A state house debate over banning sex-change procedures for minors fell largely along party lines, with Republicans supporting the law to protect children and Democrats insisting parents and their minor children should have the right to make this decision.
At least 26 states have passed bans on sex-change surgery and/or puberty blockers for children. New Hampshire law currently bans what is known as “bottom” surgery, which permanently reconfigures the genitals of children.
On Monday, members of the House considered bills to ban “top” surgery — cosmetic breast surgery for the purposes of sex identity (HB 712) — and to bar doctors from prescribing hormone treatment and puberty blockers to minors (HB 377).
Both bills were sponsored by state Rep. Lisa Mazur (R-Goffstown), who organized a press conference prior to the start of Monday’s public hearings.
Rep. Lisa Mazur (R-Goffstown) speaks at a press conference on March 3, 2025.
“The bills being considered today are about common sense protections, ensuring that children are given the time and space to grow up without being rushed into decisions they may not fully understand and can never come back from,” Mazur said.
All of the legislators at Mazur’s presser were Republicans, but at least one expert witness supporting the legislation was not.
Jamie Reed, a former Missouri pediatric gender clinic case worker turned whistleblower, identified herself as a “lifelong Democrat” during her testimony before the House Health, Human Services & Elderly Affairs Committee.
“I was once a true believer,” Reed said. “But what I learned is that these are interventions based on poor research, poor evidence, and poor outcomes.”
“You do not have to have ever worked in a gender care center like I did to simply know that children cannot consent to their own sterility, to their own loss of sexual function, and to their own lifetime physical harms,” Reed added.
Both were grilled by Democrats on the committee.
After Mazur finished her opening testimony in support of HB 377, state Rep. Tim Hartnett (D-Manchester) asked, “I wonder if you have any moral disapproval for just the category of transgender people.”
“This is about harmful procedures on minors, and I feel like that’s moving into a debate, and that’s not what this bill is about,” Mazur responded.
It was a theme that resurfaced during the hearings.
Simon Amaya Price, a 20-year-old Berklee College of Music student and self-identified “detransitioner,” testified about his time attempting to live as a girl before concluding this was a mistake. He recounted how his doctor tried to push him into transitioning and warned his father, “Would you like a dead son or an alive daughter?”
“The other side believes that if you don’t give kids puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries, they will kill themselves, that is a damned lie,” he said. “I am living proof.”
Price’s testimony appeared to irk state Rep. Trinidad Tellez (D-Hooksett), who asked whether he was paid to deliver his testimony.
“I wish,” Price responded.
Price was the only person to testify Monday who was asked this question.
Opponents of the two bills, like Oliver Bonhemma, 17, of Sutton, accused supporters of “contributing to the genocide of trans people.”
Savannah Griffin of Bradford, NH, a biological male who identifies as a woman, acknowledged, “There’s been a lot of talk about regret and permanent, irreversible decisions.”
“As for irreversible changes, suicide is an extremely irreversible change,” Griffin said.
At times, some House Democrats appeared to struggle with the basics of biology.
Rep. Timothy Horrigan (D-Durham), who asked in a previous House committee meeting, “What is biological sex?” told the committee he doesn’t believe chromosomes and a person’s sex are directly connected.
“Chromosomes do not necessarily determine what your gender expression is. What really counts is what your gender identity is — what you believe yourself to be,” Horrigan said.
And when Littleton psychologist Deborah Warner testified that the use of puberty blockers resulted in irreversible impacts for children, Rep. Jessica LaMontagne (D-Dover) challenged her.
“Would you not agree that puberty blockers — which this bill would prohibit – may give a child an option to really work things through and give them time to decide?” LaMontagne asked.
“As long as it’s reversible, it would make some sense. But unfortunately – with puberty blockers, once you pass the years of puberty, you cannot go back and have puberty,” Warner replied.
LaMontagne insisted this wasn’t true, that “the evidence online is that they are reversible.”
“If you go all the way to adulthood and you haven’t had puberty, you can’t go back and get it,” Warner replied.
Supporters of the bills pointed out that, not only have a majority of states taken some action to address this issue, but European nations have drastically curtailed these treatments due to a wave of new data raising questions about the health outcomes.
The U.K. in December extended indefinitely its ban on puberty blockers for children, for example.
Courtney Reed, a policy advocate with the American Civil Liberties Union – New Hampshire, said the organization opposes both bills. She claimed the proposals “would prohibit families from making private healthcare decisions, and it puts the legislature in the middle of medical decisions.”
Courtney Tanner, senior government relations director for Dartmouth Health — which has been outspoken in its advocacy of sex-change therapy for minors — objected to the idea of state regulation of its practices regarding children.
“It’s scary when the legislature starts to criminalize and penalize the practice of medicine, even a referral thereof,” she said.
State Rep. Katherine Prudhomme-O’Brien (R-Derry) offered a rebuttal.
“We as a legislature have made decisions about teenagers. We do it all the time. If they’re not allowed to buy scratch tickets, then this kind of surgery is also something I don’t think they’re mature enough for.”
