Amid attacks on their right to medical care, trans youth in Texas are breathing a sigh of relief after a court order allowed a Dallas hospital to resume treatments for trans adolescents.
Last Thursday, Judge Melissa Bellan of the Dallas County Court granted Ximena Lopez, a doctor at Children’s Medical Center Texas, a restraining order that allows her and other doctors to continue providing medical care to trans youth. The temporary order will allow Lopez to offer medications like puberty blockers and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to new patients seeking out the gender clinic’s services.
Within hours of the decision, five patients had signed up for care at the center, according to the Texas Tribune.
In November, the Children’s Medical Center Texas and University of Texas Southwestern dissolved GENder Education and Care, Interdisciplinary Support (GENECIS), a clinic led by Lopez that offered mental health services and hormone therapy to trans youth. The first of its kind in the southwest, the clinic won praise for the comprehensive, life-saving services to trans youth before it was abruptly shut down following a right-wing lobby campaign.
In November, GENECIS announced that it would stop seeing new patients after protesters picketed outside the building the previous month. A Facebook group said the services it offered were “medical child abuse” and compared them to “chemical castration,” as the queer news outlet Them reported at the time.
Lopez’s lawyers argued that denying gender-affirming treatment to young trans patients seeking it for the first time could cause “irreparable harm.” In court documents, attorneys also stated that the decision was discriminatory because cis patients who seek hormone treatments for reasons unrelated to transition were still be able to receive it from Children’s Medical Center Texas—just not trans patients.
Bellan agreed with this argument. In her ruling, the judge stated that the hospital had broken the law by “discriminating against patients on the basis of the patient’s gender identity” and said that it also encouraged Lopez to “violate the law by discriminating against patients on the basis of a patient’s gender identity.”
Lopez heralded the ruling in a statement.
“I feel immense relief that I can now continue to do good for my patients and provide them with the healthcare they so desperately need and that medical science recognizes as valid,” Lopez told The Dallas Morning News.
The court’s decision is an imperfect solution, as LGBTQ2S+ advocates noted. The restraining order allowing doctors to fully resume treatments to trans patients only lasts for two weeks, meaning that the court will have a hearing for a temporary injunction against the hospital at the end of that period. If granted, it would allow Lopez and other doctors to continue their work.
Still, the Transgender Education Network of Texas is remaining hopeful.
“The Dallas Court ruling over Children’s Medical Center, while being a temporary reprieve for our communities, still shows that CMC committed gender identity discrimination and interfered with Dr. Lopez’s professional medical duties and judgment,” the advocacy group said in an emailed statement to Xtra.
This isn’t the first time Lopez has fought for her trans patients. In March, Lopez filed a petition to depose University of Texas Southwestern’s leadership, hoping to learn whether outside political forces compelled them to shut down the clinic.
Although a judge approved the request, the order has been put on hold.
Many families are reportedly fleeing Texas so they can access proper care for their children. In February, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott issued a directive ordering the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) to open abuse investigations into families that affirm the gender identity of trans youth.
On Friday, Texas’ Supreme Court unanimously ruled to allow child welfare services to continue investigations into parents and doctors giving gender-affirming care to trans minors. Although the panel of judges maintained that Abbott’s directive was “unconstitutional,” they still overturned a lower court injunction, claiming that a district judge had overstepped her authority.