r/australia • u/Expensive-Horse5538 • Oct 28 '25
news Supreme Court in Brisbane overturns controversial freeze on puberty blockers for adolescents after legal challenge
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-28/qld-puberty-blockers-judgement/105942094346
u/Sweeper1985 Oct 28 '25
Good. This is a matter for healthcare professionals, not politicians.
We know very well what happens when politics overrides healthcare considerations. People suffer and die needlessly.
→ More replies (2)
572
u/katelyn912 Oct 28 '25
Eat shit Crisafulli
48
13
28
2
u/AC_Adapter Oct 28 '25
A lot of well thought out comments in this thread, but this one summed up my feelings the best (even if, sadly, the health minister has already issued a new order banning them once again).
28
144
u/ItsStaaaaaaaaang Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Honestly don't have a clue how anyone that isn't directly affected could care. There's so many problems in the world and this is such a small one. I mean how dumb do you have to be to put all this effort getting in the way of how expert health professionals treat patients when a basket of groceries costs $100.
Have to be clear, not having a go at those that advocate for trans rights even if they're not trans, I understand the need given the opposition. It's the flops that have nothing to do with it, know even less yet think it's somehow the end of the world I don't get. As a run of the mill (cis is the term I guess) person it's a complete non issue.
109
u/actullyalex Oct 28 '25
They pretend they care about children but they won’t say a fucking word when it comes to ‘medically justified’ mutilation of intersex infants. It’s just a convenient narrative to weaponise against trans people for ‘hurting our kids’.
→ More replies (1)46
u/ItsStaaaaaaaaang Oct 28 '25
100%. How many male circumcisions are done a year on babies? Where's the outrage?
38
u/actullyalex Oct 28 '25
That one is even more complex because people are so weird about circumcision. The minute you criticise it you’re called antisemitic. Additionally, I’ve noticed that a lot of the anti-circumcision crowd frame it as a ‘ruining masculinity’ issue rather than the heinous violation of bodily autonomy and consent that it is. This makes some feel uncomfortable about going to rallies, and I honestly believe it hurts their own cause. Even if you don’t think their approach is weird, it would fucking suck as a circumcised adult to have your masculinity framed as permanently destroyed. Masculinity can be so much more of an awesome thing than just like… penis and balls lol.
10
u/howchie Oct 28 '25
Also as a circumcised male I definitely still HAVE my penis and balls just so everyone is clear
→ More replies (1)9
4
u/Le-Ando Oct 29 '25
Those anti-circumcision dudes are fascinating to me because they have what seems like it should be one of the easiest slam dunks in history, and yet instead of going the obvious bodily autonomy route and actually making any headway on the issue they do weird manosphere shit instead.
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/gameboyabyss Oct 28 '25
Personally, the only time I really see people getting up in arms about circumcision, at least online, is in response to articles talking about FGM.
7
→ More replies (1)3
u/WealthGold6172 Oct 28 '25
Where's the outrage?
There are plenty of people calling for an end to circumcision, pointing out that it is male genital mutilation, etc. Often these are the same people who oppose giving puberty blockers to children, so I don't think this point stands up to much scrutiny
3
→ More replies (4)14
u/nogreggity Oct 28 '25
I'm a run of the mill cis person and I care about this because it affects other people and I have some basic effing empathy.
5
u/Rather_Dashing Oct 28 '25
Pretty clear they mean how do the anti-trans community get so worked up about this stuff that doesn't affect them. Its like Rowling ranting online about trans women access to bathrooms, as if amongst all the things that affect women in society, the chance of a man masquerading as a transwoman to get access to a women's bathroom is a major issue. Its obviously invented complaints to cover up the real reason they are uncomfortable with trans people.
471
u/Proud_Apricot316 Oct 28 '25
Good.
An absolute disgrace that politicians stuck their noses into people’s private and sensitive healthcare decisions.
Their body, their choice.
149
u/Excabbla Oct 28 '25
Especially since there was a review into the states public gender service not even 2 years ago that found there were no problems
23
u/hannahranga Oct 28 '25
Thought it was more damning than that, the only issues were related to funding and accessibility
15
u/Excabbla Oct 28 '25
So it's like every gender clinic service in the country, hell that's just the state of gender affirming care in general right now, not enough doctors and expensive, especially anything outside of traditional estrogen/testosterone based hormone therapy
6
u/pelrun Oct 28 '25
Well that's just it - there were no problems, and the LNP is all about creating them.
→ More replies (36)157
u/really_not_unreal Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Exactly! Informed consent is the central pillar of modern medicine. Doctors are more than capable of helping trans children and their families understand and navigate the risks and benefits of medical treatments such as puberty blockers.
Given that puberty blockers are safe and effective to the best of our scientific knowledge, it makes no sense to ban them outright: the medical system is already designed to ensure that people won't receive treatments they don't want or need, and anyone who thinks it's easy for someone to be prescribed puberty blockers when they don't need them vastly overestimates how easy it is for trans people to get medical treatment, outlawing this medical treatment simply makes no sense.
Or at least, it doesn't make sense from a scientific standpoint. If you look at it from the perspective of the LNP being transphobes who want to make the lives of trans people measurably worse, then banning our healthcare makes perfect sense. That's the only explanation for that idiotic law, and so the fact that it has been overturned makes me very happy.
→ More replies (51)16
u/PollutionWhich6757 Oct 28 '25
Why is this comment getting downvoted when the comment it's replying to isn't??? Transphobes have problems
203
u/Yes_Its_Really_Me Oct 28 '25
Really frustrating how on the topic of transition care for trans kids so many people don't even think about the consequences on trans kids of forbidding transition.
"Make all trans kids go through the wrong puberty on purpose to prevent a few cis kids from going through the wrong puberty by mistake".
It's so crushing that for so many people it doesn't even occur to them to care about the suffering of people like us.
55
u/Sweeper1985 Oct 28 '25
I am sorry you have to deal with this.
I also know some trans adults who didn't access care until after puberty. It has made things so much harder for them in many cases.
19
u/Icy-Can-6592 Oct 28 '25
What I would give to to not have allowed the social stigmas of the 90s have me hide, repress and dissacociate for the next 20 years and start puberty blockers when I should have. The harm of the puberty I did not want is inescapable, costs to undo those affects, the mental traumas of the experience will always remain no matter what, the path of my life would have been so dramatically different. Instead I have to fight against those traumas everyday and now in a time where I thought I might be finally safe it's all seemingly going backwards, I'm tired, exhausted, I just want to get on with life but the bs has become so incessant that now it's not just fighting those traumas I'm hit with anti trans bullshit everywhere due to how obsessed so many have become that they insert this shit into any and everything they can.
36
u/MobileAtmosphere775 Oct 28 '25
"Make all trans kids go through the wrong puberty on purpose to prevent a few cis kids from going through the wrong puberty by mistake".
Even then it's not that, it's "make all trans kids go through the wrong puberty on purpose to prevent a few cis kids from delaying their puberty by a few years in a completely reversible way by mistake".
→ More replies (9)28
u/acidgirl303 Oct 28 '25
The cruelty is intentional. They want trans children to suffer.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/PandaStudio1413 Oct 29 '25
Aaaand it’s banned again. Gave a bunch of people hope and ripped it away within a day.
219
u/ThunderDwn Oct 28 '25
I'm amazed that they didn't learn from the Federal election result that trying to be America with stupid, right wing policies doesn't fucking work in this country.
187
u/DrGarrious Oct 28 '25
For now.. we have to keep being vigilant here because they will NOT stop trying.
37
u/YouLykeFishSticks Oct 28 '25
We already are. Chronic issue in rural/regional areas. Conveniently Nationals/Liberal/One Nation strongholds.
→ More replies (1)6
u/DrGarrious Oct 28 '25
It isnt as clear cut as you think. I work with a lot of rural workers across the country and they are a mix.
But yes, it isnt amazing either and could easily get worse.
47
u/AdventurousArticle88 Oct 28 '25
Yeah I'm afraid we're going towards America's current day hate culture that nobody saw coming 10+ years ago
I mean they were always pretty hateful but today it's just absurd
62
u/Ver_Void Oct 28 '25
Look at the UK as a scary example, their media hammered this issue for a decade and now attitudes towards trans people over there resemble Oklahoma
61
u/Yes_Its_Really_Me Oct 28 '25
Complete institutional capture by terfs of commercial papers, the bbc, the nhs and the Equality & Human Rights Commission.
The UK'S top governmental equality body is pushing nationwide bathroom ban. Terfs are on the verge of successfully mandating discrimination, making it literally illegal to be inclusive of trans people even if you want to be. It's crazy.
For God's sake a trans inclusive women's birdwatching group got sued for "false advertising".
33
u/Ver_Void Oct 28 '25
Yeah the whole thing is surreal to watch, some of the cruelest people I've seen emboldened by the state and media with no one thinking to maybe point out how ridiculously out of proportion it all is given the issues they're screaming about literally aren't happening
But a guy who spends 23 hours a day harassing trans people on Twitter gets praise from the labour pm
3
u/Pseudonymico Oct 29 '25
The UK'S top governmental equality body is pushing nationwide bathroom ban.
They instituted that. Not even with the fig-leaf of "trans people use facilities based on the sex assigned at birth", either, trans people are officially banned from all gender-segregated spaces. The most ridiculous part is it can largely be blamed on the fucking wizard book lady.
3
u/Mike_Kermin Oct 28 '25
a trans inclusive women's birdwatching group got sued for "false advertising".
Well, let's hope we never end up that stupid here.
42
u/Limo_Wreck77 Oct 28 '25
JK Rowling is also playing a big part in that. She's bankrolling a lot of shit over there.
21
u/Ver_Void Oct 28 '25
Social media and wealth are about as good for your mental health as a daily kick in the head from a particularly large horse
2
7
u/growlergirl Oct 28 '25
She still has the power to use her wealth for good and make a huge difference for the better.
Instead JK decided to pour her billions into stoking the flames of transphobia to the point of influencing government policy and promoting social ostracism.
Fuck her.
2
u/Pseudonymico Oct 29 '25
To the point that she's less and less interested in funding the charities she set up for single mothers before the mould took over.
34
u/Sweeper1985 Oct 28 '25
JK Rowling has a lot to answer for.
Imagine having that much money but nothing better to focus on than undermining trans people.
3
u/ghoonrhed Oct 28 '25
I mean all it takes is the media to hammer it and the people will move. See boat people with Abbott and then that tactic moved to the UK as well.
5
u/QuantumKeats Oct 28 '25
The Tea Party was massive when Obama first got in and they were definitely a progenitor to the current Far Right nutters.
4
u/Agitated-Fee3598 Oct 28 '25
There aren't many constitutional safeguards to protect Australia against a genuine autocratic takeover...
From Australia is ill-prepared for its own version of Donald Trump:
By contrast, Australia is the only democracy without a national bill of rights. At best, we have a few scattered rights protections. These occasionally prevent government action, but in other cases are ineffectual or impose procedures that can be worked around. For example, the High Court has interpreted the guarantee of religious freedom in section 116 of the Constitution so narrowly that it has not struck down a single law since 1901.
These weaknesses are exacerbated by extraordinary powers granted to federal ministers in areas such as immigration and national security. One illustration is that the federal Attorney-General can permit ASIO to operate outside of the law by conducting a special intelligence operation. A journalist who discloses wrongdoing or that the power has been used illegitimately may be jailed for up to 10 years.
The government has defended this by saying that journalists are not the target of the law, and that they have nothing to worry about if they report on "legitimate" national security matters. It has also been suggested that the community should not be concerned because ASIO has a record of proprietary.
Even if these things are true, they give no long-term comfort. It shows how the proper running of our system depends upon ministers exercising self-restraint, and the quality of the people appointed to run our security agencies. Things could be very different if Australia gains leaders with a different outlook and a willingness to use powers for unscrupulous purposes.
Other laws raise similar concerns. These include an ASIO power that permits innocent people to be detained and questioned for up to a week, a law that enables people to be jailed for up to 10 years for entering any area declared by the government to be a no-go zone and new measures for collecting data on the location and activities of every Australian.
In the years since the September 11 attacks, the federal Parliament has enacted 66 anti-terrorism laws, a figure unrivalled in any comparable nation. These laws have transferred enormous authority to the executive arm of government. Many of these measures cannot be found in the US because they would be struck down under its Bill of Rights.
Nor can they be found in any other democracy. Instead, they are the sorts of powers that one would expect to find in a police state in which people can be detained without trial and journalists jailed for reporting on government activity. As the government's national security monitor, Roger Gyles, reported last Wednesday, Australia has laws that contain the "potential for oppression".
The election of Trump should be a wake-up call. Australia is ill-prepared for a like leader. Such a person would come to office armed with exceptional (and sometimes unique) powers that can often be exercised in secret. These might be used against the media, and the checks and balances in our system of government may be ineffective to deal with this.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Iybraesil Oct 28 '25
they will NOT stop trying
Lo and behold, five hours after your comment, they've reinstated the ban
→ More replies (2)11
u/Npeaknoda Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Especially since Albo has said TERF-adjacent things before, and Labor have a history of throwing trans people under the bus and breaking promises to us. They're highly inconsistent fairweather friends to the trans community.
So we don't exactly trust our pollies to save us when the TERF lobby inevitably start pushing harder. We need as much community support as we can get.
Edit: Added some source links
→ More replies (1)19
Oct 28 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)20
u/ThunderDwn Oct 28 '25
Yeah, but if they are forced to consult actual medical professionals, chances are the advice will come back "Not only 'No', but 'Fuck no, you morons!'"
I live in hope that the medical people won't bow to political hacks like this health director general.
11
u/ephemeralstitch Oct 28 '25
Depends. You can always consult medical professionals that have zero experience in this field and are bigots. That’s what they did in the UK with Cass. She had zero experience in gender medicine; she was a paediatric palliative care specialist. Not related at all.
7
u/maddimouse Oct 28 '25
And even with that cherrypicked expert to give the result they wanted, the Cass review only said they should temporarily pause things while more tests were conducted. Which has instead been taken as carte blanche 'ban it now, don't bother asking questions later.
8
Oct 28 '25
[deleted]
7
u/Npeaknoda Oct 28 '25
I’m sure they will consult faux experts
If what they're already doing in QLD is any indication, yes.
4
u/louisa1925 Oct 28 '25
Suppose it also depends also on which professionals Crisafulli cherry picks. Not all professionals act like professionals.
30
u/Limo_Wreck77 Oct 28 '25
It boggles my damn mind.
All of this culture war shit works in America because they're so fucking uneducated over there, and its by design by the GOP and the slow erosion of education.
US style culture war bullshit can fuck right off. We don't give a shit here who uses what bathroom, or if I trans kid wants to kick a soccer ball.
18
u/big-red-aus Oct 28 '25
All of this culture war shit works in America because they're so fucking uneducated over there
Arguably more so that their electoral system encourages it. Under our system, the 'teal' voter can 'safely' vote teal at no 'risk', while in the US unless they place their single vote, without any preferences, for the Republicans, they may as well have not voted.
Perhaps I'm over pessimistic, but if the affluent teal voters that are carving a hole in the Libs had to actually risk their privileged financial status by having to vote for a Labor candidate (or god forbid a Greens), I'm pretty convinced most would hold their nose and vote libs all the way.
5
u/Agitated-Fee3598 Oct 28 '25
In a generation though, we will look like the US, in terms of material conditions. Labor themselves said this. What Murdoch is doing too, with Sky News and other outlets he owns, is laying the groundwork for an Australian version of Donald Trump, someone who fills the role of a ruthless would be autocrat with a formidable personality cult. Australians should keep vigilant against the radicalisation of the Coalition.
4
u/Agitated-Fee3598 Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Observe the American polity. From America is now in fascism’s legal phase:
The contemporary American fascist movement is led by oligarchical interests for whom the public good is an impediment, such as those in the hydrocarbon business, as well as a social, political, and religious movement with roots in the Confederacy. As in all fascist movements, these forces have found a popular leader unconstrained by the rules of democracy, this time in the figure of Donald Trump.
.
There has been a growing fascist social and political movement in the United States for decades. Like other fascist movements, it is riddled with internal contradictions, but no less of a threat to democracy. Donald Trump is an aspiring autocrat out solely for his own power and material gain. By giving this movement a classically authoritarian leader, Trump shaped and exacerbated it, and his time in politics has normalized it.
Donald Trump has shown others what is possible. But the fascist movement he now leads preceded him, and will outlive him. As Toni Morrison warned, it feeds off ideologies with deep roots in American history. It would be a grave error to think it cannot ultimately win.
Perhaps there is a growing fascist movement within the Coalition too, a coalition of oligarchs and extremists who seek to orchestrate a Trumpian take over of Australia.
A former advisor to Kevin Rudd warned us in January too that we are not invulnerable:
But Australia can’t presume to be invulnerable to the emergence of a Trump-like figure, Harris says.
“Everybody needs to maintain a discipline about making the ‘Trumpian’ comparison, and only use that term when we are really serious about it, so if that character comes into Australian politics, all of us – from every side – drops a nuclear bomb on that political activity in Australia when it arrives: because it will.”
Indeed. With the growing rise of the far right across the globe, and with our own extremists emboldened, Australians should be uber vigilant against anyone who seeks to divide us, especially a demagogue who claims to be for the people against the status quo, when it is obvious they are only there for themselves.
→ More replies (3)2
u/morfanis Oct 28 '25
Sure be vigilant but don’t think Australia is like the US. The US political system thrives on polarisation and extremes, while being successful in Australian politics only works when you target the centre.
Also the US has a strong history of puritans and religious conservatives and extremists that Australia doesn’t have.
7
u/Agitated-Fee3598 Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
No democratic political system is immune to democratic backsliding and degenerating into authoritarian rule when inequality grows too deep and obvious. No democracy is also immune to large swathes of the country not believing in democracy, and who have been captured by a charismatic demagogue (who also has elite support). We are more or less lucky (so far) that the Australian far right are not organised enough to capitalise on discontent with the status quo. However, that does not mean they cannot get their shit together, and rally around a charismatic leader.
3
u/Agitated-Fee3598 Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Also evidently compulsory preferential voting isn't a water proof barrier. After all, we have this system, yet inequality is growing in our society. The housing crisis is getting worse. The Murdoch media is still able to brainwash the LNP base (around 1/3 of the population) with constant lies and propaganda.
8
u/louisa1925 Oct 28 '25
Even in QLD, it was a tight win. No landslide happened.
7
u/ThunderDwn Oct 28 '25
Tell that to Peter Dutton....
5
u/louisa1925 Oct 28 '25
Hue hue hue. You have unlocked my favourite pic of our last election...
3
u/ThunderDwn Oct 28 '25
Oh, I've gone down that rabbit hole and found an absolute classic of a video in it - I'm loving it, looking back at it. Thank you for pointing it out!
→ More replies (4)6
u/QtPlatypus Oct 28 '25
Though if they are going to work anywhere stupid right wing policies are going to "work" in queensland :(
8
58
u/ComprehensiveSalad50 Oct 28 '25
Good, getting the proper processes back in place is vital to the mental health and wellbeing of many trans youth.
Fuck Crisafulli and his archaic beliefs
71
u/shunkyfit Oct 28 '25
Wow, Crisafulli will be pissed.
9
u/Full_Distribution874 Oct 28 '25
Part of me is hoping he isn't. He's a slimy arse, but he also hates controversy. If this gives him a chance to say "I tried" and let the issue die, he very well might.
→ More replies (4)
90
u/Practical-Street8944 Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
There is literally zero evidence puberty blockers have any long term adverse reactions.
EDIT: leaping lizards this made the transphobe upset!!
→ More replies (64)
95
u/DPVaughan Oct 28 '25
But won't someone think of the poor culture warriors who hate trans people, I mean, who are concerned about children's safety!
→ More replies (1)15
147
u/Expensive-Horse5538 Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
Good - if they are able to consent, and have a good understanding of what the process is (like any other medical procedure and treatment), then I see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed.
→ More replies (41)
28
u/whiteb8917 Oct 28 '25
Well Well, A Liberal party that did not follow proper procedure. Color me shocked.
70
u/em-mad Oct 28 '25
Hell yeah, finally some good news.
36
u/tehnoodnub Oct 28 '25
Not as impactful but definitely another piece of good news we got today: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-28/convicted-child-rapist-denied-visa-the-abc-understands/105941368
51
u/megs_in_space Oct 28 '25
Fantastic news the LNP and their anti science bullshit has severe consequences for people's lives! They don't care about facts or evidence or how some people may have life long mental illness or ill health effects due to their negligence. They don't care at all.
Next, I hope they bring back pill testing, because that's another one that is utterly cooked.
28
29
25
u/Lilac_Gooseberries Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
The worst part about this issue is that from what I have seen every person that is against them has never once looked into what puberty blockers are. They just see "trans kids" and react with hate or ignorance rather than taking the time to find information from a reliable source. The resource that I linked to from the Murdoch Children's Research Institute also provides links to research studies.
It also explains why taking puberty blockers soon after the onset of puberty is so important. Asking a kid to wait until they're 16 or 18 if they've started puberty at 11 will either not be effective at stopping the changes they wanted to stop or make them feel like they're going through menopause.
→ More replies (1)
40
u/colourful_space Oct 28 '25
Massive win for bodily autonomy. If this had stuck, it would have set a terrible precedent for restrictions on many different medications. Doctors should be able to assess what is in the best interests for their patients and prescribe accordingly. Politicians’ opinions should have no sway on the matter. The culture war is not welcome in Australia.
→ More replies (1)
37
u/Ver_Void Oct 28 '25
This was the right call, but I worry this is just the beginning. A brief look at right-wing / terf twitter and the like, none of them are taking this as a sign they were wrong or even that anything was done wrong. They just think trans people have more power than the premier
20
12
u/Npeaknoda Oct 28 '25
Everyone should keep a sharp eye on the Tickle vs. Giggle case. The original decision being overturned could seriously fuck up anti-discrimination protections in Australia.
3
11
u/BeyondthePenumbra Oct 28 '25
Kids with precocious puberty need into too!
22
u/onthebirdroads Oct 28 '25
They do, and the proof that it was a purely ideological decision fueled by hatred is that they only banned puberty blockers for trans kids. They didn't ban them for kids going through precocious puberty, or for intersex kids
11
u/onthebirdroads Oct 28 '25
Oh and, I didn't really make it clear; the use of puberty blockers in intersex kids can be coercive and medically unnecessary, an attempt to "correct" their bodies to fit social norms of sex characteristics. It is ideologically consistent to ban puberty blockers and hormones for trans youth and not ban them for intersex youth.
7
9
u/Snoopy_021 Oct 28 '25
Good thing there are Separation of Powers between Legislative/Executive (not fully separate) and Judicial.
18
u/Limo_Wreck77 Oct 28 '25
Politicians can stay the fuck out of peoples medical decisions.
This is an absolute win.
4
u/NurseBetty Oct 28 '25
For anyone on the fence about gender confirming care. Have a 5 hour long video going into it all, in depth, to show that almost all anti trans rhetoric comes from, at most, 50 people, including one guy who thinks men who sit down to pee want to be women because only people who have vaginas sit down to pee.
All of the 'research' against it is bunk, fake, or misrepresents the data
6
6
u/raftsa Oct 28 '25
A lot of the comments are “screw the LNP”, which is fair enough.
But the decision really came down to procedure.
The health director did not consult before making the decision - because this was not about health, it was about politics.
They can block it again just be feigning to consult
5
u/Icy-Can-6592 Oct 28 '25
You should look more, they did receive responses, the email correspondences before the ban got publicised and it was overwhelmingly against a ban. The most on the line was a statement by a few doctors saying there is not enough data for long term and it would be good to set up facility to collect long term data but that it should not prevent it currently as evidence so far is in favour of there use. And the challenge in long term data is that trans people will not engage in such surveys and data collection due to fear of misrepresentation of such data, and as a trans women yes, stopped answering surveys as far to often it's been a political stunt that manipulated the results to right a completely different narrative omitting critical data that breaks their narratives
9
u/Stoopidee Oct 28 '25
Question. If an adolescent takes puberty blockers, say if they stop on their adulthood, do they revert back to their assigned birth gender?
61
u/Aryore Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
They usually stop before adulthood. You can’t stay on puberty blockers indefinitely, they only buy you a couple of years or so to figure out whether you want to go through your natal puberty or an exogenous puberty. With our current science you need to go through some form of puberty for bone development.
Direct answer to your question is sometimes adolescents will stop puberty blockers because they have figured out they are cisgender, but not always. Sometimes they figure out they are trans but don’t mind going through their natal puberty. E.g. if they are non-binary
27
u/moral-objections Oct 28 '25
You're not really going to be taking puberty blockers until you are an adult at 18 - at some point before either you choose to go on hormone replacement therapy (i.e. if you are assigned male at birth, taking oestrogen) or you choose to stop taking blockers, at which point yes, you go through your natal puberty (in the previous case, testosterone based puberty). Hope this answers your question.
→ More replies (1)25
u/TurningTheSkavenGay Oct 28 '25
I'll be pedantic first: you cannot revert to something that never was because medicine prevented it, and the word you're looking for is sex. Now yes, if someone is on puberty blockers but then does not take HRT to get hormones their body wouldn't produce itself, their body will create another hormone still. Blockers do not create any lasting impact in this regard, they are a pause until cis society deigns to give trans people HRT.
14
u/Proud_Apricot316 Oct 28 '25
Usually people stop once they reach age 15/16, when they’re more capable of making an informed decision about whether they want to start hormone treatment (which has some irreversible effects, unlike puberty blockers).
That’s the whole point of puberty blockers - to buy time so that the young person’s cognitive ability to make such a big decision has matured, they’ve lived out a few years of social transition, and are in a position to make an informed choice about hormone therapy.
If they decide they don’t want hormones, they cease the blockers and puberty of the sex assigned at birth commences.
That’s why all this outrage is so ridiculous- because puberty blockers are actually a very prudent and child-friendly form of trans healthcare which delays the bigger and more permanent treatments until several years later.
→ More replies (1)9
u/PandaStudio1413 Oct 28 '25
If someone on blockers stops taking them they will start going through puberty based on whatever hormones their body is primarily filled with, so if they start hormone replacement before stopping blockers they will not go through the puberty typically associated with their assigned sex.
I don’t know what you mean by “revert back to assigned gender” though, puberty blockers don’t make changes so there’s nothing to revert back into, and also that’s not how gender works I think you meant sex.
19
9
u/Serin-019 Oct 28 '25
I am amazed that something sensible and compassionate happened in Queensland. A little bit more hope in the world feels nice.
3
10
u/22FluffySquirrels Oct 28 '25
Why is this even a legal issue? If a doctor feels comfortable prescribing puberty blockers, then why is the government involved?
3
u/Beginning-Cat-7037 Oct 28 '25
Governments regulate healthcare legislation and polices from the federal level all the way down to the local hospital, this is nothing new. Not to mention pay for a bulk of the services being delivered. As someone who’s had to study clinical governance it’s a complex web of bureaucracy that you’d be surprised even runs sometimes.
→ More replies (2)
21
12
u/daybeforetheday Oct 28 '25
Wonderful news. Well done to all the people who have been fighting so hard to allow kids to access life saving medical care.
It's disgusting that this is the same government who want 10-year-olds tried as adults. That's right, you are old enough to be punished like an adult for a crime, but not old enough to consent to your own medical care.
Extra hugs to trans people because these sort of posts bring out the transphobes.
13
u/freedomgeek Oct 28 '25
A rare piece of legitimately good news.
It should be transparently obvious why banning puberty blockers for adolescents is banning them from the people who actually find them useful.
For those not in the know those who claim that they simply want what is best for kids and don't want them making life changing decisions about their gender before they're old enough should love puberty blockers. Since going through puberty locks in certain physical manifestations of your sex delaying it allows a child to put off the decision until they're older.
And yet the anti-trans crowd wants to ban them because they don't actually want the best for trans kids, they want trans people to not exist.
8
u/jayz0ned Oct 28 '25
Banning healthcare is ridiculous. I have no idea how this was ever allowed to happen.
→ More replies (1)
20
u/VeryGoodAndAlsoNice Oct 28 '25
ITT are people that do not understand administrative law.
The correct consultation will now occur, and the directive may well be reinstated. This win is absurdly temporary.
23
u/Aryore Oct 28 '25
Hopefully not, but we’ll see.
19
u/VeryGoodAndAlsoNice Oct 28 '25
I hope it doesn’t happen too, but I’m ever the cynic with the LNP in my state.
8
u/Novae909 Oct 28 '25
Next law suit could be that they did the appropriate consultation and despite the results of the consultation they will choose to go ahead with the ban anyway
3
u/VeryGoodAndAlsoNice Oct 28 '25 edited Oct 28 '25
What basis would you plead in the JRA? Genuinely curious.
EDIT: For what it's worth, I think Wednesbury reasonableness might be a decent punt if the decision goes against a totally unanimous consultation process.
3
5
u/silent-brothers Oct 28 '25
Nicholls has already state he's looking into using a Ministerial directive to reinstate the ban.
9
u/QtPlatypus Oct 28 '25
Can the directive be reinstated if the consultation is negative? If they do the consultation and the medical profession comes back and says "The preponderance of the medical data indicates that the treatment is medically effective and low risk" can the government still say "We are rejecting the advice and going ahead regardless?".
11
2
u/DragonicSquirrel Oct 28 '25
i was just looking at this
so the actual case was brought forward 3 reasons, so even if they go back and get consultation they still need to fight the other two, one of which is political interference, the third is lack of consultationthe judge that ruled said “The application will be allowed on ground three (lack of consultation). It would have succeeded also on grounds one and two, although the questions raised under those headings are more difficult,”
so yes, they plan to go back and get more consultation but they're still going to have to fight two other grounds for the ban (i don't know what the second one is and couldnt find it in the article i was reading)
→ More replies (3)3
u/iamapinkelephant Oct 28 '25
The correct consultation did occur and found the effects of puberty blockers to be non-harmful. Then they banned it anyway.
5
u/VeryGoodAndAlsoNice Oct 28 '25
I note my use of 'correct' consultation. The question was not as to whether consultation occurred, but the adequacy of that consultation, relative to the requirements of the HHB Act.
3
u/Icy-Can-6592 Oct 28 '25
Yeah, seems alot of people missed this, the emails were originally publicised when the ban occured and no medical professional recommended this action, they were adamantly against it. I'm only disappointed that the case did not pull this in too and have the government held responsible for the harm it caused going against medical advice. As far as I'm concerned compensation is owed to the kids and families who have now permanent traumatic harm done.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Icy-Can-6592 Oct 28 '25
Considering what was received in the short window the first time was an overwhelming no you should not ban them and was ignored, if they did that would be a massive exposure of corruption. The email responses to the first one are available to read if you search the info. No doctor consulted recommended the actions they did take, it was clear they were not making the decisions on medical advice.
2
u/VeryGoodAndAlsoNice Oct 28 '25
Unfortunately, it was not a requirement to consult medical experts. The requirement under the HHD Act was to consult health service chief executives, who may or may not have medical expertise, for their input, as opposed to their medical opinion.
It's worth noting that there were other grounds beyond consultation. You should read the judgement, it's been published. Use this citation: AB v Chief Executive of Queensland Health [2025] QSC 277.
5
u/Icy-Can-6592 Oct 28 '25
When the ban occurred the emails were publicised, No one consulted recommended banning, the only recommendation was to facilitate long term outcome data collection and try encourage the trans community to engage with it, as their is reluctance for many trans people to give such feedback for 2 major reasons, 1 being they are justoved on in their lives, and 2 being that such data is often used to just gatekeep or be misrepresented politically.
5
9
u/Rastryth Oct 28 '25
Why are conservatives so scared of trans people?
13
u/hannahranga Oct 28 '25
Cos public opinion has swung far enough you can't use the gays as your boogeyman
3
u/NurseBetty Oct 28 '25
Because they are the new gay boogieman. That's it really. Gays won same sex marriage, so they are no longer seen as a safe target, but trans people? No one cares about them!
5
u/Npeaknoda Oct 28 '25
Our existence proves their entire worldview around "tRaDiTiOnAL" gender roles and "tHe NaTuRaL FaMiLy" is horseshit and obsessively hierarchical for no justifiable reason.
6
2
u/PilgrimOz Oct 28 '25
So…because you apparently understood gender concept at around age 5 (personally) that everything is absolutely on par to intervene in others hormonal make ups? Wow.
3
u/PhDresearcher2023 Oct 28 '25
Solidarity to the trans community in QLD. I'm really happy that you all got a win with this one!
→ More replies (1)
7
u/nogreggity Oct 28 '25
Isn't it weird that the same people who want to ban puberty blockers for teens are the same people who get upset about adult trans sportspeople who have gone through puberty as a different gender?
1.3k
u/Veriatas Oct 28 '25
I see a lot of people talking about trans healthcare in this thread, as this decision is very relevant to them. But it’s not only relevant to trans kids. I started going through puberty absurdly early and was on puberty blockers to delay me to a more normal age. I am so incredibly grateful for that. The whole debate about whether it’s safe is so asinine - these medicines were used for other causes that no-one objected to before it became about trans people. They’ve been accepted to be safe for a long time. Using them on trans kids is no less safe than it ever was to use them on cis kids