New Zealand court stops trans puberty blockers ban

A New Zealand court has ordered ministers not to enforce a ban on prescriptions of puberty blockers for trans young people, pending the outcome of a judicial review.

New Zealand’s rightwing government introduced a ban last month, over objections from their ministry of health.

PATHA – an interdisciplinary association that works to promote the health, wellbeing and rights of transgender people – is seeking a judicial review of the ban and applied for an urgent injunction to stop the ban coming into effect on 19 December.

The High Court of New Zealand has now ruled that there was “no evidence” to support an urgent ban on new prescriptions, asking why the government hadn’t thought it was necessary to take action against similar prescriptions for cisgender young people.

The High Court has not yet reached a decision on the merits of PATHA’s judicial review, but said that the challenge was “perhaps more than arguable” – citing significant evidence supporting their claim that the ban was “a political decision and contrary to advice from the ministry”.

PATHA argued that restrictions on puberty blocker prescriptions would “lead to consequences which are lifelong, irreversible and significantly harmful to transgender young people”, while the government cited the recommendations of the controversial Cass review and Wes Streeting’s restrictions on prescriptions for puberty blockers in the UK.

But the court was not persuaded that there was evidence of any “immediate risk” to young people if blockers continued to be prescribed, saying that blockers are “reversible”, with “no evidence that they affect fertility”. The court also suggested that a ban focused only on treatment for gender incongruence could be discriminatory.

According to the court, given the likely mental health impact of such a ban, “negative outcomes from a ban are a far more immediate concern”.

For Jess O’Thomson, Good Law Project’s trans rights lead, the ruling shows the benefits of courts “properly considering the reasons behind decisions on medical treatment”.

“Decisions on medical treatment should be for medical professionals,” said O’Thomson. “The increasing trend of politicians wading into these sensitive decisions is putting vulnerable patients at risk. Anyone who has worked closely with trans youth over the past year has already seen the devastating impact of the UK’s puberty blockers ban.

“Politicians should only meddle in decisions taken by healthcare professionals and their patients when it’s absolutely essential. And when they do, their decisions must be driven by robust evidence instead of bowing to a transphobic panic.”