By Shaina Cole | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
On Friday, March 28, Colorado legislators introduced House Bill 25-1309 and House Bill 25-1312, proposals crafted to safeguard transgender youth. Their aims are well-meaning: one mandates insurance coverage for gender-affirming treatments such as hormone therapy and surgeries, while the other anchors gender identity within custody law to protect vulnerable children.
Yet, beneath these noble intentions lies a troubling prospect—lasting harm to the very youth they seek to shield, coupled with an alarming shift of authority from parents to the state.
Consider HB 25-1309, which compels insurance providers to fund gender-affirming care when deemed medically necessary. The goal is clear: ensure access for transgender youth. However, this mandate risks ushering children toward irreversible decisions with consequences that may echo for decades.
A 2016 study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that up to 85% of gender dysphoria cases in youth resolve naturally by adulthood.
Contrast this with a 2022 National Institute of Health report, which cautions that the long-term effects of puberty blockers—such as compromised bone health or infertility—remain insufficiently studied.
By enforcing this path, the state diminishes parental discretion to pursue alternatives like counseling or patience, potentially leaving children to grapple with unforeseen medical burdens in adulthood, all under government directive rather than family choice.
Equally concerning is HB 25-1312, which seeks to fortify protections by designating “deadnaming” or “misgendering” as factors in custody disputes and safeguarding parents who pursue gender treatments from external legal threats. Its protective intent is evident.
Yet, this framework endangers parents who, relying on caution or research—like the NIH’s noted uncertainties or the 21 states restricting such care, per a 2023 KFF analysis—question these interventions.
These parents could face the loss of custody, not for neglect, but for failing to align with state-endorsed ideology.
This transfers decision-making from the family to the judiciary, risking fractured households and diminished stability for children over time—an ironic outcome for a measure meant to nurture their well-being.
These two bills exist within a larger framework that heightens their potential consequences.
Schools, increasingly incorporating gender ideology into their curricula, appear to contribute to a rise in transgender identification among youth, as documented in a 2023 Williams Institute report.
When paired with HB 25-1309’s medical mandates and HB 25-1312’s custody provisions, a troubling pattern emerges: educational influence primes children for gender-affirming care, and state policy ensures its execution, sidelining parents at every turn.
The American Academy of Pediatrics advocates for individualized care tailored to each child, yet Colorado opts for a uniform approach that may hasten permanent choices for youth ill-prepared to make them.
These bills, though rooted in compassion, cast a shadow of unintended harm—children burdened by the physical toll of premature treatments, families destabilized by judicial overreach, and parental authority replaced by state authority.
Years from now, many may regret a system that prioritized ideological conformity over the needs of its youngest citizens.
Colorado’s youth and their families deserve policies that uphold the vital role of parental guidance, not ones that surrender their futures to state-imposed mandates.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.