Connect with us

National

America’s broken pipeline of mental healthcare for trans youth

Despite strong demand, 44 percent of LGBTQ youth have no access to it

Published

on

Quinn Pulsipher (Photo by Kim Raff for Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare)

Uncloseted Media published this article on May 12.

Editor’s note: This article includes mention of suicide and contains details about those who have attempted to take their own lives. If you are having thoughts of suicide or are concerned that someone you know may be, resources are available here.

By SAM DONNDELINGER and ANASTASSIA GLIADKOVSKAYA | The first panic attack Quinn Pulsipher remembers having was at 8 years old. They describe it as “a pitch-black ghost that hugs them all over and tries to control their mind.” At the beach on vacation with their family, the wind suddenly picked up, and Quinn began hyperventilating, screaming and crying uncontrollably. Nothing could calm them down.

After that first episode, the panic attacks occurred whenever there was a storm, sometimes even when there was just a light breeze.

By the time Quinn was 14, they were “spiraling down.”

They began failing most of their classes. They rarely left their room, even avoiding going to the store with their mom.

Quinn, who is nonbinary, says the deterioration of their mental health was related to the rejection they received for their identity. At school, teachers continued to misgender them even after their records were updated. They endured cyberbullying, transphobic slurs from classmates and lawmakers across the country restricting their rights.

For those six years, Quinn cycled through five therapists who, according to their mom, Hilary, did not understand the challenges Quinn faced as a queer kid.

Hilary spent hundreds of hours searching for help — filling out intake forms, sending emails and calling therapists across Utah — only to get to the scheduling stage and repeatedly hear that providers “weren’t willing to treat a trans kid.”

The therapists who agreed to work with Quinn often failed to understand how being transgender intersected with their anxiety and depression. Some confused gender identity with sexuality. Others dismissed the idea that Quinn’s gender identity could be connected to their worsening mental health.

One night, after a teacher refused to use their pronouns, Quinn reached a breaking point. They came home and cried for hours.

“The feelings were too much,” they told their mother. “I shouldn’t have to fight for my pronouns and name to be used.”

“They kept repeating, ‘I just can’t do it anymore,’” Hilary told Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare. “So I flat-out asked if they were suicidal, and they said ‘yes.’ I was terrified. I prepared myself for the possibility that my child might not be alive when I checked on them.”

Hilary scheduled an emergency appointment with a nonbinary therapist Quinn has now started seeing after getting off a six-month waitlist.

“It didn’t fix everything,” says Quinn. “But what helped was talking to somebody who got it. [My therapist] is just so kind, respectful, calm and accepting. I don’t know any other way to describe just how amazing it is to have someone like this.”

“I feel so lucky we found [their therapist] when we did because I could have lost my kid,” Hilary says.

As almost 1 in 4 American teens identify as LGBTQ, affirming therapy can be life-saving. Yet availability is shrinking. Access to mental healthcare for LGBTQ youth dropped from 80 percent to 60 percent from late 2023 to late 2024, according to the Trevor Project. And in 2025, though 84 percent of LGBTQ youth wanted mental healthcare, 44 percent of them could not get it.

Over four dozen interviews with transgender teens, their families, clinicians and researchers reveal a fragmented health system plagued by long waitlists, prohibitive costs, parental consent complications and a shortage of affirming providers. Clinicians receive little to no formal education on LGBTQ health, often leaving young patients to repeatedly explain their identities in spaces intended to support them. Many LGBTQ youth say they have encountered provider homophobia and transphobia. These barriers are compounded by political hostility and school environments where bullying is pervasive.

“It’s really a wall of barriers and there’s these layers and layers of obstacles that, taken together, make accessing care feel impossible,” says Lana Lipe, a licensed clinical social worker and private practice therapist serving queer patients in Indiana.

“Not only is the need growing, but there’s not enough resources,” adds Jenna Glover, chief clinical officer at Headspace.

The journey to affirming providers

On every major mental health and suicide risk indicator, queer youth struggle more than their heterosexual peers. Analysis of 2023 national data found that queer youth are more likely to experience persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness (66 percent versus 31 percent), poor mental health (54 percent versus 22 percent) and suicidal ideation (41 percent versus 13 percent). They were also more likely to attempt suicide (20 percent versus 6 percent).

Experts stress that the mental health struggles of queer youth are not inherent to their identities. Rather, they exist because of the minority stress they experience. Six in 10 LGBTQ teens experienced bullying in the past year. And those who did reported significantly higher rates of attempted suicide.

“They’re struggling because of what’s being done to them, and what isn’t happening for them,” Lipe says.

Finding affirming providers is difficult in part because there is no mandated LGBTQ cultural sensitivity training for mental health professionals in the U.S. And when training is offered, experts interviewed for this story agree that it’s not sufficient.

“We know that affirming care saves lives,” Lipe says. “The question isn’t whether we can do better; it’s if we’re willing to.”

From 2009 to 2010, medical school curricula included an average of only five hours of LGBTQ-related content, one study found. By 2022, that average had increased to 11 hours, which some maintain is still inadequate. Dustin Nowaskie, a psychiatrist and founder of OutCare Health, a nonprofit offering LGBTQ health resources and provider training, has argued that med schools should require 35 hours of LGBTQ training.

“This leaves the burden of educating providers to patients,” Ellesse-Roselee Akré, assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare. “It has an impact on people’s willingness to receive care, people’s willingness to continue getting care and contributes to a lot of people finding alternative ways to self-medicate and treat their health themselves.”

Daniel Trujillo, a trans teen from Arizona, was lucky enough to find an affirming therapist.

As early as 3 years old, Daniel expressed his gender identity in drawings. His parents were paying attention and helped Daniel socially transition at 8 years old, which included a haircut and new clothes. Soon after, they found Daniel an affirming care team, including a psychologist for whom they paid out of pocket.

“They had had years of experience navigating how to support transgender youth and how to talk us through things we didn’t know, and help us better understand the needs of our child,” says Daniel’s mother, Lizette Trujillo.

Daniel, now 18, saw his therapist for about eight years. “During my tween and early teen years, it felt really important to have someone to help identify things I was going through,” Daniel says. “As I got older … it was more just someone to debrief with.”

The Trujillos, who have long advocated for trans rights in legislative sessions, moved to Spain in 2025 to keep their family safe due to the current political attacks on trans rights in the U.S. The move meant Daniel could no longer see his therapist.

“The political climate has made it harder and scarier for parents to say that they support their children,” Lizette says.

One way that LGBTQ patients can find providers is through online directories. GLMA, the national association of LGBTQ and allied health professionals, maintains a public list of over 5,000 queer-affirming providers, which it says is the largest online directory of its kind.

To be approved, providers must attest to their approach to LGBTQ care, thereby signaling their commitment to an affirming practice. GLMA reviews each provider’s online presence for anti-LGBTQ activity or affiliations, including social media posts and ties to Southern Poverty Law Center-designated hate groups. In cases where a provider has a limited or no online footprint, GLMA may request professional references. Providers are also asked questions to test their competency in LGBTQ topics and training.

“To be an affirming provider means that you are meeting patients exactly where they are,” Alex Sheldon, GLMA’s executive director, told Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare. “It’s more than just checking a box that says, ‘I’m not going to outright discriminate against you.’ We ask for folks to go a little bit further in their exploration of their own educational ability. … Did you receive LGBTQ-specific training in medical school [or while you pursued your doctorate]? Have you published any LGBTQ related materials? Do you do research in the space?”

In a survey of 375 providers, the findings of which have not yet been published and were shared with Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare, OutCare Health found nearly half of providers stated that the current political climate has made them feel more cautious about being publicly visible as an LGBTQ-affirming provider. “We have witnessed … a shrinkage of LGBTQ+ providers and practices,” Nowaskie wrote in an email.

There are many ways to deepen knowledge. Providers can voluntarily engage with medical association-accredited trainings from organizations like OutCare Health or Violet, which offer provider training on marginalized populations. Companies can either mandate these trainings or offer bonuses to clinicians for completing them.

Violet’s training revolves around a few key questions including whether providers feel confident in their knowledge of a given identity and whether they know what therapies are appropriate. Violet can then track if the training led to changes in provider behavior and patient outcomes.

Violet has seen steady interest in its LGBTQ health training: across 2024-2026, over seven hours of education per provider were completed each year, suggesting sustained engagement. And the number of providers who completed LGBTQ education grew 51 percent on the platform, from over 7,600 to nearly 11,600.

Headspace’s Glover says LGBTQ education should not be a specialization: “It should be a general part of education that any provider should be able to provide this level of care.”

Schools can be a source of pain or support

The lack of affirming providers has real-world effects. It took Emma, a 15-year-old trans girl from Fredericksburg, Va., years to find an affirming therapist to help with her anxiety and depression and to deal with the daily bullying she experienced. Emma’s mom, Angela, says that many therapists who use the tag “trans-accepting” themselves still lack expertise.

“They say LGBTQ-affirming and LGBTQ-welcoming, but … do you know how to deal specifically with gender dysphoria, body dysmorphia, all of the unique and complex things that go along with being trans? Emma is still having to explain who she is over and over again. They don’t even have that concept or grasp of it because, where’s the training?” Angela says.

In 2024, Emma and her family left Florida, where she had been bullied for being trans to the point of fearing riding her bike outside. After researching Bloomington, Ill., Angela felt it would be a safe home for her daughter, joking that half of the 1.6 percent of the population who identify as trans in the U.S. live in Bloomington.

But a few months into seventh grade, Emma was beaten unconscious in a school hallway.

In footage of the attack as described in a lawsuit, another student — who had been overheard saying she would “bully this girl until [she] transfers” — approaches her from behind, pulls her hair and forcefully and repeatedly slams her head to the ground until Emma loses consciousness. She then punches her in the face until someone pulls her off.

“She has officially lived the purest form of hate,” Angela says. “She was only four feet tall and 50 pounds at the time. She is a kid.”

After the attack, Emma was diagnosed with a concussion, a potential traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder, according to the family’s lawsuit against the school. She says the trauma left her feeling unsafe and severely disrupted her education and well-being.

“I was just really depressed and I was always in bed. … I couldn’t eat more than a few crackers a day. All I did was sleep,” Emma told Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare. “[The hate and bullying] just kind of makes you feel like a burden and like you shouldn’t be like the person that you are, even if that’s who you should actually be.”

When done right, schools can offer crucial opportunities for community, resources and support, but they are increasingly a breeding ground for bullying and political threats. Queer students reported their school climate felt more hostile during the 2024-25 school year due to an anti-LGBTQ political climate, a Glisten survey found, and over two-thirds of respondents faced harassment or assault because of their gender identity or expression.

Some states have instituted explicit policies to repress LGBTQ identities. In Florida, schools must abide by so-called “Don’t Say Gay” laws that restrict K-3 classroom instruction on sexual orientation or gender identity and prohibit all employees in K-12 public schools from using students’ preferred pronouns. Teachers must also report changes to a student’s name, pronoun use or restroom use to parents, which effectively outs children who haven’t told their parents about their identity. In Ohio, teachers are required to notify the parents if a student requests to identify as a gender that doesn’t align with their biological sex.

And even in Massachusetts, a blue state with the country’s only Commission on LGBTQ Youth, schools have become tight-lipped in their support, whether out of fear of losing funding or retaliation from parents. “Almost all districts [have] some anti-LGBTQ activity,” the commission’s executive director, Shaplaie Brooks, says. Examples include parents opting students out of LGBTQ-inclusive education; rejection of parent advisory councils meant to ensure LGBTQ inclusivity; bullying from students and rejection from educators; and administrators requesting flag removal or other material signaling affirmation.

Not ‘the next Nex Benedict’

Angela didn’t want Emma to be “the next Nex Benedict,” referring to the nonbinary 16-year-old who was beaten unconscious by kids in a school bathroom and later died from the injuries.

Even before the bullying started, she created an extensive integration plan with Emma’s junior high school. All was going smoothly until a teacher accidentally deadnamed Emma while taking attendance, even though the records were updated. From there, bullying “spread like wildfire,” according to Angela. And once it began, Angela exchanged over 60 emails with school administrators to ensure that the bullying would stop, but to no avail.

The school did not respond to Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare’s request for comment.

Beyond attacks on queer rights, some lawmakers are deprioritizing mental health in general. In 2025, just a month after President Donald Trump ordered the closure of the Department of Education, the agency ended $1 billion in grants meant to train and support mental health professionals who work in schools. And in Indiana, Republican legislators removed teacher training requirements related to social-emotional learning and cultural competency.

Schools are the most common institutional entry point into mental healthcare for youth. But staffing models vary wildly. Some districts have well-staffed health centers, while others share a single provider across multiple schools. Half of all U.S. schools cite inadequate access to a licensed mental health professional as a top factor limiting their ability to provide mental health services to students, according to KFF, a nonprofit research organization.

The share of schools reporting inadequate funding for mental health services has grown since 2021 and resources vary by state. In California, public school students on private or government insurance qualify for free therapy and counseling. Meanwhile, Alabama ranks last nationally in mental health access, with many rural districts struggling with staffing shortages and inconsistent funding. Last June, 16 states successfully sued the DOE over terminated grants, with funding restored for those states by a federal judge in October.

Even organizations trying to support schools are hitting roadblocks. Bring Change to Mind, co-founded in 2010 by actress Glenn Close, operates a national student-led high school club program focused on mental health. In 2025, the organization found that 92 percent of registered club participants said they take better care of their mental health as a result.

Bring Change to Mind had spent seven years building out its high school program in Indiana with the support of the state education department. The organization also launched a middle school pilot at the agency’s request. But in 2025, its DOE funding was not renewed. “I have to find money elsewhere, until things change,” says Pamela Harrington, the organization’s executive director.

And last month in Minnesota, administrators shut down student attempts at Benilde-St. Margaret’s to start a mental health club, despite Bring Change to Mind offering seed funding. The school is near where a shooting took place last year, and the club was intended to support students struggling with the tragedy.

Harrington has also noticed that many students have stopped self-identifying as LGBTQ over the past several years. Registration for the organization’s annual student summit is down, even though participation is up. “Some students don’t feel safe registering,” she says.

Crisis care is another first entry point for many

All of these barriers may be contributing to a surge in youth going to the hospital in a mental health crisis. From 2011 to 2020, despite an overall decrease in pediatric emergency department visits, the portion of mental health-related ED visits by kids and teens soared, with the sharpest increase for suicide-related visits.

In New York state, Northwell’s Cohen Children’s Medical Center sees a disproportionate number of kids who are queer. Whether it’s bullying, depression, anxiety, trauma or suicidality, “all the rates are much higher for these kids, they’re much more vulnerable,” says Vera Feuer, the former vice president for child and adolescent psychiatry at Northwell, who left the organization in April. “Because community access is so difficult, we are often the first mental health providers that these families ever see,” says Feuer, who is now the chief clinical officer of the Child Mind Institute.

She says the main reasons kids end up in the ED for mental health are suicidality and self-harm, or behavioral problems like aggression. Conflicts involving sexuality or gender identity are often part of the trigger, and can get worse in a hospital environment if staff are not properly trained. “Feeling like you add value to the people around you versus feeling like you’re a burden, are really important components of suicidal crises,” Feuer says.

Many patients in the ED deal with trauma. And while evidence suggests that trauma-informed care has a positive impact on patients, the approach isn’t always used in EDs. The psychiatry team at Northwell is trained to be trauma-informed and affirming, which could look like wearing a Pride badge, asking a patient their pronouns or determining if they want to disclose their identity to their parents.

Feuer says even in cases of significant self-harm, some parents are “in utter denial” about their child’s identity. They might see the behavior as attention-seeking and be more concerned about their school test the next day. “The parent is also in crisis, and their brains don’t work particularly well when they’re with us,” she says.

When Emma was admitted to Carle Foundation Hospital in Illinois after the attack at school, Angela says she was offered “zero resources.”

Speaking generally about the hospital’s policies, Holly Cook, director of the Carle Foundation Hospital ED, wrote in an email that the ED has multiple protocols in place for patients experiencing mental health crises, including referrals to the outpatient psychiatric team and community mental health resources. “The top priority … is keeping the patient safe, treating the patient with dignity and helping to explain the processes as they occur,” Cook wrote.

But Angela says none of those supports were offered to Emma after her hospitalization. She says they were left without referrals for counseling, trauma services or clear guidance about where Emma could receive ongoing emotional support.

“The hospital ER doc was aware of the situation,” Angela says. “They didn’t even give me the proper ‘victim information’ paperwork that includes those types of resources. … We got nothing regarding mental health resources from the hospital. … I ended up finding resources on my own for crisis counseling because I just really needed somebody to help my kid.”

A Carle Health spokesperson declined to comment on Emma’s case, citing HIPAA, and reiterated the hospital’s priority of patient safety and dignity.

In other parts of mental healthcare, resources are strained. Last year, the Trump administration cut the LGBTQ-specific option on the 988 suicide hotline, even though suicide rates dropped 11 percent below projections since its rollout. And the 10 states with the largest 988 service uptake saw rates drop 18 percent below projections.

All of this is occurring when research demonstrates that LGBTQ youth who are able to access affirming mental healthcare report lower rates of suicide attempts.

Angela, aware that her daughter needed urgent support after she was attacked, found Project Oz, an Illinois nonprofit that provides survival aid to youth. They provided crisis care weekly to Emma, which helped her process the trauma of the attack. But the care was limited to six weeks due to their care model.

“She really listened and included my [trans identity] in the care,” Emma says. “I wish I had a little bit more time because I got to a point of recovery but it wasn’t complete. I get it could only be six weeks, but it takes time to process this stuff.”

“My biggest barrier to mental healthcare has honestly been people not understanding,” she says. After searching for years, Emma has found a trans therapist that Angela says “sees all the trans youth in [their] town.”

After working with him, Emma’s self-harm has reduced from an average of once a month to only once in the past six months.

“I’m happier. I’ve worked through my struggles a lot more and [don’t] keep it in the back of my mind because that’s what I used to always do. I would just avoid my problems.”

Emma was fortunate to have her mom in her corner. For many LGBTQ youth who need mental healthcare, getting their parents on board can be a barrier. Family rejection has among the strongest associations with suicidality and poor mental health in LGBTQ youth.

Jessica Schleider, an associate professor at Northwestern University, came across this in her research as director of the school’s Lab for Scalable Mental Health.

When she initially required parental consent for teen participation in youth mental health research, it led to homogenous samples. But when the researchers secured university approval to waive parental consent for future studies, “samples suddenly became about 80-85 percent LGBTQ, from 5-10 percent,” Schleider says. Through follow-up studies, it became clear that fearing parents was often the reason teens avoided care.

This revelation prompted Schleider to lead a study analyzing parental consent laws for mental healthcare around the country. In 2024, she found that a third of states have laws prohibiting teens from independently consenting to therapy. In these states, the study found teens with depression were significantly less likely to get treatment. Things have likely gotten more restrictive since then, per Schleider.

“Parental rights movements have really been sweeping recently, and a lot of these laws are getting more stringent,” says Schleider. The movement hinges on a “push for parents to be involved in every facet of their children’s lives to their detriment,” Schleider adds.

Trans youth are much more likely to experience homelessness than their peers and are overrepresented in foster care. Getting kicked out of their home for identifying as LGBTQ further complicates access. Will they have an ID? Will they know their Social Security number? What about transportation? “We have a healthcare system that’s built on forms and insurance cards,” says Lipe, the private practice therapist in Indiana. “When you don’t have those things, getting access to long-term care or even just routine care becomes impossible.”

Schleider says states, both red and blue, don’t realize the extent to which parental consent laws create barriers to accessing care. “It reflects how these structures and systems are all built, which is without youth input,” she says.

Astrid, a 17-year-old in central Florida who didn’t want her last name included for safety concerns, says that her mental health struggles are fueled by her parents’ rejection of her trans identity. She says these struggles are compounded by the fact that it’s been difficult getting her parents on board with seeking consistent care.

Astrid has experienced depression and anxiety and has self-harmed since she was 10. As therapy helped lessen her gender dysmorphia and body dysphoria as she transitioned, it was a blow when her family had to change insurance and their provider was no longer in network.

“I just can’t have this fight with my parents again,” she told Uncloseted Media and Fierce Healthcare. “It took so long to convince [them] to let me try therapy. … They just think I should occupy myself more, and it will distract me.”

As a result, Astrid has not been in therapy for the last two years.

LGBTQ youth who report living in very accepting communities attempted suicide at less than a third of the rate of those who live in very unaccepting communities, per the Trevor Project. “That’s why chosen family, chosen community is so important,” says Glover. “That’s the basic safety net that we need.”

With his family’s and care team’s support, Daniel Trujillo never experienced suicidality, his mother says. “He’s proof of what happens when you affirm and you love someone,” Lizette says.

Freedom of speech makes it harder to police harm

Once parents are on board, navigating the network of providers and discerning who may be affirming or rejecting still remains a challenge. To demonstrate this, Avery, an 18-year-old from Mississippi, opened up his laptop to Psychology Today, a therapy provider directory, to find a therapist. Avery, who is questioning his gender and has been in and out of therapy for six years to help with his anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation, filters for “transgender” therapists, and only a handful in his area appear. When he adds another filter looking for therapists who work with trans people with autism, zero results turn up.

“There’s a big difference between mental healthcare and good mental healthcare,” says Avery, who asked to use only his first name for safety reasons. “A lot of queer people are dealing with complex cases. I have autism and I want to be able to work with someone who understands that as well as my gender.”

Avery describes a long history of therapy providers who were unequipped or dismissive of his gay identity. Several therapists avoided engaging with his gender questioning altogether, leaving him feeling ignored.

There were more extreme scenarios. He says one therapist used a form of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing, a type of psychotherapy often used for PTSD, suggesting that his sexuality was something he could change.

“He said, ‘Have you considered that identity is culturally constructed and that you could just construct an identity that’s not gay?’” Avery says. “It made it hard to trust therapists for me.”

With Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy being overturned by the Supreme Court on free speech grounds last month, therapists now have more legal protections to use nonaffirming language with clients. Beyond that, the ability for LGBTQ-affirming therapists to practice freely in certain states is being challenged. In March, Texas’s attorney general issued a legal opinion declaring that the prohibitions outlined in a law that makes it illegal for healthcare providers to “transition” kids also apply to certain mental health providers. This limits what they can say in sessions.

“They want to make any mental healthcare for trans kids that is affirming punishable but they are saying free speech protects conversion therapy, so that is hypocritical in our minds,” GLMA’s Sheldon says. “It is going to be a very challenging landscape for mental health providers.”

If you find it, can you afford it?

Even when you identify an affirming provider, finding one that takes insurance is another battle. According to the Trevor Project, affordability was the top reason queer youth couldn’t access care in 2025, with 46 percent reporting they could not afford it.

Many therapists don’t accept insurance, citing difficulties in becoming in-network with payers and low reimbursement rates.

“We’re quite literally pricing kids out of survival,” Lipe, the therapist in Indiana, says.

Aaron Martin, a licensed marriage and family therapist with a virtual private practice in San Francisco, accepts several commercial insurance plans. And his reimbursement rates are not only low but also sometimes delayed. For over a month, Martin was owed over $1,000 by a major insurer. Chasing them down by phone meant wasted time that could’ve been spent seeing patients. “It becomes this really awful game,” Martin says. “It makes a lot of sense why providers are just opting out [of insurance] altogether.”

The Savannah Pride Center offers therapy for free or as low as $5, regardless of insurance status. But getting in is challenging. Parental consent is required, and there is a waiting list. “We definitely saw an uptick in clients right after the election,” Michael Bell, the center’s executive director, says.

The path forward

To combat the shortage of providers, especially in more rural areas, experts interviewed for this story agree that telehealth has emerged as a powerful medium to support queer patients. Use of telehealth for mental healthcare has increased in schools, though some schools are parting ways with virtual providers as federal COVID-19 relief funds expire.

“Technology is here,” says Ashwin Vasan, a physician and epidemiologist and the former commissioner of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. “Let’s make it better. … When you do that, you can actually steer it towards meeting the needs of the most vulnerable.”

Virtual providers like Charlie Health are seeing the positive impact. In 2025, 34 percent of Charlie Health’s patients identified as LGBTQ, many of whom struggle with suicidal ideation. “Virtual care can really meaningfully change access and safety equations,” says Caroline Fenkel, co-founder and chief clinical officer at Charlie Health. For example, for trans youth who have not had top surgery, being able to log on virtually where they only have to show their face can feel more comfortable.

Though telehealth can help in some cases, policy change is needed. Akré, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, says the barriers trans youth face are systemic, not individual. “Our mental healthcare system as it’s designed, is not really meant to accommodate individuals with diverse identities,” she says.

Echoing Akré, Lipe notes chronic stressors like poverty and disability don’t have an easy fix: “We don’t currently have solutions that match the complexity of that problem.” Some social needs are addressable, like transportation to care. “Anything we can do to help reduce those barriers, so that they can access those types of services, is critical for upstream prevention,” Lipe says.

While expanding LGBTQ-specific training for providers is often cited as a solution, Akré argues that education alone won’t fix the problem. “It doesn’t change behavior at scale — policy does.”

In addition to mandating training requirements, Akré recommends stronger accountability for discrimination in care and clearer reporting systems so patients aren’t left “reporting into a black hole.” Without those structural changes, she says, trans youth will continue to navigate a system that too often requires them to fight for care at the very moment they need it most.

When it comes to schools, Glisten, a national nonprofit advocating for LGBTQ students, says queer kids feel safest when reports of bullying are taken seriously. Glisten recommends that bullies should be held accountable, with parent involvement, and schools should support students in organizing gender and sexuality alliances.

In the absence of sweeping policy changes, non-therapy tools remain a key access point. Schleider’s lab runs Project YES, a free online mental health support tool that offers referrals to local or crisis resources. Within the tool, users can access Project RISE, designed for LGBTQ youth, which teaches skills to overcome internalized stigma.

“I definitely believe that’s our best bet, particularly for these historically stigmatized groups, where changing laws and policies is going to take too long,” Schleider says.

For Quinn, things are still hard, but their affirming therapist has changed how they move through tough moments.

After years of shutting down when things felt overwhelming, Quinn’s biggest change, according to their mom, is their ability to express what they want and need.

“[Their therapist] was kind of the catalyst for us to find a gender clinic and start on estrogen and puberty blockers,” Hilary says.

Quinn says they feel more themselves and feel more engaged with life. Their mom has noticed.

“I went to Costco the other day, and they wanted to come with me,” Hilary says. “That didn’t used to happen. I get to see my kid again.”

Neither the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine nor the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, which publish clinical guidelines for providers, responded to multiple requests for comment.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

U.S. Supreme Court

11 years after Obergefell, marriage equality remains under scrutiny

Landmark ruling issued on June 26, 2015

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Friday marks 11 years since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled the Constitution protects same-sex marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Despite that major win for LGBTQ people nationwide, the case may be on shakier ground than originally thought.

Obergefell v. Hodges, the case that determined the Constitution extends its protection of rights to same-sex couples and that states must recognize marriage licenses for same-sex couples from other states, was decided using a combination of cases from several states.

The central arguments in the case rested on the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, Due Process Clause, as well as collateral spousal and parental rights.

Cases in play

The first case came from Michigan with DeBoer v. Snyder, where a lesbian couple, who were not legally allowed to marry in the Mitten State, attempted to adopt their third child but could not both obtain legal parental rights. April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse initially received a favorable ruling in district court, with the judge finding that the Michigan Marriage Amendment — which barred same-sex marriage in the Midwestern state — violated the Equal Protection Clause. The same day, the case was appealed to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, eventually making its way, along with the other five cases, to the highest court in the land.

Ohio had multiple cases that ultimately contributed to the judicial acknowledgment of same-sex marriage rights in the U.S.

The Supreme Court case most commonly associated with the fight for same-sex marriage — Obergefell — originated in Ohio. Beginning as Obergefell v. Kasich in the state, James Obergefell knew his longtime boyfriend, John Arthur, was suffering from ALS. Knowing Arthur’s life would end shortly — and understanding the couple could not legally marry in Ohio — they boarded a medically equipped plane, accompanied by a nurse and Arthur’s aunt, Paulette, and flew to BWI Airport in Maryland. There, they were legally married. Over the next several months, Arthur’s health continued to decline until he eventually passed away in October.

The legal battle began after Arthur died, as Ohio law refused to acknowledge that Obergefell was his husband and would not list him as Arthur’s surviving spouse on his death certificate. Obergefell challenged the decision, arguing it was unconstitutional and pursuing legal action. The local Ohio registrar agreed that refusing to recognize their out-of-state marriage license — which Ohio had recognized for different-sex couples in the past — discriminated against the couple. Despite that, the state attorney general continued to defend Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban.

The judge ultimately ruled that “a marriage solemnized outside of Ohio is valid in Ohio if it is valid where solemnized,” marking another step toward marriage equality. Ohio appealed the ruling, and the case ultimately contributed to the establishment of same-sex marriage protections under the federal Constitution.

The second Ohio case, Henry v. Wymyslo, much like DeBoer v. Snyder, involved parental rights for adopted children. The case included four couples — three lesbian couples who lived in Ohio and adopted children while residing there, and one gay couple from New York with an adopted son born in Ohio. The four couples filed a lawsuit against Ohio, seeking to require the state to list both parents on their children’s birth certificates.

Eventually, the judge — the same one who presided over Obergefell v. Kasich — ruled that the state must list both parents on their children’s birth certificates. Like many cases that make their way to the Supreme Court, it went through multiple appeals before ultimately reaching the nation’s highest court.

Kentucky also had two cases that contributed to the legal battle for same-sex marriage.

The first, Bourke v. Beshear, revolved around Gregory Bourke and Michael DeLeon, a same-sex couple married in Canada in 2004, and Randell Johnson and Paul Campion, who were married in California in 2008. Like DeBoer v. Snyder and Henry v. Wymyslo in their respective states, the plaintiffs challenged Kentucky’s ban on same-sex marriage and its refusal to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions so that both parents could be acknowledged on their children’s birth certificates.

The judge ultimately ruled, much like in Obergefell v. Kasich, that states constitutionally must recognize legally performed out-of-state marriages.

Love v. Beshear is the second case from the Bluegrass State.

Maurice Blanchard and Dominique James were denied a marriage license by Kentucky county clerks. The couple’s legal team filed to join Bourke v. Beshear, another case actively challenging the state’s ban on same-sex marriage, and the motion was approved, with the case restyled as Love v. Beshear. The judge ultimately ruled that Kentucky’s bans on same-sex marriage explicitly “violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and they are void and unenforceable.”

The final case, Tanco v. Haslam, involved four same-sex couples who filed suit in Tennessee. Each couple had married outside Tennessee before moving to the state, with nearly all relocating for employment. One worked for the military, whose marriage was already recognized by the Department of Defense; one worked for the state; and two were professors. Seeking to have their out-of-state marriages recognized in Tennessee, the four couples filed Tanco v. Haslam in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The court eventually granted a preliminary injunction requiring the state to recognize the marriages of the three plaintiff couples but denied the request to overturn Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban.

To SCOTUS

All of these cases contributed to the legal challenge against same-sex marriage bans across the country and ultimately led to a 5-4 ruling that allowed same-sex couples to have their marriages recognized in all 50 states, Guam, Puerto Rico, and D.C.

The justices voted as follows: Anthony Kennedy, who authored the majority opinion, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan supported Obergefell while Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito all dissented.

The court held that the 14th Amendment — specifically its Due Process Clause — guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, regardless of the gender of those getting married.

The court also ruled that another provision of the 14th Amendment — the Equal Protection Clause — extends the right to marry enjoyed by different-sex couples to same-sex couples, finding that denying same-sex couples that right violates their right to equal protection under the law.

Some of the Supreme Court justices who dissented argued that this was a state issue, not a federal one, because the Constitution makes no mention of same-sex couples. They said it was beyond the purview of the court to decide whether states must recognize or license such unions. The dissenters argued that the majority was engaging in judicial policymaking, which they contended is not permitted under U.S. law.

Another argument made by the dissenting conservative justices was that the majority opinion infringed on religious freedom by engaging in this “judicial policymaking” rather than allowing state legislatures to determine the laws governing marriage.

Since the ruling

According to data from the Williams Institute, 823,000 same-sex couples are now legally married — more than twice the number in 2015 — as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision.

The ruling also increased the number of same-sex families raising children, largely because it removed legal barriers and paperwork restrictions that had prevented same-sex couples from being listed as parents. The data shows there are nearly 299,000 children under the age of 18 being raised by married same-sex couples as a result of Obergefell.

The states that saw the largest increases — and the most favorable changes to marriage rates — were in the South. The percentage of cohabiting same-sex couples who were married between 2014 and 2023 increased from 38 percent to 59 percent.

Many of the married same-sex couples surveyed said marriage improved their sense of safety and security (83 percent), life satisfaction (75 percent), and relationship stability (67 percent).

“Marriage equality has significantly benefited the lives and well-being of same-sex couples, their families, and the communities where they live,” said Christy Mallory, interim executive director and legal director at the Williams Institute.

Future of Obergefell

While same-sex marriage remains the law of the land, there have been multiple attempts by conservative and religious figures in America to reverse it.

In 2025, Kim Davis, the clerk of Rowan County, Ky., who made headlines 10 years earlier after refusing to issue marriage licenses following the striking down of same-sex marriage bans, approached the Supreme Court with the goal of getting Obergefell overturned.

She argued that the ruling put her religious beliefs at odds with her job and asked the court to strike it down. The consensus was nearly unanimous, holding that when a person serves as an agent of the state, they cannot place their personal religious beliefs above state policy because they are acting on behalf of the government.

Thomas, one of the Supreme Court’s most conservative justices, has also attempted to plant the seeds for overturning Obergefell.

In Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which ultimately restricted abortion access in the country, he wrote a concurring opinion suggesting that Obergefell, along with several other precedents, should be “reconsider[ed].”

Later, without directly addressing Obergefell, Thomas told an audience at Catholic University’s Columbus School of Law that he didn’t “think that … any of these cases that have been decided are the gospel.”

While President Donald Trump has not implemented any executive restrictions on same-sex marriage during his presidency, his administration has made it clear that it opposes continued efforts to expand protections for same-sex couples, particularly when doing so conflicts with claims of “religious freedom.” The administration has attempted to remove sexual orientation and gender identity from federal health care and housing nondiscrimination protections and has significantly restricted the rights of transgender Americans.

Currently, same-sex marriage remains federally protected by the Respect for Marriage Act, and the Supreme Court has thus far declined to overturn Obergefell.

Continue Reading

New York

Judge blocks DOJ from obtaining transgender patients’ medical records

Advocacy groups sued White House

Published

on

Protesters pushed for protections for transgender children’s right to healthcare outside the D.C. Attorney General’s office in 2025. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

A judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has granted a request from multiple transgender people for a temporary restraining order, blocking the disclosure of plaintiffs’ and class members’ medical information to the Justice Department.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla approved the Temporary Restraining Order and Provisional Class Certification, preventing any further information from being provided to the Trump-led DOJ.

The medical data was requested through subpoenas issued by the Trump-Vance administration’s DOJ to multiple hospitals in New York City — most notably NYU Langone — which halted its Transgender Youth Health Program in May following a federal push to stop providing trans minors with gender-affirming care.

In May 2026, NYU Langone Hospitals received a subpoena from a federal grand jury in Fort Worth, Texas, demanding that the hospitals turn over the identities and sensitive health information of any patient who had received medical treatment for gender dysphoria while under the age of 18 at NYU Langone between January 2020 and May 2026.

Lambda Legal, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit, “Coe, et al. v. Blanche, et al.,” against the Trump-Vance administration on behalf of three families with trans youth and two trans young adults who were minors when they began care, in June 2026.

The lawsuit requests a temporary restraining order blocking the DOJ from violating the patients’ constitutional privacy rights by obtaining identifying and sensitive health information as part of its investigation into unspecified health offenses. The DOJ issued subpoenas to NYU Langone and other similar healthcare institutions in New York City, including Mount Sinai, that provide or have provided gender-affirming medical care to trans minors. All plaintiffs have filed under pseudonyms to maintain their privacy and anonymity.

Multiple leaders of organizations that helped push for the restraining order provided quotes about the ongoing situation and what it means for the fight for trans children’s access to healthcare in the U.S.

“Today’s order from the court is a victory for the basic privacy of our clients and all families like theirs across New York City. It is no secret that this administration will use every lever in its power to attack transgender people and fulfill its misguided goal to ‘end’ gender-affirming medical care — care that is legal and protected in New York State. Using subpoenas to attain the identities and sensitive health information of transgender young people to effectuate such goals should send chills down the spine of every American. Our laws and our Constitution recognize that we all have a right to confidentiality about the most intimate and private information about ourselves,” said Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, senior counsel and health care strategist at Lambda Legal. “Whether a young person receives any type of medical care is a decision for that patient, their family, and their doctor, not for political appointees to decide, interfere with, or know. The government cannot abuse its powers to violate the constitutional rights of transgender young people and their families. It is an enormous relief for these families that the court has stopped them from doing so as this case proceeds.”

“We’re thankful the court has granted our emergency request to protect the privacy interests of transgender New Yorkers and their families,” said Chase Strangio, co-director of the ACLU’s LGBTQ & HIV Rights Project. “Patients and families trust their doctors with their most intimate, private information and should trust in turn that this information will be protected from impermissible and harassing demands for disclosure from the federal government or anyone else. For the past year, the Trump administration has not only decided that it knows better than these families and their doctors what their medical needs are, but has also sought to obtain troves of sensitive information about patients in New York. We will continue to fight on behalf of these families and the fundamental liberty of all transgender New Yorkers and those who come here to seek needed medical care.”

“New York’s laws recognize that transgender youth deserve fundamental privacy protections for their sensitive medical records and unobstructed access to the care they need,” said Bobby Hodgson, deputy legal director at the New York Civil Liberties Union. “As the Trump administration tries to bully transgender youth, scare families, and intimidate healthcare providers into dropping their patients, we’re thankful the court found these tactics are likely unconstitutional and put a stop to them here in New York.”

Continue Reading

Federal Government

Trump holds housing bill hostage to anti-trans SAVE Act

President’s SAVE Act failed in the Senate

Published

on

People protesting the restrictive and anti-trans SAVE Act in March. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

President Donald Trump is refusing to sign a new bipartisan housing bill unless his SAVE Act is approved by the legislative branch.

The bill being prevented from being enacted into law is the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act.” The legislation is an attempt by Congress to make buying a home in the U.S. Senate more affordable in response to various factors — including housing shortages and regulatory constraints — that have made homeownership increasingly difficult. The total number of homeowners has nearly stopped growing, with high interest rates and surging home prices pushing more Americans toward renting.

The housing bill was considered highly bipartisan, something that is rare in this Congress. The House voted to pass the bill 358-32 on Tuesday after the Senate approved the measure 85-5 a day earlier. The legislation was led by U.S. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.) in the Senate and U.S. Reps. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and French Hill (R-Ark.) in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Some of the highlights of the legislation are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing while making homeownership more accessible. The bill would streamline environmental reviews and direct the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide guidance to communities on reforming zoning and land-use policies that can create barriers to housing development.

The legislation would also expand the definition of “manufactured housing,” making it cheaper and easier to mass-produce homes built in factories before being transported to their sites. To encourage additional development, the bill would provide grants and loans for the construction of new housing, the rehabilitation of aging properties, and the conversion of vacant buildings into residential units. It would also increase certain banks’ Public Welfare Investment cap, allowing them to direct more capital toward low-income and affordable housing projects.

In an effort to help more Americans purchase homes, the legislation would create a program to expand access to small-dollar mortgages, which are often used to finance lower-cost homes, while also seeking to improve housing opportunities for veterans. The bill would further promote homeownership by limiting the number of single-family homes that large institutional investors can own and requiring them to disclose how many such properties they control, a measure intended to prioritize American families over corporate buyers.

The bill the president wants enacted — the SAVE Act — is a restrictive and anti-transgender piece of proposed legislation.

The bill would impose a number of new limitations on voter registration across the country by amending the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require in-person proof of citizenship for anyone seeking to vote in U.S. elections. The bill would also limit acceptable forms of identification to documents such as a birth certificate or passport — records that the Brennan Center for Justice estimates more than 21 million Americans do not possess — effectively restricting access to the ballot. It would also ban online voter registration, DMV voter registration efforts, and mail-in voter registration.

Trump pushed for the SAVE Act to include a provision that would ban gender-affirming medical care for trans minors, even with parental consent, and prohibit trans people from participating in school or professional sports consistent with their gender identity rather than their sex assigned at birth.

Trump also pressed Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to eliminate the filibuster so the Republican-controlled Congress could pass the SAVE Act, saying Republicans will never win another election without it.

It is expected that Congress will override the president’s veto and pass the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, as it requires a two-thirds supermajority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate — a threshold the legislation currently exceeds.

It is not expected that the SAVE Act will pass the Senate in its current form. It passed the House, but every Democrat and four Republicans voted against it in the Senate.

Continue Reading

Popular