Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has accused a doctor of prescribing irreversible puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones to 21 patients, violating a state law that prohibits “sex reassignment” procedures for minors. I filed a complaint.
The lawsuit was filed Thursday against Dr. May C. Lau, who accused her of treating “at least 21 minor patients” for the purpose of “transitioning or affirming their biological sex” in an “unlawful and illegal manner.” He is accused of engaging in “dangerous and experimental medical procedures.” Their gender identity does not match their biological sex. ”
The complaint identifies Lau as an employee of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas and as having admitting privileges at Children’s Medical Center Dallas and Children’s Medical Center Plano.
Get the latest news for free
Subscribe to receive a daily/weekly email with the top stories (plus special offers!) from the Christian Post. Please know before anyone else.
The complaint accuses Mr. Lau of violating Section 161.702(3) of the Texas Health and Safety Code. The law, passed last year as Senate Bill 14, prohibits doctors from administering puberty-blocking drugs to children under most circumstances.
“Lau provides, prescribes, administers, and dispenses testosterone to minor patients for the purpose of transitioning biological sex or affirming the belief that their gender identity does not match their biological sex. “By doing so, he violated the law,” the complaint reads in part.
The lawsuit also briefly describes the experiences of 21 anonymous minor patients, some as young as 14, who were prescribed irreversible puberty-blocking drugs in violation of state law.
“Lau falsified patient medical records, prescriptions, and billing records to ensure that the use of puberty blockers on minor patients was for purposes other than transitioning biological sex or affirming sexual gender beliefs. deceives pharmacies, insurance companies, and/or patients by indicating that their gender identity is inconsistent with their biological sex,” the lawsuit states.
“Texas has passed legislation to protect children from dangerous, unscientific medical interventions that have irreversible and harmful effects,” Paxton said in a statement Thursday.
“Doctors who continue to offer these harmful ‘sex change’ drugs and treatments will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” he added.
SB 14, which was passed in May 2023 and became law in September 2023, would prevent medical professionals from performing mutilating sex reassignment surgeries or prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to children. It is prohibited to do so.
State law states that if a child is “experiencing precocious puberty,” is “born with a medically verifiable genetic disorder of sexual development,” or if a minor is “a male or female.” It included an exception that would allow such a procedure if the person “does not have a normal sex chromosome structure.” This is determined by a doctor through genetic testing. ”
Texas family groups represented by several progressive organizations have filed a lawsuit against SB 14, arguing that it deprives transgender youth of necessary health care.
However, in June, the Texas Supreme Court upheld the law, with Justice Rebecca Eispuru-Huddle writing the majority opinion, stating that “Congress has made no permissible rationale for limiting the types of medical procedures available to children.” “We made a number of policy choices,” he concluded.
“Therefore, we believe that this law does not unconstitutionally deprive parents of their rights, but rather protects physicians and other health care professionals from claiming proprietary rights in their medical licenses and their right to professional freedom. We conclude that this does not constitute an unconstitutional deprivation,” Hadl wrote.
Justice Debra Lehman wrote a dissenting opinion that called the law “cruel” and “unconstitutional” and that the majority opinion “effectively eliminates all medical options currently available to these children.” he claimed.
“This court has long had a strong conceptualization of parental autonomy, but today the court has swiftly discarded that precedent,” Lehmann disagreed.
“Relatedly, the court’s opinion puts all parental decisions at risk of being overturned by the government. Make it something.”