Federal Agencies Continue Funding Transgender Medical Interventions on Children
The NIMH approved $728,119 in taxpayer dollars to study puberty blockers on children, defying a presidential order and state bans while American families subsidize controversial pediatric medical experiments.
The National Institute of Mental Health approved $728,119 in taxpayer dollars this February to study puberty blockers on children. The payment continued federal funding for controversial transgender medical interventions despite a presidential order halting such spending and dozens of state bans. Americans now face subsidizing medical experiments their state legislatures have deemed harmful to children.
The NIMH grant went to Nationwide Children's Hospital in Columbus, Ohio. The funding contradicts Executive Order 14187, which President Trump signed in January 2025 to end federal support for gender-affirming care for minors. The February 2026 payment supports a longitudinal study tracking pubertal suppression effects on 132 minors ages 8 through 12. Half the children receive blockers while half serve as controls.
Health and Human Services terminated the grant in March 2025. An NIH spokesperson said the project "stopped receiving funding." NIMH's continued financial commitment demonstrates bureaucratic ideology overriding both executive directives and scientific caution.
Federal agencies persist in funding these interventions as state-level resistance accelerates. Twenty-five states have enacted laws prohibiting puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for minors. Forty-plus hospitals have paused or ceased gender-affirming care for children since January 2025, including three of the study's own participating institutions. Texas Children's Hospital settled with the Justice Department on May 15 for $10 million, agreeing to stop offering the treatments entirely.
The funding hypocrisy extends to scientific transparency. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy withheld results from a separate $9.7 million Trans Youth Care study that showed puberty blockers provided no mental health improvement. "I do not want our work to be weaponized," Olson-Kennedy told the New York Times in October 2024. Her refusal to publish taxpayer-funded research occurred despite baseline data showing 28.6 percent of her cohort exhibited elevated depression symptoms and 23.6 percent were suicidal before treatment.
"Dr. Olson-Kennedy's apparent mischaracterization of the TYC study's results and refusal to publish taxpayer-funded research because they contradict her pre-existing biases and could be cited by critics of 'gender-affirming' medical interventions is an irrefutable example of politicization of scientific research to further an ideological agenda," House Oversight Chairwoman Lisa McClain stated in a November 2024 committee letter.
The medical reality contradicts activist claims of reversibility. Puberty blockers lack FDA approval for treating gender dysphoria. A 2020 UK study found 98 percent of patients who started blockers proceeded to cross-sex hormones. Consent forms from Children's Hospital Los Angeles explicitly warn parents that starting blockers followed by hormones prevents sperm or egg development, guaranteeing sterility.
"Government funding for studies on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones in healthy children is deeply concerning, given the lack of evidence for long-term benefits and the growing documentation of significant physical and psychological risks," said Stella O'Malley, director of Genspect. "These experiments are both unnecessary and harmful."
The continued funding comes from the same federal agency tasked with protecting mental health. NIMH's parent organization, the National Institutes of Health, has poured over $1 billion into sexual and gender minority research since 2016, with much directed toward pediatric interventions. The agency's persistence contradicts shifting global medical consensus, including the UK's Cass Review that found "weak evidence" supporting puberty blockers.
Federal health agencies now operate as ideological state apparatuses, insulated from both executive policy shifts and state sovereignty. While hospitals face Justice Department subpoenas and million-dollar settlements for providing these treatments, NIMH funnels taxpayer dollars to researchers studying the same interventions. The disconnect reveals bureaucratic capture by gender ideology, prioritizing advocacy over child welfare and parental rights.
This funding continues despite mounting evidence of harm, irreversible consequences, and widespread public rejection. Parents in 25 states have secured protections against these medical interventions, only to discover their federal tax dollars subsidize the very procedures their state laws prohibit. The contradiction demands immediate congressional scrutiny into how grant-making bodies evade democratic accountability to finance controversial pediatric experiments.