Area's state leaders address passage of bill banning trans youth care

LAFAYETTE, Ind. — On Monday, the Indiana House approved Senate Bill 480 that would, if signed by Gov. Eric Holcomb, ban Hoosier youths from receiving gender-affirming care.

The bill would ban doctors from providing Hoosiers under the age of 18 with gender transition care, such as hormones, puberty blockers or gender reassignment surgery. If signed, the bill would also require any individual under the age of 18 to end current treatment by the end of the year.

During the committee hearings, IU Health and other health organization leaders told lawmakers that minors in Indiana cannot receive gender reassignment surgeries. Only with the consent of a parent are they able to receive medication gender-affirming hormone treatments and puberty blockers.

But if this bill is signed, doctors will no longer be allowed to provide any forms of treatment to trans youth.

Senate Bill 480 passed through the general assembly after the house passed the bill 65-30 primarily along Republican party lines.

The bill was authored by Sen. Tyler Johnson, Sen. Ed Charbonneau and Sen. Gary Byrne.

Sen. Ron Alting (R-Lafayette), Rep. Chris Campbell (D-West Lafayette), and Rep. Sheila Klinker (D-Lafayette) all voted against the bill, while Sen. Spencer Deery (R-West Lafayette) voted for the bill.

The Journal & Courier reached out to each state official in hopes of gaining insight into how they felt about the passage of the bill or explain why they may have voted the way they did.

Out of the four officials representing the Greater Lafayette area, the J&C heard back from Alting, Campbell and Deery at the time of reporting.

Alting: Bill created a misconception

Alting spoke on the phone with the J&C and explained why he voted no on the bill.

Alting found two major issues with the bill, primarily that the bill created a misconception regarding the issues surrounding trans youth care and how the bill intrinsically takes away parents' right to consent on issues dealing with their children.

"This bill is a politician's bill, and it is one that has a very wrong perception about it," Alting said. "Usually, when you write laws, it's because something is broken and you need to fix it.

"There's two parts to this bill, it's a very simple bill. The first part is dealing with how you can get a sex change under the age of 18 in the state of Indiana. Now, I support that, 100 percent. I do not think anyone under the age of 18 should get a sex change because it's irreversible and once you do it, it's done.

"However, there are no sex change operations in Indiana. Every single medical organization came before the health care committee and testified that they never had done such a surgery and that they never will. This includes Riley's, IU, Franciscan, and every medical organization, and I mean everyone in Indiana.

"That's why I say it's a politicians bill, because it gives the perception, you can go get that (sex change operation) now. But you can't.

"I think it's really misleading to the point that you can get these surgeries. And I don't want my name on something that basically is not telling the truth."

His second primary issue with the bill is how it takes away rights from parents, and how creating these types of laws, it could create a blueprint for taking away other rights from parents in the future.

"The second part deals with the pills, steroids, etc. The bill states you cannot get steroids or any of those types of hormones under the age of 18.

"There's only one problem with that," Alting continued, "and in order for them (trans youth) to do that (receive gender-affirming hormone treatments), they have to have parental consent. The parents got to agree that their child can do that.

"What that means is this bill is going against parental rights.

"Now, a politician would say, while wait a minute, it's wrong we can go against parental right here. But let me tell you something. You're either for parental rights or you are against parental rights. You don't pick and choose what rights a parent can have.

"And this is my point, I've been an elected official for 28 years, when you start going down a road of taking away parental rights, let me tell you what happens. If you take away parental rights in this category, look out for what happens down the road, because there's going to be another parental right that's going to be closer to home for you as a voter.

"It doesn't stop there.

"I am for parental rights."

Campbell: Heart breaks for transgender youth, parents

Rep. Campbell sent her response via an email hours after the House had voted to approve the bill.

“My heart is breaking for all of our Hoosier transgender youth and their parents today,” Campbell said. “Many of these families have spent years working through the process of accessing this medically necessary care, and not only does Senate Bill 480 ban all gender-affirming care for minors moving forward, it cruelly halts the treatments that have already been implemented.

“What’s more, I have serious concerns about the constitutionality of this bill and suspect the supermajority has once more signed the state and taxpayers up for months, if not years, of expensive litigation.

“We’ve seen time and time again the grief and harm caused by Statehouse Republicans getting in the way of the patient, doctor and parental relationship and decision-making process. I am calling on Gov. Eric Holcomb to stand up against this government overreach and veto this discriminatory piece of legislation.”

Deery: A tough vote

Sen. Deery sent the J&C an email explaining his position on why he voted yes for SB 480.

"This was a tough vote and a close call because I believe legislators should be very cautious when regulating medical practices and parental choice.

"I reviewed the evidence and considered the testimony on both sides and was moved as I listened to tragic stories from individuals whose lives and health were permanently and negatively impacted by these interventions and who felt the system pushed them into the decision before their brains, bodies and gender identities were fully developed.

"I believe it is appropriate to draw boundaries in the interest of protecting young Hoosiers, which is why I ultimately decided to support the legislation."

Noe Padilla is a reporter for the Journal & Courier. Email him at Npadilla@jconline.com and follow him on Twitter at 1NoePadilla.

This article originally appeared on Lafayette Journal & Courier: Local representatives address passage of bill banning trans youth care