Senate committee passes bill limiting gender affirming care, despite opposition from doctors

Four Senators on the South Dakota Senate Health and Human Services committee voted Wednesday to advance a bill limiting several forms of gender-affirming care for minors.

The bill, House Bill 1080, will now advance to the South Dakota Senate floor in the coming days. If it passes there, as it did in the South Dakota House on a 60-10 vote, it will land on Gov. Kristi Noem’s desk. Noem has signaled her support for the legislation, and also signed a bill in 2022 limiting trans athletes’ participation in sports.

Even if HB 1080 passes the Senate, it will go further than any anti-trans healthcare ban has gone in previous legislative sessions in South Dakota.

Sen. Shawn Bordeaux, the sole Democrat on the committee, motioned to kill the bill, but nobody made a second. Instead, bill sponsor Sen. Al Novstrup (R-Aberdeen) motioned the committee approve the bill, which was seconded by Sen. Erin Tobin (R-Winner).

Novstrup, Tobin, Sen. Mike Diedrich (R-Rapid City) and Sen. Sydney Davis (R-Burbank) voted in favor of the bill while Bordeaux and Sen. Tim Reed (R-Brookings) opposed it. Sen. Michael Rohl (R-Aberdeen) was excused from the vote.

Proponents include former trans people who have testified in support of similar bills

Multiple proponents for the bill argued Wednesday that children are incapable of, or not mature enough to be, making decisions that would affirm their gender or affect their medical future.

For example, Novstrup argued in favor of the bill, because he once snapped at his mother for stepping on his glasses by yelling at her and calling her an “old cow,” he said, explaining young people making rapid decisions doesn’t end well.

Rep. Bethany Soye (R-Sioux Falls) repeated a story from earlier bill hearings about how as a child she felt she was a boy, but later in life felt glad she remained a woman.

Other proponents of the bill included two people who detransitioned: Chloe Cole and Billy Burleigh.

More:Effort to limit gender-affirming care for trans youth in South Dakota moves forward

Detransitioning is defined by the Trans Journalists Association (TJA) as seeking gender-affirming medical care and then stopping it, and/or attempting to reverse its effects. Many of the proponents Wednesday emphasized they’d stopped transitioning for medical reasons.

Cole is an activist from California and self-described “former trans kid,” and both Cole and Burleigh have testified in support of similar bills in other states like Utah, Tennessee and Idaho.

Other proponents included a psychologist who didn’t say where he was from, an Evangelist, and lobbyists with Family Heritage Alliance Action, South Dakota Parents Involved in Education, and LGB United.

Opponents include three of state’s major medical associations

Several medical groups from South Dakota again showed their opposition to HB 1080 on Wednesday, represented by Dr. Nicholas Torbert, a Sioux Falls pediatrician, as well as lobbyists from the South Dakota Academy of Family Physicians (SDAFP), the South Dakota State Medical Association (SDSMA) and the South Dakota Section of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Dan Heinemann, with SDAFP, explained diversity in gender identity and expression is a normal part of human existence, and gender-affirming care for gender-diverse patients is only started after multiple evaluations. Parents are part of the informed consent process, he said. He added the effects of puberty blockers are also reversible.

Justin Bell, with SDSMA, said lawmakers often hear about and speak about both parental rights and limited government, but argued that HB 1080 goes against those concepts.

More:Push to limit access to gender-affirming care for youth passes in South Dakota House

Bell continued to say gender-affirming care is evidence-based care that includes several types of consultation as well as parental consent, and that physicians have an obligation to act in the best interest of their patients.

Elizabeth Broekemeier, the parent of a trans teen in South Dakota, said when her son came out, she met him with love and acceptance, and that his need for care was not a decision made brazenly.

Other opponents included an Episcopal Reverend, the ACLU of South Dakota, Sioux Falls counselor Anne Dilenschneider, trans man and registered nurse Dylan Daniels, and a representative from the Human Rights Campaign.

Local organizations plan protests in opposition of the legislation

Moments after the committee approved HB 1080, the South Dakota Transformation Project, an organization supporting transgender people in the state, announced several protests to the bill across the state Saturday.

The protests are expected to be held before legislative coffees in Brookings, Rapid City, Sioux Falls and Vermillion. Sioux Falls’ protest will be 9:30 a.m. at Southeast Technical College.

The protests are being supported by the Project as well as Sioux Falls Pride, the Black Hills Center for Equality, South Dakota Youth Activism, Brookings Pride, Brookings PFLAG (Parents For Lesbians and Gays), Quilting Allies, Equality South Dakota and more.

“This is one of the most extreme political attacks on transgender people in recent memory,” executive director Susan Williams said in a statement. “Not only does it ban medically necessary, lifesaving care for transgender youth, but it also prevents parents from getting their child the medical care they need.”

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: South Dakota Senate committee advances anti-trans health care bill