Connecticut Children’s agrees to end gender-affirming care, pay Trump administration

Hartford Courant – Friday, August 7, 2026
By Kaitlin McCallum

Connecticut Children’s has reached an agreement with the Trump administration to end gender-affirming care for minors, conceding to pay a monetary penalty and offer $500,000 in medical care for former patients who claim harm.

The health system announced last July it was shutting down its gender care program that provided therapy, puberty blockers and hormones to patients under 18 for the treatment of gender dysphoria, which the Mayo Clinic defines as “a feeling of distress that can happen when a person’s gender identity differs from the sex assigned at birth.” Surgeries on minors are almost never performed in Connecticut or elsewhere in the U.S.

“The Department of Justice will stop at nothing to protect America’s children,” said Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward. “This resolution is a reminder to hospitals, medical providers, and pharmaceutical companies that the Justice Department will vigorously enforce federal law, especially where the lives of children are endangered.”

The cooperative agreement with Connecticut Children’s is the third in the nation, following Texas Children’s Hospital and the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, amid the Trump administration’s quest to eradicate gender-affirming care, which the administration calls “sex-rejecting procedures.” President Donald Trump has led the administration in efforts to combat “gender ideology” and restore belief in the “biological reality” of binary gender, something many scientists and doctors dispute.

In announcing the agreement, the Department of Justice said the resolution stems from its “ongoing investigation into violations of federal law in connection with the provision of sex-rejecting procedures on minors.”

The administration has attempted to withhold Medicaid and Medicare funding from hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to minors and was blocked by a federal judge in a case to which Connecticut was a plaintiff.

The agreement notes “The claims resolved by the United States in the agreements are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. Connecticut Children’s has denied all allegations.”

Asked which federal laws Connecticut Children’s had violated, a DOJ official pointed to “potential violations of the FDCA and False Claims Act, as well as potential health care fraud.”

The Department of Justice noted that Connecticut Children’s was entitled to “credit for cooperation” with the Department for taking “significant steps.”

“At all times during the investigation, Connecticut Children’s remained cooperative, proactive, and solution-driven, as highlighted by its financial commitment to providing restorative care to the victims who desperately need it,” the statement said.

Neither the DOJ nor the health system confirmed whether any patients had claimed harm or need for restorative care.

Connecticut Children’s issued a statement suggesting that protecting patients’ information and preserving the hospital’s ability to serve the region’s children were factors in the decision. As part of its investigation, the Department of Justice subpoenaed pediatric patients’ names, addresses, Social Security numbers and medical histories from dozens of children’s hospitals that provided gender-affirming care. Many have now closed their gender care clinics.

“We can confirm we have reached a resolution that allows our organization to remain focused on our mission of improving the health and well-being of children,” the health system said. “Most importantly, patient privacy remained our foremost concern throughout this process and we were able to resolve this matter without disclosing any protected patient information to the US government. We have complied and will continue to comply with all federal and state laws. We have no additional comment beyond the information contained in today’s DOJ announcement.”

The DOJ confirmed that as part of the agreement, the hospital did not overturn any patient information.

Yale New Haven Health quickly followed Connecticut Children’s last year in ceasing medical care for transgender and gender diverse patients under age 19 due to the pressure from the Trump administration. The closures virtually eliminated medical care for those patients in Connecticut, forcing families to seek treatment out of state.

Following the closures, GLAD Law filed complaints with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities on behalf of a number of families, claiming the hospitals discriminated against patients based on their gender identity. That case is still pending.

In response to the agreement, GLAD Law staff attorney Hannah Hussey blasted the health system.

“Connecticut Children’s Medical Center has once again betrayed Connecticut families,” Hussey said in a statement. “Last July CCMC told parents with no warning that their trusted doctors would no longer provide the care they know stops their children’s suffering and allows them to thrive. By agreeing to this settlement, the hospital has doubled-down not only on that breach of faith with parents and patients, but on its attempt to thwart its obligation under Connecticut law to provide medical care without discrimination.

“As CCMC itself maintains, it did not violate federal law. In fact, there is no federal law against providing medical care for transgender adolescents according to the rigorous standards of care. The Trump Administration is using unprecedented threats to go after established medical care for the small population of transgender adolescents. These tactics should chill every American who believes that healthcare decisions should be made by parents, patients, and doctors who understand the care, not by a federal government with a political agenda.”

State Sen. Matt Lesser, a Middletown Democrat, also blasted Connecticut Children’s, warning that its actions may constitute discrimination “against LGBT patients in explicit violation of state law and its Medicaid provider agreement” and that the legislature’s Human Services Committee, which he chairs, would “exercise its statutory oversight powers.”

The Out Accountability Project, organized by a parent to defend the rights of transgender children, called the news “devastating.”

“Connecticut is supposed to be different. Our state has enacted some of the strongest protections in the nation for LGBTQ+ people and families. Those protections mean little if they disappear the moment the federal government applies political pressure. Rights that exist only until someone sends a threatening letter are not secure rights,” the Project said.

“Every hospital executive who claims they “had no choice” should remember who did have no choice: the transgender young people whose care was taken away, whose trusted providers disappeared, and whose families are once again being told that politics matters more than their health.”

When Yale and Connecticut Children’s announced closure of their gender clinics, Mel Cordner, founding director of the LGBTQ youth organization Q Plus, said that gender-affirming care has been proven to save lives.

“This is really hard on kids especially. They already don’t have control over a lot … and for kids who were getting gender-affirming care, they had bodily autonomy and now they don’t … Trans youth are already at such a high risk for self harm and suicide: that is the risk that this is increasing and that’s why it’s so important,” Cordner said at the time.

A study by Harvard University’s school of public health noted “Previous research has consistently demonstrated that gender-affirming care for (transgender and gender diverse) people can be lifesaving in mitigating negative mental health outcomes such as depression, anxiety, and suicidality.”

In addition, lead author Dannie Dai, research data analyst in the university’s Department of Health Policy and Management, concluded, “Our findings suggest that legislation blocking gender-affirming care among TGD youth is not about protecting children, but is rooted in bias and stigma against TGD identities and seeks to address a perceived problem that does not actually exist.”

Access this article at its original source.