Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram
This article discusses suicide and disputed claims about suicide prevention. If you or someone you know is experiencing a mental-health or suicidal crisis, call or text 988 to reach the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline.
In August 2026, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center announced as part of a settlement, that they would no longer block the puberty, sterilize or mutilate the bodies of gender-non-conforming children as part of “gender affirming care” – interventions they have claimed for years were “life saving”.
If the puberty blockers, hormones and surgeries of “gender affirming care” were “life saving” as Connecticut Children’s Medical Center strongly asserted and convinced Connecticut policy makers and families for so many years (see below), then why have they abandoned it? “Life saving” is a highly manipulative and coercive term, you better get it right.
Like, wasn’t it worth fighting for in the face of . . checking notes . . an “investigation”? They have promised not to provide these “life saving” interventions for 10 years over a federal “investigation” of their billing practices. Really? These are people who have dedicated themselves to serving families and children in CT. If they really thought it was “life saving” care, nothing would stop them from providing it.
It seems more likely that they’ve come to realize, like dozens of countries, thousands of parents, doctors and even the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, that “gender affirming care” . . hasn’t been affirming anything except gender grifters and DEI divas at the expense of vulnerable children and families. But that is not as sympathetic as blaming an investigation.
Let’s look at the record . . .
Connecticut Children’s Medical Center heavily promoted a “gender affirming care as suicide prevention” narrative for years.
Here are just some of the ways Connecticut Children’s Medical Center (CCMC) has repeatedly asserted and continues to assert that gender-transition services for minors like those they and their clinical affiliate, Hartford Healthcare, provided, are “life-saving”. . .
In CCMC’s 2023 statement titled “The Life-Saving Impact of Gender-Affirming Care” (below CCMC’s “Land Acknowledgement”) the hospital warned that restricting access to “gender-affirming care” placed transgender youth “in danger”. So much danger that they apparently planned to go around or even break the law in other states to provide it.
CCMC still advertises their plans to open a “portal” to bring gender affirming care to more children in Connecticut, New England and across the country. Even, according to the head of their gender clinic, into those states that ban it.
“This legislation will empower providers such as myself to reach beyond Connecticut via telemedicine to support patients in states where in-person care for hormone therapy is fully banned. Furthermore, it will protect me and my colleagues from hostile out-of-state prosecution,” – 2025 Testimony of Priya Phulwani MD, then director of CCMC’s Gender Clinic.
There is little doubt the hospital planned to use their well-funded portal to subversively reach out-of-state children. The only thing blocking them were sensible legislators who heeded our warnings against expanding CT “shield laws’ to include telehealth.
It was Family Institute of Connecticut Action who created a diverse coalition and led the effort to stop CCMC’s plans to practice gender affirming care in the states that ban it. You can join our mailing list and donate to our continued efforts here.
Back to the narrative building . . . in 2023 CCMC proudly hosted Admiral Rachel Levine, who stated at the conference that “Gender-affirming care is medical care. Gender-affirming care is mental health care and literally gender-affirming care is suicide prevention care,” still available on CCMC’s website. “Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex Americans, especially our youth, are very challenged at this time and are attempting suicide at an alarming rate” quotes CCMC’s website.
You may know that the admiral, a cross-dressing man, shamefully and notoriously used his political position to pressure WPATH on behalf of the Biden Administration to remove all age restrictions on surgical interventions for exactly the type of “gender affirming care” CCMC and their affiliates provided.
In a 2017 Hartford HealthCare publication, and on their current webpage entitled “Understanding the Gender Revolution Doesn’t Just Ease Discrimination, It Can Save Lives”, Dr. Priya Phulwani, former director of Connecticut Children’s Gender Program repeats a wholly discredited statistic of a false “40% attempted suicide rate” among transgender children: “For the vast majority of people, not doing something because you fear that it’s a phase has a huge negative consequence with suicide attempt rates greater than 40 percent. There’s no question in my mind that supporting transitions is the way to go in nearly every case.” This was not a casual comment about respectful language. Phulwani expressly linked “supporting transitions” with the false claim of suicide-attempt rates of “greater than 40 percent.”
For the uninitiated, “gender-affirming care” includes prescribing puberty blockers to 10 year olds, stymying their mental and physical development, further alienating them from their bodies and peers. It includes prescribing cross sex hormones that when combined with puberty blockers, always leads to permanent infertility of the child. “Gender-Affirming Care” also includes chopping the breasts off of young girls to alleviate mental health problems – Connecticut paid to have this done as a “treatment” for gender dysphoria at Hartford Healthcare. Connecticut has also removed children from their loving parents for refusing to affirm a false identity.
The stakes are very high and CT Children’s has lead their patients, policymakers and the public to believe that these interventions were necessary to save the lives of children. If that were true, why have they stopped providing them?
Connecticut Children’s promoted a life-or-death message based on low quality research and activist group assertions.
Their “Life-Saving Impact” statement relied heavily on advocacy “research”, including surveys of teen volunteers from the Trevor Project. Those surveys can describe the experiences of the people who answer them, but participants were recruited online, including through social-media advertising. They were not randomized clinical trials and could not prove that puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones prevent suicide.
CCMC’s document cited a short-term observational study claiming that young people receiving gender-related interventions had lower odds of depression and suicidal thoughts. The hospital presented that finding as support for medical intervention while giving far less attention to limitations.
CCMC relied on and recommended The Trevor Project, ACLU, the Human Rights Campaign, and GLSEN – these are not neutral arbiters of science or healthcare.
By their own standards, is CCMC now risking the lives of patients?
CCMC began abruptly closing its youth gender program in 2025 after consulting “medical and legal advisers”. Then in 2026, it entered a ten-year agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice. Under that agreement between both parties, CCMC cannot provide or refer minors for puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, surgeries, or other covered gender-transition procedures. It must pay $60,000 and establish a $500,000 fund for young people seeking evaluation, discontinuation, reversal, or treatment of the effects of previous care.
Family Institute of Connecticut Action has filed a Freedom of Information Request to gain access to those documents.
State Sen. Matt Lesser’s shock and anger are understandable.
Families trusted CCMC, developed relationships with its doctors, and were then told that the program was ending. Senator Matt Lesser is understandably upset and has stated that the agreement did not help families left scrambling after the closure. He also reported hearing that a constituent died after losing care at CCMC.
Any death of a young person is heartbreaking, and his concern for the family should be treated with compassion. But compassion must not replace careful evidence. Suicide is complex and rarely has one cause. Connecting a particular death to the loss of hormones or puberty blockers without medical findings, records, or an investigation risks turning a tragedy into proof of a disputed medical claim. Suicide-reporting guidance also warns against attributing a death to one event, such as a breakup, job loss, bullying or interruption of medical care. Suicide usually involves multiple interacting factors.
But Lesser’s reaction exposes the contradiction at the center of CCMC’s conduct. He apparently believed the hospital’s serious warnings that puberty blockers and hormones for children experiencing a mental health crises would be necessary to save their lives. Parents were also encouraged to believe the same thing. CCMC promoted that message for years, so lawmakers and families naturally should be shocked when CCMC abruptly stopped providing the medical interventions.
Are they choosing Privacy over “life saving care”?
The hospital says the settlement was necessary to “protect patient information from disclosure”. Protecting privacy is important. But that explanation does not resolve the central question: If these interventions were necessary to keep children alive, how could CCMC agree to stop providing or even referring for them for ten years?
Either the hospital overstated its “life-saving” claim, or it appears to have discontinued care that it genuinely believes children need to survive. Both possibilities demand an explanation.
“Gender Affirming Care”interventions were never going to help in the long term, and doctors should have known better.
New evidence makes CCMC’s earlier certainty even harder to defend. A 2026 Finnish nationwide study followed 2,083 young people referred to specialized gender services and compared them with 16,643 matched controls. Among those who underwent medical transition, recorded severe psychiatric morbidity rose from 9.8 percent to 60.7 percent in males receiving feminizing treatment and from 21.6 percent to 54.5 percent in females receiving masculinizing treatment. Turns out blocking puberty, stymying maturity, indulging and supporting psychotic delusions, removing young breasts, castrating boys and permanently sterilizing children is not a cure for mental distress.
The Finnish study does not prove that hormones caused every later psychiatric problem. Many patients had serious mental-health problems before treatment, and an observational study cannot establish causation by itself. But the findings do annialate the confident claims that medical transition reliably improves mental health or prevents suicide.
At least 300 children were subjected by CCMC to medical interventions to attempt to reverse their sex.
CCMC reportedly had approximately 300 adolescents under the care of its gender program. What happened to them? How many received puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones? How many were transferred elsewhere? How many stopped treatment? How many may now need the restorative care funded by the settlement? The stakes are very high, taking away a child’s infertility because they’ve been sold a lie they can change their sex is very serious.
Senator Lesser is right to demand answers for the affected families. But those answers should include an effort to get to the root of the problem. They should include an honest review of the treatments CCMC provided, the evidence it relied upon, the outcomes it tracked, and whether families received an accurate explanation of the risks and uncertainties.
It is fair to ask whether and when CCMC’s leaders recognized that their earlier promises and assertions could no longer be defended. The sudden closure, ten-year prohibition, payment to the government, and $500,000 fund addressing the effects of previous treatment make the question unavoidable.
Connecticut politicians continue to push the narrative.
Connecticut policymakers continue to defend puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries for minors as life saving and medically necessary, even after Connecticut Children’s agreed to stop providing them.
Attorney General William Tong has called the care “essential, lifesaving medical treatment” and is leading a lawsuit to preserve Medicaid funding for it. Governor Ned Lamont has criticized hospitals’ decisions to end these services for minors and pledged support to transgender youth and their families even signing legislation to facilitate it for children who come here from out of state. He also signed legislation to give $4 million in free money in the 2026 and 2027 CT state budgets to CCMC. State Treasurer Erick Russell and Lieutenant Governor Bysiewicz lead efforts to pressure other states to expand access. Rep. Jillian Gilchrest has called the care “essential,” while Sen. Matt Lesser has threatened state action and questioned whether Connecticut Children’s decision violates state nondiscrimination law. Their statements show that the lifesaving claims continues to shape Connecticut policy.
That is more than a public-relations or political problem. It is part of a larger medical scandal that may involve weak evidence, exaggerated suicide claims, institutional pressure, and vulnerable children placed on treatments with lifelong consequences.
Connecticut Children’s owes politicians, the affected families, and the public more than silence. It owes them the truth.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
