On April 29th, the Carolina Journal published the following op-ed by Ashley Vaughan, NC Values Press Director, entitled “The Path to Justice for Victims of Gender Transition Interventions in NC”:
Prisha Mosley was a young teenager when doctors in Gaston County, North Carolina, started her down the path of so-called “gender-affirming care.” She was prescribed puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, and then at 18 she had a double mastectomy — removing her normal, healthy breasts. Now an adult who fully embraces her biological sex, her body bears the permanent scars of those medical and surgical interventions. Prisha suffers from vaginal atrophy, Hashimoto’s disease, ongoing emotional distress, and a range of other complications still being discovered. But when Prisha sought justice in court for the harm doctors inflicted on her, her medical malpractice claims were dismissed due to North Carolina’s current statute of limitations.
Prisha is not the only one. Across the country, countless patients have undergone irreversible interventions, believing they were scientifically sound and necessary for their mental well-being. But gender transition interventions were not supported by science and, in many cases, were used with vulnerable minors and young adults who could not fully comprehend the long-term impact of their decisions — including that they may be left infertile and never be able to experience the joy of having their own children. Now, because of the reckless “treatments” they received, these people are life-long patients with piles of medical bills and often no path to justice.
The rise of so-called “gender-affirming care” occurred without the scientific research typically required for such invasive and life-altering procedures. These interventions — often starting with mental health professionals encouraging social transitioning such as changing pronouns and dress, then moving to medical interventions such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy, and finally culminating in surgery to remove healthy reproductive organs — were sold to vulnerable people as the only solution for gender dysphoria. But, despite support from the medical community, there were no long-term studies proving the safety or effectiveness of these interventions for relieving bodily discomfort and mental distress.
Such was the case with Chloe Cole. At just 13 years old, Chloe was placed on puberty blockers, and by 16, she had undergone a double mastectomy. These decisions were made under the premise that they were necessary to alleviate her conception that she was born in the wrong body. However, she was not properly informed of the potential lifelong complications that these interventions could cause. Chloe is one of many “detransitioners” who are now speaking out about how they were coerced into medical and surgical interventions without a full understanding of the risks involved.
Prisha, Chloe, and many others were victims of medical professionals who were driven by gender ideology instead of relying on rigorous science and basic principles of patient care — such as “first, do no harm,” which has long been recognized as the core principle in medical ethics.
Jamie Reed, a former case manager at the Washington University Transgender Center at St. Louis Children’s Hospital, provides another crucial perspective. Married to a transgender person and originally an advocate for gender transitioning, Reed grew deeply concerned after witnessing the lack of proper psychological evaluation and informed consent for minors in the gender clinic where she worked. Moreover, Reed revealed that many parents were pressured into believing that their child would commit suicide unless they supported gender transitioning. In her whistleblowing testimony, she exposed a system that fast-tracked minors into life-altering procedures without fully understanding the long-term consequences. These revelations highlight how social activism based on gender ideology shaped medical decisions, with devastating consequences for vulnerable minors and their families.
Around the world, the medical community is beginning to recognize the dangers of these unproven interventions. Countries like Sweden, Finland, Norway, and the United Kingdomhave pulled back on the use of gender transition interventions for minors after systematic reviews showed significant risks and unproven benefits. The American Society of Plastic Surgeons has also raised concerns about the lack of evidence supporting surgical interventions for gender dysphoria, acknowledging that the risks of such procedures may outweigh their benefits.
In the United States, over 25 states, including North Carolina, have banned gender transition interventions for minors. These state-level actions reflect a growing recognition that these procedures carry significant risks, especially when performed on children and adolescents.
Given the irreversible harm caused by these interventions, it is crucial that the statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims for gender transition interventions be extended to 10 years in North Carolina. The full extent of the damage often doesn’t reveal itself until years later. Victims may not discover issues like infertility, long-term psychological effects, or physical complications including cancer and bone-density loss for many years. Extending the statute of limitations would give victims the time they need to fully realize the harm done to them.
We must ensure that victims who were misled into making permanent and harmful changes to their body are given the opportunity to hold those responsible accountable. The stories of Prisha, Chloe and other detransitioners are a powerful testimony to the reckless and unethical nature of so-called “gender-affirming care.” These victims were misled by a medical system that prioritized ideology and profit over patient care — and they should be able to seek justice for the harm done to them.
Ashley Vaughan is the press and political director for NC Values.
