Transgender – Page 5 – Family Council

The Crumbling Sham of Trans Medicine

Apr 29, 2026John StonestreetTransgenderTransgender

Trans activists loudly claim that medicalizing gender confused youth is “settled science” and saves lives. This is meant to shut down any doubt or debate on this critically important topic.

Thankfully, a few undeterred scholars are asking important questions and demonstrating just how false trans activists’ claims really are.

An impressive new Finnish study, published in the Swedish academic journal Acta Paediatrica, is extending the damning conclusions of the UK’s 2024 Cass Review. The report was unequivocal in concluding that the so-called “settled science” of trans medicine “is an area of remarkably weak evidence” and the “reality is that we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress.”

The new Finnish study provides the “good evidence.” Its findings on long-term outcomes, based on extremely strong data sets, don’t bode well for trans activists’ overconfident claims. Finland’s government-run medical system has an extremely rigorous tracking system containing detailed medical and psychiatric records on all citizens dating back to 1994. Drawing from this, the study conducted an analysis of every patient under 23 who attended Finnish gender identity clinics from 1996 to 2019 and compared them with a matched control group.

This means their study population is uniquely comprehensive—it analyzed the entire gender treatment patient population in the country for years and years. Other studies have only included those who chose to take part, seriously undermining the validity of their claims. The Finnish school system also regularly screens students for mental health disorders. It consists of two timeframes: 1996 to 2010, and 2011 to 2019, the time when those “trans identity” numbers started exploding in many countries, likely from social contagion.

So, what did this comprehensive Finnish study find? It’s a pretty direct conclusion: The whole basis of transgender ideology and practice is wrong. As the study revealed, “Gender-referred adolescents showed significantly higher psychiatric morbidity than controls,” and severe psychiatric morbidity increased substantially in two-plus year clinical follow-ups. Those who sought gender services in the second, larger cohort “had greater psychiatric needs than earlier cohorts.”

In fact, these medical researchers state,

Among adolescents who underwent medical gender reassignment, psychiatric morbidity increased markedly during follow-up—rising from 9.8% to 60.7% in feminizing gender reassignment and from 21.6% to 54.5% in masculinizing gender reassignment.

They add,

After adjusting for prior psychiatric treatment, all gender-referred adolescents had similarly elevated risks of psychiatric morbidity, with hazard ratios approximately three times higher than female controls and five times higher than male controls.

These findings directly challenge the assumption that gender transition is a natural, harmless occurrence and that taking sex-rejecting hormones and cutting off healthy body parts benefits patients. In fact, the researchers bluntly confess, “This does not support the suggested improvement in mental health after medical GR [gender reassignment].”

Thus, this research supports previous conclusions that those struggling with gender confusion suffer from other serious parallel psychological comorbidities. A group of Austrian scholars explained in the Archives of Sexual Behavior in 2025 that “gender dysphoric adolescents presenting to specialized gender identity services experience varying degrees of co-occurring mental health problems.”

They note that 71% of such patients suffer from moderate- to high-distress psychopathology (48% and 23% respectively) while only 29% suffer at low-distress levels. Most of these patients (77%) enjoyed high levels of social support in the midst of their struggles, belying another tired line of gay/trans rhetoric.

This Finnish study confirms that gender confused patients aren’t otherwise healthy people simply born in the wrong body, and if we just give them what they say they need, all will be well. Doing so actually appears to make things worse.
The Finnish research team, working from the same stellar population sample, also reported two years ago in the British Medical Journal that the “Main predictor of mortality in this population is psychiatric morbidity, and medical gender reassignment does not have an impact on suicide risk.” The Cass Review came to the same conclusion: “Tragically deaths by suicide in trans people of all ages continue to be above the national average, but there is no evidence that gender-affirmative treatments reduce this.”

The manipulative claims of trans activists continue to crumble, thanks to carefully done science by honest researchers.

This Breakpoint was co-authored by Glenn Stanton.

How HRC’s Corporate “Equality” Index Harms Children: Guest Column

Apr 14, 2026Jerry CoxLGBTHRC, LGBT, Transgender

One of the most effective tools to shape culture in recent years has been the Corporate Equality Index from the Human Rights Campaign. Today on Breakpoint, Katy Faust of Them Before Us explains:

You may be surprised to learn that when you picked up that matte red lipstick at Ulta, you were helping fund cross-sex hormones for gender-confused kids. Or that when you ordered that chicken al pastor with extra guac at Chipotle, you were subsidizing IVF and surrogacy, which is intentionally creating children who will be separated from their mother or father.

That may sound extreme, but according to a new report published by my non-profit Them Before Us, there’s often a pipeline between our daily purchases and child harm. This harm is thanks to The Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index.

Launched in 2002, the CEI presents itself as a benchmarking tool, rating companies on how well they implement “LGBTQ inclusion” policies in the workplace. It promises to help businesses create fair, equitable environments for employees. But far more than shaping office culture, it has quietly reshaped how corporations think about children, families, and even the human body itself. And whether we realize it or not, most of us are participating.

Companies don’t just earn points for preventing workplace discrimination. They’re rewarded for adopting a slate of policies that reach far beyond the office into medicine, reproduction, and family structure. That includes offering “family formation” benefits like IVF, surrogacy, and gamete donation. It includes covering gender-transition procedures. And it includes financially supporting organizations that promote these practices, even among minors.

In other words, a high score isn’t just about tolerance. It’s about aligning with a specific vision of what it means to be human. And that vision has consequences, especially for children. This isn’t just about corporate policy. It’s about anthropology. What does it mean to be human? What is a child? Where do children come from? And what do they need?

For most of human history, these answers were obvious. Children come from a man and a woman. Those two adults are their literal biological origins. And children are most likely to flourish when raised, whenever possible, by the mother and father who brought them into the world.

But our culture is replacing that reality with something else. Children are redefined—not as persons with origins, but as products of intention. Not as gifts to be received, but as outcomes to be achieved. And when that happens, the logic of the marketplace begins to take over.

Think about what it means when companies are incentivized to subsidize IVF and surrogacy. IVF encourages the mass production of embryos so they can be eugenically screened for fitness or sex or other characteristics. It also allows for the use of third parties severing children from one or both biological parents. Surrogacy adds an additional layer of child loss and risk, substituting contracts for relationships.

Or consider the push for “inclusive” health coverage that covers irreversible medical interventions. On minors, it harms their physical bodies. On adults, it often steals a child’s father by facilitating his presentation as a “mother.” These corporate policies aren’t neutral. They reflect a belief that the body itself—a child’s own or those of his or her parents—is optional. It’s something to be reshaped according to identity rather than received as a given. And the kids are the constant losers.

A Christian worldview offers the kind of clarity people need right now. Human beings are creatures, not the Creator. We are embodied souls, male and female, designed for relationship—with God, and with one another. Children are not lifestyle accessories or subjects of irreversible medical experimentation. They are image-bearers and unable to protect themselves from corporations like Coca-Cola or Procter & Gamble.

Throughout history, the Church has defended children against a variety of cultural threats. Whether female genital mutilation, abortion, infanticide, or Chinese foot binding, God’s people have stood athwart all manner of child victimization. Now we have a chance to join that great cloud of witnesses by doing something as simple as purchasing mulch from Lowe’s rather than Home Depot.

To be clear, none of this means that all employees or executives are acting with malicious intent. Many are unaware of what their “perfect score” produces and are motivated by compassion, inclusion, or a desire to do what’s right. But good intentions aren’t enough.

So, what should we do? First, see clearly. Systems like the CEI aren’t neutral. Christians should critique their comprehensive moral vision, not accept it. Second, we should think carefully about where we shop, the companies we support, and how we engage as employees or shareholders. Finally, we need to speak truthfully and compassionately. Not with outrage for its own sake, but with a commitment to defend those who cannot defend themselves.

In the end, the question is not whether we value equality. It’s whether our vision of equality still has room for children.