Maine Moves to Stifle Conventional Views on Gender

M y beloved home state of Maine prides itself on a politically independent streak as big as the north woods. Unfortunately, in the name of compassion, a newly proposed Maine law would buck our independent ways by effectively criminalizing dissent on one of the most controversial topics in American politics today: gender.

LD 1735, “An Act to Safeguard Gender-affirming Health Care,” would allow Maine courts to take custody of any child from their parents if the latter disagree with “gender-affirming care” as defined by the state. That is no exaggeration — the bill text specifically says a court may take temporary custody of a child “in an emergency” if the child is present in Maine and “has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care.”

So “in an emergency” (the vagueness of this term is especially troubling), a parent of a child experiencing gender dysphoria may not have a conversation with their child, teach self-acceptance, or communicate their values if they do not believe that a sex change is the only answer. If they exercise their First Amendment rights in this way, they could lose custody of their children.

And “gender-affirming care” is broadly defined. The bill text repeatedly states that whether or not such care is warranted is up to the child in question, and it explicitly includes hormone treatments, mastectomies, and castration as protected procedures. The bill would also make Maine a safe haven for minors to come receive sex changes if they hail from one of the states that have begun to restrict such procedures for the underaged. Courts and officers of the law would be barred from reuniting kidnapped children with their legal guardians if the children came to Maine for gender-affirming care against their guardians’ wishes.

“It undermines the law in other states and legalizes kidnapping,” state representative Katrina Smith, an opponent of the legislation, told me. “A child could jump on a bus and come to Maine with any stranger they meet online who tells them, ‘Trust me, not your parents.’”

Smith introduced a bill last year to require parental notification from schools if a student starts using a different name or pronouns, which was defeated by the legislature’s Democrat supermajority. She says that she is sympathetic to those who experience gender dysphoria, especially children, and emphasizes that LD 1735 targets minors and their parents, not consenting adults.

Maine’s legislature is part-time, and committee attendance can be poor during the workweek. As a result, three of the eight Democrats on the Judiciary Committee missed the vote to advance this bill last week. With four Republicans present, GOP representative David Haggan took the day off from his teaching job to race to Augusta and vote to deadlock the committee, 5–5. The bill is stalled for now, but it is only a matter of time before Democrats can whip the votes to pass it.

Regardless of how one feels about the efficacy of sex changes for minors suffering gender dysphoria (and I do not doubt the sincerity of the bill’s proponents), data consistently show that the debate is far from settled. Six-in-ten American adults believe gender is determined by one’s sex at birth, according to Pew. While majorities oppose banning gender-affirming counseling for minors, 68 percent also oppose giving puberty blockers to children ages ten to 14, and 58 percent oppose hormonal treatments for 15-to-17-year-olds. Progressive European countries from the U.K. to Sweden to France have all banned or restricted such treatments for children through their medical authorities. Americans, like the rest of the world, clearly have nuanced views on gender, and the debate will continue for the foreseeable future.

But that debate will be meaningless if parents are not able to communicate their own values to their own children in their own homes. LD 1735 would punish Mainers for exercising free speech in this context. Religious liberty is also threatened: If you count yourself among the 63 percent of Mainers who practice Christianity, Judaism, or Islam and you hold to the traditional teachings of these faiths, the bill would deem your values “abusive” to the point that your children would have to be separated from you. You would now be regarded on the same level as deadbeat drunkards and child molesters.

It’s fine by this commentator if you hold a different view on whether hormone blockers and cosmetic surgeries should be available to minors. Unlike the proponents of this Orwellian legislation, I don’t mind people disagreeing with me and won’t seek to break up their families if they do. Fundamentally, this is a freedom-of-conscience issue: Do you still have the right in Maine to believe that mammals are sexually dimorphic or that children should be taught self-acceptance before sex changes? If so, do you still have the right to communicate these values to your children without the state yanking them from your home? And if not, what are you allowed to freely say in the privacy of your own home in Maine?