This commentary is by Renee McGuinness, of Monkton. She is a member of the Vermont Family Alliance.

While listening to committee testimony and floor readings on H.89 and S.37, I heard witnesses and legislators toss the words “evidence-based” like pizza dough, except there was no crust. They air-tossed words without substance.

H.89 (with amendment) and S.37 (with amendment) propose to shield gender-affirming practitioners legally and financially, at a time when both individual and class-action lawsuits have been filed by youth and minors who have been damaged by this so-called “care.”

While members of the House Committee on Healthcare were rapt as a transgender youth provided stirring emotional testimony in support of S.37, they ignored offers from Carol Kauffman, President of Vermont Family Alliance (VFA), to bring them testimony from experts with dissenting views and from youth, minors, and adults harmed by gender-affirming treatments.

While most are initially pleased with the results of their gender-affirming treatments, there is an international debate on the efficacy and long-term outcomes of gender-affirming protocols and whether studies concluding the benefits of gender-affirming care are reliable.

Legislators ignored the list of serious side effects and complications of  gender-affirming treatments Vermont Family Alliance presented to Committees, along with the Cass Review of Tavistock Gender Clinic  and the 2011 Sweden study that concluded suicidality and morbidity remains much higher than the general population after receiving gender-affirming treatments.

Dr. Erica Gibson, the only witness who is in the medical profession, provided a written endorsement signed by leaders of numerous medical organizations, yet provided no actual studies on the outcomes of gender-affirming treatments. Dr. Gibson claimed some medications are fully reversible while others are partially reversible, yet the Informed Consent Form in the UVM Clinician’s Guide to Transgender Healthcare in Vermont states, “I understand that the medical effects and safety of testosterone are not fully understood, and that there may be long-term risks that are not yet known.”

Dr. Gibson also stated (@1:43:48) she does not have collated treatment data in the UVMMC Transgender Youth Program. How can Dr. Gibson know whether treatments are successful if she does not have data according to treatments patients are receiving?

While most countries in Europe are now shielding youth and minors from gender-affirming care practices, Governor Scott and most Vermont legislators plowed forward with protecting an industry, not patients.

Chair of the House Committee on Healthcare, Lori Houghton, reminded Committee members that (@27:50), “Sometimes stakeholders really help you write the bill. They give you ideas, they talk you through what’s important to them, and then as legislators, our job is to determine what is legal, what is appropriate, and what we want the policy of Vermont to be. So, I want to be clear that yes, we have sought out Planned Parenthood as experts in this field, just as we’ve sought out Vermont Medical Society, and all the other people we’ve talked to over the last few weeks.” Vermont citizens are noticeably absent from the list of stakeholders in their own and their children’s health care. The State will decide for you upon which experts you will rely, and without evidence as to why you will rely on them.

Several representatives in the House Judiciary Committee shed joyful tears as they voted to advance H.89, ignoring the painful tears of those who were, and those who will be damaged by gender-affirming “care” at the hands of Vermont practitioners.