Montana Senate hears testimony on contentious Senate Bill 164 restricting gender affirming care

The Montana Legislature's House Judiciary Committee convened on March 21, 2025, to discuss Senate Bill 164, a controversial proposal aimed at regulating gender-affirming care for minors. The bill has sparked significant debate, with proponents arguing it protects children from irreversible medical decisions, while opponents assert it infringes on parental rights and access to necessary healthcare.

During the meeting, supporters of the bill highlighted concerns regarding the psychological impacts of gender-affirming surgeries and treatments. They referenced a recent study from the University of Texas and Baylor University, which suggested that such surgeries could lead to increased rates of depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts among individuals who undergo them. Advocates for the bill emphasized the need for caution in medical decisions affecting minors, arguing that children are not equipped to make life-altering choices.

Conversely, opponents of the bill, including medical professionals and advocates for transgender rights, argued that the legislation could harm vulnerable youth. They pointed out that gender-affirming care is supported by major medical organizations and is essential for the mental health and well-being of transgender individuals. Testimonies from healthcare providers illustrated the positive outcomes associated with gender-affirming treatments, including reduced rates of depression and suicidality among youth who receive appropriate care.

Several opponents shared personal stories, emphasizing the importance of allowing families and medical professionals to make informed decisions without government interference. They expressed concerns that the bill would create a culture of fear among parents seeking care for their children and could lead to criminal penalties for healthcare providers.

The committee heard from a diverse range of voices, including parents, healthcare professionals, and individuals with lived experiences, all urging a vote against the bill. They argued that the legislation misrepresents the nature of gender-affirming care and could ultimately endanger the lives of transgender youth by denying them access to necessary medical support.

As the committee deliberates, the implications of Senate Bill 164 remain a focal point of contention in Montana, reflecting broader national debates over transgender rights and healthcare access. The outcome of this legislation could significantly impact the lives of many families and children across the state.