The Australian Doctors Federation and the Nurses’ Professional Association Australia have joined forces to call for an end to experimental practices on vulnerable children.

Together, they are calling for an urgent ban on the prescribing of puberty blockers and cross sex hormones to gender distressed youth.

They are calling all political leaders to be responsible and safeguard children, highlighting the actions of governments around the world who have taken action on this.

The open letter is reproduced in full below. You can contact The Hon. Mark Butler to ensure he is taking note.

The Hon. Mark Butler MP   

Minister for Health and Ageing  

Via Email Only: [email protected] 

Open letter regarding the NHMRC guidelines for minors with gender dysphoria 

Dear Minister Butler, 

As clinicians, we urgently call on you to discontinue the development of NHMRC guidelines for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors. 

Instead, we request a full inquiry or Royal Commission into the current practices being referred to as “gender care” in Australia. 

Why an enquiry is needed

Current practices lack scientific and medical credibility and do not meet accepted standards of evidence-based medicine. They amount to systemic malpractice, enabled by flawed governance structures. 

Australia has frequently followed developments in the UK. However, with vulnerable children at risk, we must not delay action until harm is entrenched. Young people deserve evidence-based, family-centred care, with psychotherapy and psychosocial support as the first-line approach to gender-related distress. 

Given the serious failings in the NHMRC process, we believe you must act decisively and place Australia under the guidance of the UK Cass Review recommendations for clinical care.

Evidence from Comparable Countries

High-quality systematic evidence reviews, the highest standard in medicine, carried out in the UK, Sweden, Finland, and the United States have led to the rejection of the “gender-affirming care” (GAC) model. New Zealand has also now banned the initiation of puberty blockers in youth with gender dysphoria.

Key Concerns 

Conflation of Sex and Gender   

Sex is biological and immutable.  

The WHO defines gender as socially constructed and fluid over time, therefore not clinically diagnosable and not a biological pathology.  

The biological reality is that it is not possible to change sex.  

DSM-5 Limitations   

The DSM-5 is consensus-based, not evidence-based. The renaming of “Gender Identity Disorder” to “Gender Dysphoria” was led by figures who pioneered the Dutch Protocol, yet their own 2015 paper admitted no conclusions could be drawn.  

The US HHS has further noted that the diagnosis of gender dysphoria relies entirely on subjective self-report, with no objective markers. It centers on “attitudes, feelings and behaviours that are known to fluctuate during adolescents”. 

Failure of Medical Standards   

What is termed GAC is not medical treatment. Clinicians are effectively providing whatever “products” are requested by the consumer rather than performing true assessment, diagnosis, and informed consent. The result is iatrogenic harm, including sterilisation of healthy young bodies and diminished sexual function. 

Compromised Impartiality of the NHMRC   

The integrity of the NHMRC has been compromised through conflicts of interest with researchers and organisations advocating GAC.  

WPATH/AusPATH terminology has been embedded to pathologise young people as “trans and gender diverse”, predisposing them to lifelong medicalisation.  

The guideline committee includes members of AusPATH, one of the authors of the “Australian Standards of Care and treatment guidelines for trans and gender diverse children and adolescents” and individuals who personally promote GAC or are associated with organisations that do. These are clear conflicts of interest that have been ignored in the appointment process. 

The NHMRC has also funded the AusPATH aligned Kids Institute to run a consultation to reduce the weight given to scientific research evidence and elevate the weight given to individual ‘consumers’ in all research and clinical guideline development under a timeline that will allow application of recommendations in their ‘gender guidelines’ review and development 

Legal and Ethical Concerns   

Former Chief Justice Bryant has now questioned her 2013 Family Court judgment that allowed puberty blockers to be prescribed without court oversight. She relied on the belief that they were “fully reversible”—a claim now proven false. 

Allowing parents to authorise the sterilisation of children with untreated mental health needs without Family Court authorisation contravenes the High Court ruling in re-Marion (1992). To qualify as “therapeutic”, treatment needs to address a pathology. 

Gender as a socially constructed self-declared fluid identity is not a pathology requiring medical and (irreversible and potentially mutilating) surgical interventions. 

Our Request   

We again call on you to provide clear guidance that clinical practice should align with the Cass Review and the National Association of Practising Psychiatrists, which recommend psychosocial support as the first-line intervention for minors.  

Yours sincerely, 

Dr Louise Kirby MBBS (Hons1) FRACGP on behalf of the Australian Medical Professional 

Society. 

With support from the Nurses Professional Association Australia.  

The names of other signatories have been kept private for reasons of personal and 

professional safety.