Protecting Children from Harmful Medical Interventions Is Common Sense, Not Controversy

In today’s political climate, it’s easy to get swept up in emotion and ideology. But when it comes to the health and well-being of children, we must be guided by facts, not feelings. That’s why I supported legislation to prohibit the use of gender-transition medications on minors—a decision rooted not in partisanship, but in medical evidence and the fundamental responsibility we all share to protect children.

Let me begin with an undeniable truth: children cannot fully understand the lifelong consequences of altering their bodies with powerful medications. And yet, in the United States today, children as young as eight or nine are being prescribed puberty blockers and, shortly after, cross-sex hormones. In some cases, this follows just a few hours of consultation. These are life-altering decisions made long before the age of maturity, and the long-term consequences are often irreversible.

No one denies that gender dysphoria is real. It is painful, and those experiencing it deserve compassion and support. But compassion must not override caution. Rushing children into medical interventions—especially ones with no proven long-term benefits—is not care. It is harm, cloaked in good intentions.

Several countries that were once considered pioneers in pediatric gender medicine have now reversed course. The United Kingdom, Sweden, Finland, and Norway have all either halted or dramatically restricted access to these treatments for minors. These decisions followed systematic reviews of the evidence, which found that puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones do not reliably improve mental health outcomes, including depression or suicide rates, among children with gender dysphoria.

In fact, the UK’s National Health Service found such weak evidence supporting these interventions that they ended routine prescriptions for children and instead recommended a more cautious, psychotherapy-first approach. Other countries have followed suit. Why should we in the United States ignore these findings?

Puberty blockers like Lupron were originally developed to treat prostate cancer and endometriosis. They were never intended to be used to halt healthy puberty in children. And they have never been approved by the FDA for that purpose. Yet today, they are routinely prescribed to minors as part of a gender-transition protocol, often presented to families as safe and reversible.

But these drugs are not without serious consequences. Puberty is a critical period for human development, affecting everything from bone density to brain maturation to fertility. Suppressing this process can have lasting effects. Research shows that the vast majority of children placed on puberty blockers go on to take cross-sex hormones. This often leads to sterilization and lifelong medicalization—locking young people into a future they may later regret.

This is not a question of parental rights. It is about the obligation of the state to protect children from harm, especially when irreversible medical treatments are being pushed under the guise of affirmation. We have an established precedent for this in other areas of law.

Just this year, some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle introduced legislation to ban the sale of over-the-counter weight loss and muscle-building supplements to minors. They argued—rightly—that these products could pose health risks. But if we accept that logic, how can we turn a blind eye to medications that alter a child’s endocrine system, stunt puberty, and risk long-term physical harm?

We are told this is progressive. That it is modern medicine. That to question it is to be cruel. But protecting children from experimental medical procedures is not regressive. It is responsible.

Children deserve time. They deserve thoughtful, evidence-based psychological support. And they deserve the chance to grow up with their bodies intact—without being rushed into decisions that will shape the rest of their lives.

It is time to step back from ideology and return to science. We must follow the lead of nations that have conducted rigorous reviews and concluded that the risks of these treatments far outweigh their benefits.

The legislation I supported does not ban adults from making choices about their bodies. It does not criminalize being transgender. It simply says that when it comes to children—when it comes to those who are still developing physically, mentally, and emotionally—we must err on the side of caution.

We do not allow minors to smoke, to drink, to get tattoos, or even to use tanning beds without restrictions. Why, then, should we allow them to make permanent, medical decisions about their sex?

This isn’t a culture war. It’s a call for common sense. The time to act is now. Let’s safeguard the health and future of the next generation by putting their well-being before politics.

Lisa Mazur is a State Representative for Hillsborough 44, covering the towns of Goffstown and Weare