Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gender Affirming Care topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trans advocates say budget language banning Medicaid-funded gender-affirming mental health care would put lives at risk
Summary
Dozens of transgender Ohioans and advocacy groups testified that sections in House Bill 96 would bar Medicaid funding for mental-health services that 'promote or affirm' social gender transition, and they told the Senate committee that the change would worsen suicide and homelessness among trans youth and adults.
Multiple witnesses at the Senate Medicaid Committee hearing urged lawmakers to strike provisions in House Bill 96 that would prohibit Medicaid reimbursement for mental-health services described in the bill as promoting or affirming social gender transition.
"This bill will do nothing but harm for my fellow trans individuals here in Ohio," said Cookie Dixon, a 20-year-old transgender woman who testified she had been approved for Medicaid to afford hormones and mental-health care. "Mental health services that are targeted at and affirm queer people are highly important for our safety and well-being."
Speakers included national- and state-level advocates and dozens of Ohio residents who provided personal testimony about suicide attempts, family rejection and homelessness. Justin Baker, a software administrator who described multiple hospitalizations for suicidal ideation, told the committee: "My care team saved my life. My care team understands, accepts, and acknowledges that I'm transgender."
TransOhio executive director Sarah Adkisson told senators the budget language mirrors recent federal statements and would be both medically inaccurate and dangerous. "The idea that sex is binary and immutable is not supported by science," she said. She and other witnesses cited positions from major medical societies — including the American Medical Association, the Endocrine Society and the American Academy of Pediatrics — which endorse gender-affirming care and supportive mental-health services.
Witnesses described concrete harms they expect if Medicaid-funded affirming care is restricted: increased suicide attempts, reduced access to medications and counseling, and greater rates of youth homelessness. "This will force these children back onto the street and back into the hands of their abusers," said Raven Tadlock, an 18-year-old who recounted a violent attack near a community event.
Legal advocates also warned of immediate litigation risk. Sarah Adkisson and others said the language could conflict with federal civil-rights protections recognized in court, notably Bostock v. Clayton County, which affirmed that discrimination based on transgender status can constitute sex discrimination.
Senators heard repeated pleas for lawmakers to remove or revise the provisions. Many witnesses asked that the legislature preserve Medicaid coverage for evidence-based mental-health care and social supports. The committee took no immediate action at the hearing.
The hearing placed human stories and clinical expertise side by side, and witnesses urged senators to weigh the documented mental-health effects of denial of affirming services when considering final budget language.
