States, Catholic hospital network file suit against HHS transgender regulation

A Catholic hospital network, five states, and the Christian Medical & Dental Associations have filed suit against the Department of Health and Human Services over regulations related to persons who identify themselves as transgendered.

Under the regulations, a medical provider or private insurer’s decision not to provide gender-transition procedures is seen as a violation of federal civil rights laws that bar sex discrimination.

“We believe that it is important to ensure that civil rights protections are extended to transgender individuals to afford them equal access to health coverage, including for health services related to gender transition,” the department stated in its regulation. “The across-the-board categorization of all transition-related treatment, for example as experimental, is outdated and not based on current standards of care.”

I am glad that the Church is opposing the liberal federal government and their treacherous attempts to make religion change. We need to stand strong against the New World Order.

HHS regulations overstep the bounds of ethics and decency when they try to force unwilling doctors and hospitals to mutilate patients. It is not possible to change a man into a woman or a woman into a man through surgery. That would require changing all the sex chromosomes in every cell of the body.

The new rules don’t force doctors to perform sex reassignment surgery if that is not a kind of surgery they normally provide:

Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said the rule is intended to prevent discrimination against transgender people in getting access to all kinds of health care.

The ACA rule does not mandate what kind of care doctors can and cannot give. It bans discrimination. It’s there to make sure that transgender people can get the treatment we need without facing harassment — or worse.”

It applies, she said, not only to transition-related care “but also to getting care for other health issues, from colds to cancer. It simply requires that medical decisions be made based on medicine, not prejudice.”

I was going by this from the linked news article:

“Under the regulations, a medical provider or private insurer’s decision not to provide gender-transition procedures is seen as a violation of federal civil rights laws that bar sex discrimination.”

If there is no chance that the regulation violates the religious liberty of doctors, hospitals, and insurors, why the lawsuit?

Also found in the linked article:

For example, the suit says, a doctor performing mastectomies to treat breast cancer would be barred from declining to perform the same surgery for sex reassignment.

So even if you are a physician who isn’t in the basis of doing sexual reassignment surgeries, you could conceivably be roped into doing one (or, more likely, threatened with being forced to do one and then having to pay the price) if you perform other services which could, conceivably, be related.

Physicians should have the right to limit to the scope of their conscience and they should have the right to conscientious objection. If physician A isn’t willing to do mastectomies for sex reassignment purposes, but physician B is, then physician A is free to do more mastectomies for cancer related purposes while physicians B can do more mastectomies for sex reassignment purposes. Ultimately everyone wins.

If physician B isn’t available then that’s an opportunity for locum physicians to step in, or allied group to fund or create transportation or arrangements for individuals to find a physician B. In a location rural enough where no physician B exists, its likely there are many other reasons rather than physician A’s reluctance that an elective surgery isn’t on the docket. Speaking as someone in an under serviced area, we have enough issues pumping out the absolutely essential and time critical surgeries.

But, if the situation in the US is anything like our recent shake-up about physician conscience rights in Canada, I suspect ensuring access to these types of surgeries is only secondary to the true purpose. It’s about ensuring that everyone in the medical community gets with the program. Either you will affirm, support, and actively assist a patient’s quest to transition or you don’t belong in medicine.

An article from the Natl Catholic Register here.

To me, this is one of the smaller wavelets that preceeds the big wave. The left is going to force far more on us than this.

Wasn’t it Cdl George who said he would die in bed; that his successor would die in prison and the next bishop would die a martyr?

Yes, and he also said: ***‘His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.’ ***

It does not seem to me that the good Cardinal thought we are at the end; rather, he was simply saying rough waters lie ahead and that (as usual) the Church will have to rebuild society after the turmoil (my words).

“The effect is that there are doctors all across the country that are going to be asked to perform gender transition procedures, even when they believe it is going to be physically and emotionally harmful to the patient and against their best medical judgment,” Luke Goodrich, deputy general counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, told CNA.

I think that this is just a scare tactic to imply that doctors who don’t normally perform or have any expertise in sex reassignment surgery are suddenly going to be forced to do such surgeries. If, on the other hand, a doctor who normally performs mastectomies for women with breast cancer refuses to perform a mastectomy on a trans-woman with breast cancer, that would be a problem and would run afoul of the new rules.

How exactly would that work? Given there is no breast tissue to become cancerous…

It’s more than that. It trying to force hospitals out of the equation, as if they are just places where certain procedure happen to take place. It is as if the hospital itself is not allowed to have any position at all, and that everything is purely between the doctor and the patient, and nobody else is allowed to have a position.

One area I can see being a problem is abortion. Say Dr X worked at County General and had provided surgical abortions. Dr X leaves and gets hired by Catholic General. This policy says that hospitals cannot tell Dr X that he cannot perform abortions using Catholic General’s facilities, equipment, or staff.

And this would apply to transition surgeries as well. Dr Y is a plastic surgeon that used to do transition surgeries at Count General, but leaves and is hired by Catholic General. Are you saying that Catholic General must provide the transition surgery since Dr Y has expertise in sex reassignment surgery?

I do think this is where the HHS wants to go. This is their backdoor. And it will succeed if we keep up with this trope of decisions being purely between the patient and the doctor.

Trans-women (male to female) will have breasts that look like a woman’s if they are taking hormones. Also, even men can get breast cancer:

Even though men don’t have breasts like women, they do have a small amount of breast tissue. The “breasts” of an adult man are similar to the breasts of a girl before puberty. In girls, this tissue grows and develops, but in men, it doesn’t.

But because it is still breast tissue, men can get breast cancer. Men get the same types of breast cancers that women do, but cancers involving the parts that make and store milk are rare.

Looks don’t get cancer. Tissue does.

Which, as I understand it, is exceedingly less likely due to the amount of actual breast tissue being significantly less than a woman’s. The surgery men receive in a transition doesn’t increase the amount of breast tissue, though the hormones may do so. And I would argue it is precisely the hormones that increase the risk, by causing growth that would not naturally occur.

But this is all beside the point. You and I both know this policy isn’t intended to make sure trans-women get cancer care or even a mastectomy. This policy is intended to force hospital to either hire staff or permit staff to perform transition surgeries, using hospital equipment, supplies, and staff, against the hospital’s policy.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit