Governor of Ohio, Mike DeWine (R), has signed an executive order prohibiting state hospitals from performing gender-affirming surgeries on children. Although such therapies aren’t frequently performed on adolescents, the ban went into effect immediately.
DeWine recently vetoed a bill to ban all gender-affirming medical treatments for minors (including medication) and to forbid transgender females from participating in female scholastic sports. It’s unclear if his executive order aims to prevent Democratic state legislators from overriding his veto.
DeWine also revealed that “fly-by-night” providers would not be able to provide gender-affirming treatment (including medication) to adults “with no guidance and no basic standards to ensure quality of care” during a press conference held on Friday morning.
The review rules, he claimed, may call for a comprehensive team, including an endocrinologist, bioethicist, and psychiatrist, to help patients through care, develop individualized care plans that include patient informed consent of the “risks” associated with gender-affirming care, and conduct protracted mental health counseling before treatment is even considered.
Lastly, DeWine unveiled draft regulations mandating that Ohio medical organizations report “de-identified information” on cases of gender dysphoria and care.
DeWine acknowledged that he had never encountered any people seeking gender-affirming procedures for their young children and that, in Ohio, such procedures are not carried out.
“There is very little proof that this is happening, but come check,” he said.
The governor emphasized his concern about “fly-by-night operations” that may “set themselves up and begin dispensing hormones” to adults without “the medical care that we know is so very, very crucial” on numerous occasions. He did, however, acknowledge that he had not heard of any concerns about the state’s “fly-by-night operations.”
DeWine noted that House Bill 68, which he vetoed last Friday and would have prohibited transgender minors from receiving gender-affirming attention, does not solve treatment for transgender people. People seeking gender-affirming care may face limitations and obstacles under the draft guidelines DeWine announced today.
The announcement was made today as Ohio House Republicans prepared to resume their spring break by weeks in order to override DeWine’s veto of the anti-trans bill.
Ohio politicians were not expected to visit Columbus again until the end of the month, according to local ABC internet News 5 Cleveland. However, House Republicans decided to return for a January 10 session especially to override DeWine’s veto following his December 29 defeat. In order to push through the anti-trans bill, some lawmakers are perhaps skipping previously scheduled donations to return to the state’s capital.
The veto must be overridden by a three-fifths majority voting in both the Ohio House and Senate, according to News 5. The legislation’s supporter, state representative Josh Williams (R), asserted that the veto would be overridden with sufficient support.
DeWine declined to comment on whether he believed his executive order and the draft laws would convince his fellow Republicans not to override his veto during the press conference on Friday. He claimed that today’s actions were intended to close “holes” in the gender-affirming care debate, which he described as a lack of information regarding the “frequency and conditions” of such care.
“We’re going through with this, whatever the Senate decides,” he declared.
DeWine stated that he would not regard signing an executive order prohibiting state legislators from passing legislation to limit or restrict such treatment, despite his constant position that children, not politicians, may be making decisions about gender-affirming care for their children.
HB 68 forbids transgender individuals from taking part in school sports on teams that reflect their gender identity in addition to outlawing gender-affirming care for minors. DeWine stated that he is focusing on the issue of gender-affirming care and did not make any plans to address that section of the law. He claimed that his veto did not reflect his views on the sports restrictions.
