The Medical University of South Carolina initially said it wouldn’t be affected by a law banning use of state funds for treatment “furthering the gender transition” of children under 16. Months later, it cut off that care to all trans minors.

One Saturday morning in September 2022, Terrence Steyer, the dean of the College of Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina, placed an urgent call to a student. Just a year prior, the medical student, Thomas Agostini, had won first place at a university-sponsored event for his graduate research on transgender pediatric patients. He also had been featured in a video on MUSC’s website highlighting resources that support the LGBTQ+ community.

Now, Agostini and his once-lauded study had set off a political firestorm. Conservative activists seized on one line in particular in the study’s summary — a parenthetical noting the youngest transgender patient to visit MUSC’s pediatric endocrinology clinic was 4 years old — and inaccurately claimed that children that young were prescribed hormones as part of a gender transition. Elon Musk amplified the false claim, tweeting, “Is it really true that four-year-olds are receiving hormone treatment?” That led federal and state lawmakers to frantically ask top MUSC leaders whether the public hospital was in fact helping young children medically transition. The hospital was not; its pediatric transgender patients did not receive hormone therapy before puberty, nor does it offer surgical options to minors.

  • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am amazed that health companies are not penalized for discrimination on which human beings they treat. Sorry, but that makes no sense.

    • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      the neat part is the American health care system always finds a new way of disappointing everyone.

      what’s truly upsetting is that the few trans people that may need to go to that hospital for the fastest health care are going to find out the shitty way they’ve been blacklisted.

      there is probably a good legal case against this misinformation but how many trans have the time and energy to fight backdoor politics?

      • Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        there is probably a good legal case against this misinformation but how many trans have the time and energy to fight backdoor politics?

        That’s why I give money to the ACLU

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah exactly, I’m trying to afford rent and stave off burnout too. I spent years doing activism but I’m almost 30 and I’m exhausted. And even when we do fight we’re a third of a percent of the population and economically disadvantaged before you take into account the expenses of transitioning (fortunately I’m past most of it, but spending my first years out of college saving up for a $20000 surgery was a serious financial hit)

        And all this for what? My state government doesn’t give half a shit what we want. I’ll keep trying to vote them out but they realized they don’t even actually have to do what courts say. The courts won’t actually punish the legislature, just the state coffers if that.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          We have Two SCOTUS justices who committed perjury during their confirmation hearings and another who has been caught accepting bribes from petitioners of the court. You’re putting an awful lot of faith in the court.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well if you decide that it’s religion you can hurt people by deciding that their medical care isn’t something your god approves of. And no you don’t need to find sufficient text or historical justification

      • CosmicTurtle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wasn’t there a case before SCOTUS where they held only “closely held beliefs” (or some shit) was allowed?

        I can’t find the actual case or verbage but basically it made it possible to force, say, spaghetti monster believers to adopt laws against their beliefs. Essentially paving the way for Christian nationalism.

    • cannache@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if health insurance companies in China would pull the same crap.