In a landmark legislative action, New Hampshire has become the first New England state to enact a comprehensive ban on gender transition procedures for minors, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing national debate surrounding youth healthcare and gender identity.
This historic measure was solidified when Republican Governor Kelly Ayotte signed two significant child protection bills into law: House Bill 377 and House Bill 712. These statutes collectively prohibit the prescription of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and the performance of gender transition surgeries for individuals under the age of 18.
The newly enacted laws do include carefully defined exceptions. These provisions accommodate existing patients who are already undergoing such treatments before the effective date of the legislation, as well as certain medically necessary procedures that are unrelated to gender transition, ensuring continuity of care where essential.
House Bill 377 specifically addresses pharmaceutical interventions, making it illegal to prescribe puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones for gender transition purposes to minors. This prohibition becomes effective on January 1, 2026. Furthermore, the bill empowers minors who may have been harmed by these treatments to pursue legal action for damages and authorizes the state medical board to impose disciplinary measures against any violators of the law.
Complementing this, House Bill 712 targets surgical interventions. It explicitly bans chest surgeries for minors, such as double mastectomies for biological females or breast augmentation for biological males, unless the procedure is deemed medically necessary. Such medical necessity is strictly defined, covering conditions like cancer, injury, infection, congenital deformities, abnormal development, or reconstructive purposes. The law classifies non-compliant procedures as unprofessional conduct, enabling legal recourse by the state attorney general or affected minors.
Governor Ayotte articulated the rationale behind the legislation, stating, “Medical decisions made at a young age can carry lifelong consequences, and these bills represent a balanced, bipartisan effort to protect children.” Her remarks underscore the state’s commitment to safeguarding vulnerable youth from irreversible medical procedures.
Supporters of the legislation, including Republican State Senator Kevin Avard, contend that these laws are an essential safeguard for young people. Avard emphasized the belief that “Biology speaks volumes,” and highlighted the profound impact of testimonies from individuals who expressed regret over their gender transitions, citing “long-term and irreparable damage to their bodies” as a decisive factor in garnering legislative support. This perspective echoes sentiments seen in other states, such as Tennessee, where similar bans have been constitutionally upheld.
Conversely, opponents of the bills, such as Courtney Reed of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, have voiced strong condemnation. Reed described the laws as “merciless, cruel, and painful for transgender young people, their families, and their doctors,” arguing they will inflict significant harm. Chris Erchull, a senior staff attorney at GLBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders, further characterized the bans as a dangerous overreach, asserting that the legislature is presuming to know better than medical professionals and families regarding the care needed by transgender youth.
The enactment of these bills in New Hampshire intensifies the national discourse on the rights of minors, the autonomy of parents, and the role of the state in healthcare decisions, positioning New England at the forefront of this complex and evolving legal and ethical landscape.
