume that is accurate.
Dear Karen Winkel:
I’m writing to submit a public comment to Oregon’s Insurance Commissioner about his proposed rules on gender-affirming treatment.
If enacted, these rules would be harmful to Oregonians. They would prevent ethical medical practitioners from providing the best support to their patients by forcing them to adhere to unscientific and harmful ideological guidelines.
These new rules are not informed by scientists or public health experts, but by activists with extreme and unpopular agendas. They go well beyond what the legislature authorized last year in HB2002.
While HB2002 simply required insurers to cover “medically necessary” care prescribed by a licensed provider and deferred clinical questions to the medical community, the Insurance Commissioner’s proposed rules go much further. They define “accepted standard of care” as adhering to WPATH-8, a controversial document developed by transgender rights activists. As covered in the New York Times, Economist, The BMJ, and a briefing filed by the Alabama Attorney General with the US Supreme Court, WPATH-8 is heavily influenced by a radical political agenda.
WPATH, the organization which created these "standards of care," has been increasingly discredited as an authoritative source for policy direction. It is a grave mistake to follow their guidance as a lode star for gender-distressed people. Too many have already been harmed by WPATH's "guidance." As an example, in WPATH-8 there are no mandated age limits for surgeries and medicalization for gender distressed youth. WPATH-8 also removed a section on ethics and included a section on "Eunuch Gender Identity."
Neither the Insurance Commissioner nor his staff possess any medical expertise or licensure. Their agency regulates financial institutions, not healthcare. Furthermore, no licensed health care professionals were included on the advisory committee that helped draft these rules – rules that now define a legally binding clinical standard of care for the practice of medicine regarding individuals experiencing gender distress.
In addition, while the Insurance Commissioner promised the legislature that he would use this new law to require insurers to pay for “detransition” services, the proposed rules are completely silent on this issue. Further, no detransitioners were included in the advisory group that helped write the rules.
Please research WPATH further before putting the lives and well-being of Oregonians at risk. Please talk to detransitioners and listen to their stories. Do not implement these rules as they stand.
I appreciate your consideration of this matter.
earlier this week there was a devastating post on PITT from a mom in Oregon about how the law there removed her teen from her care ...
Those facts are also a vital and powerful part of the rejection of this OR policy.
Yes, absolutely.
Submitted from WA
Sadly, I doubt they will read any of them. It's a matter of showing up and being part of a tally. I agree this will likely pass no matter how many take the time to contact them. But I also believe it's our duty to be on the permanent record using the democratic process to make a public comment with our opposition to these terrible rules, in whatever way works for each person. Bullet points etc. are great! But a haiku would also be fine, as long as they are added to the tally of names of Americans against these changes.
This is excellent Lisa. In particular this piece provides an informative, well-researched review of the background on WPATH that should be tremendously helpful for those who are not yet conversant with these issues, which is, unfortunately, still far too many people. I hope it will be widely read and shared.
"And that they rejected an amendment that would cover detransition care—which was proposed by a Republican."
—> This part, to me, is the strongest proof of nefarious longer-term planning behind "gender" "medicine"—going beyond agency and policy capture, into corruption of the main principles that underlie medical insurance (public and private alike).
Specifically, insurance has long been expected to cover the consequences of (to put it simplistically) mistakes, bad decisions, or bad judgments—whether by practitioners, or even by the patient herself/himself.
.
On practitioner mistakes/misconduct: Typical insurance plans DO underwrite the reconstructive surgeries needed to repair botched cosmetic surgery—even though cosmetic surgery itself (other than "gender-affirming care" of course) is not covered by any U.S. health insurer.
(If "gender-affirming" surgeries remain legal—for adults—after a modicum of sanity is restored, then obviously they should be reclassified as the cosmetic procedures that they are and stripped of all insurance coverage. Detransition care, on the other hand—including lifetime supplies of hormones for anyone who has had the body's original sources of sex-axis hormone production removed—ought to be underwritten.)
.
And even if one is inclined to view "transition" more cynically as caused by the patient's own misjudgment (an insane opinion to hold about pediatric patients), then it would still fall into the same purview as injuries caused by other kinds of risk-taking behavior—ALL of which are covered by American medical insurers, in the same way and to the same extent as injuries that are in no way the patient's own 'fault'.
So once again, even if we were to go by trans activists' BS claims that detransitioners "were never rlly trans", it would STILL be a singular, one-of-a-kind violation of the basic principles of medical insurance to exclude detransition coverage.
We the women of Scotland (Where Women Won’t Wheesht ) are watching the US post election - many of us took an educated guess that Trump would win knowing as we do just how angry and upset females everywhere are about the loss of rights not to mention the denial of material reality - good luck to everyone over the pond we stand with you in this crazy fight
I'm working with a group that has written a federal bill to address this and other problems caused by gender ideology. We hope to intercede before Trump swoops in and "saves the day" with a presidential signing statement. Trump still uses expressions like "sex assigned at birth." We believe if he takes a limited approach with poorly crafted, inaccurate language, it will make the problem worse. Attorneys general in blue states will simply sue over his signing statement and tie the issue up for years more. Youth in Oregon and other Democratic-led states will still suffer. We want to build a broad based coalition from the Left and Right to engage Americans in support of a comprehensive solution from female athletics to privacy and other sex-based rights.
If you want to connect to help this effort, message me via substack.
To whom you are attracted sexually is purely subjective and therefore cannot reasonably be contested by an outside observer.
Where you decide to live your life on a spectrum of superficial, stereotypical male to female attributes (and we all do) is also purely subjective and similarly cannot be questioned.
However, your biological sex reflects an objective reality which cannot be changed by your subjective personal view and futile attempts to do so can result in serious health impacts to you as well as harms to members of the sex you are impersonating (primarily women).
Others who are grounded in objective reality should never be forced to accept your subjective version of your actual biological sex.
Finally, it's past time for the LGB community to separate themselves from the trans activists who are trying to take away the rights of women to fairness in sports and to privacy and safety in their restrooms, locker rooms and prisons. They also advocate for the chemical and surgical mutilation of children many of whom would grow up gay.
Their actions are evil and the
understandable negative reaction to the harm they are causing is spilling over to innocent people who are just going about their business, marrying and leading their lives.
XXX
Consider this: One of Ray Blanchard's famous case studies, natal male now returned to identifying with his biology, is gone as a case study. Sam Kaye, of Call Me Sam YouTube channel, was cited as possible "genetic link" case, because his father had "transitioned" and Sam became "Maya" in his 20s after a tumultuous childhood and young adulthood. Makes you wonder how many other cases are now detransitioned, completely evaporating the "evidence" WPATH loves to cite. I'm waiting for Blanchard and Cantor to acknowledge this problem with their published research from the past, as I tagged both with this information on X. Then I was suddenly put in X time out. I recently started developing the Wellness Checklist after helping a teen boy out of Pink Mist rabbit hole in just 6 weeks of critical thinking work. Conclusion: "Paul" was influenced by early exposure to porn on his smart phone. A reflection he offered, not prompted by me. He's gardening with Grandma, playing board games with Mom and Dad and doing the Primal Fitness workouts. It's a miraculous list, that Wellness Checklist!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz0Zy-J5OYc&t=20s
In NY, rather than tying abortion rights to so-called "gender affirming care" as was done in Oregon, Prop 1 did something worse. People were lied to - in every single summary of this proposition to change our state constitution - and told that Prop 1 protected women's abortion rights, when it does no such thing. Instead, it enshrines "gender Identity" - a made-up concept with a circular definition that is unfalsifiable and unverifiable - in law as a protected class. Of course, this will be used to protect rules that have already been put in place to put males in female sports and spaces, to teach children about "gender identity" in public school, and to medically alter vulnerable young pre-teens, teens and adults to appear like the opposite sex, while negatively impacting their health. So, Oregon or NY, we're in trouble!!!!
That’s horrible.
I came across this SNL skit while scrolling one night: Ariana Grande as a castrated child
https://youtu.be/VmI1MSmHFA0?si=roFsbDXFMPaV-vJc
In the comments, people could not believe that this is actually historically accurate. What is even MORE crazy, is that gender medicine is doing pretty much the same thing!
This is not supported by anything near a majority of Americans. If Oregon voters want this fine, but let them live with the costs which are likely to be substantial and other - more important for sure - the almost predictable negative human consequences. In my opinion, American health and medical associations and their support for this kind of legislation just to enrich their members are disgraceful. I would encourage Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy focus their government efficiency efforts on them. They are a disgrace to America.
Oregon voters voices are drowned out by the Portland and Eugene areas. I have suspected for a while we are a more purple than blue state-Trump got 45% of the votes here. I’m also inclined to be suspicious of that fact that there has not been a republican governor here in about as many years as we’ve been a vote by mail only state. In my county the Republican Party is strong and cohesive and making a difference. We have successfully shut down the schools in our county and neighborhood counties schools from hosting drag queen shows with our taxpayer dollars, by simply bombarding the principals with polite but firm phone calls. It can be done here but it takes hard work.
Lisa, Could you please edit your article to include the information (in a comment below) about how to lobby the OR gov't concerning this?
This is a great article but it needs this action linked into it.
Thank-you!
Lisa is a journalist, not an activist, so it's not appropriate for her to push a lobbying effort, but see my comment above with an email address and my own letter. I can't find a link with a clear action and templates to share anywhere. I got an email from both the LGBT courage coalition and DIAG about this, but the suggestion to contact the committee is only in my email, and I can't find an action to link to on either of their sites.
If you don’t mind, I’d like to offer an editorial linguistic comment. I find the strike through font is confusing, and think it’s more direct to say MTF or FTM. Former names in parentheses.
It’s the language shenanigans that are infuriating for people like me who studied grammar intensively. I reject the way they construct their arguments for grammatical gymnastics. No room for free thinkers when joining what is essentially a cult.