FTC Takes GAC to Task

FTC Workshop to Probe Pediatric "Gender-Affirming Care" Today

Today from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EDT, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will host a public workshop, “The Dangers of ‘Gender-Affirming Care’ for Minors,” at the Constitution Center in Washington, D.C. In-person attendance is by-invitation-only but the program will also be streamed live and posted. The event will investigate whether providers of pediatric “gender-affirming care” (GAC)—treatments like puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries—engage in unfair or deceptive practices under Section 5 of the FTC Act. Featuring pediatricians, detransitioners, parents, whistleblowers, and legal experts, the workshop will challenge pediatric medicine’s reliance on self-regulation, exposing how the American Academy of Pediatrics’ (AAP) autonomous standards-setting, which pushes GAC with limited evidence, has fueled a medical scandal. By scrutinizing claims about GAC’s benefits and risks, the event aims to guide potential enforcement actions and establish the missing accountability in children’s healthcare.

The Roots of Pediatric Medicine’s Autonomy

Medicine’s self-governance emerged in the 19th century as physicians sought to professionalize their field amid unregulated practitioners like homeopaths. The American Medical Association (AMA), founded in 1847, established ethical and educational standards, a move solidified by the 1910 Flexner Report, which closed substandard medical schools and elevated physician-driven oversight. The AAP, formed in 1930, became the authority on children’s health, crafting guidelines for vaccinations and developmental screenings with minimal government interference. While this autonomy drove progress, it often prioritized internal consensus over external scrutiny, stifling dissent and enabling controversial practices to persist. The FTC’s workshop, by examining the AAP’s unchecked role in promoting GAC, underscores the need to challenge this self-regulatory model, which has shaped the GAC landscape through limited oversight.

Historical Missteps in Pediatric Care

Pediatric medicine’s self-regulatory model may have driven significant advances, such as promoting car seat safety in the 1960s and immunization campaigns in the 1980s, saving countless lives. Yet, this same autonomy has led to errors when internal standards outpaced evidence. In the 1970s, influenced by industry ties, the AAP endorsed formula feeding over breastfeeding, ignoring the latter’s long-term benefits until public pressure forced a reversal in the 1990s. During the 1990s, AAP guidelines encouraged overuse of antibiotics for pediatric ear infections, fueling antibiotic resistance until external studies prompted reform. In 2000, the AAP advised delaying peanut exposure until age 3 to prevent allergies, a recommendation overturned in 2015 after the LEAP study showed early exposure reduced allergy risk by 80%. These missteps, corrected only after external pressure, parallel the GAC controversy, where the AAP’s autonomous endorsement of treatments lacks robust evidence. The FTC’s inquiry, by scrutinizing GAC’s evidence base, seeks to address this pattern of unchecked autonomy.

Shifting Approaches to Gender Dysphoria

Historically, the AAP emphasized psychotherapy for mental health conditions brought on by OCD, anxiety, autism, or sexual trauma—common comorbidities in children with gender dysphoria. Its 2018 policy, “Ensuring Comprehensive Care and Support for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Children and Adolescents,” which has been critiqued without adequate response from the AAP, marked a shift, endorsing affirmation of transgender ideation and recommending GAC without requiring thorough psychological evaluation. Critics, including workshop speakers Dr. Miriam Grossman and Dr. Michael Laidlaw, highlight risks like infertility and bone density loss, as noted in the UK’s Cass Review and the leaked WPATH Files. Studies like the one by Dr. Lisa Littman in 2018 suggest rapid-onset gender dysphoria may reflect treatable underlying conditions, raising concerns about irreversible treatments. Driven by internal committees without mandatory external review, AAP members who dissented were sidelined. The FTC’s workshop challenges pediatric medicine’s staunch resistance to oversight, which has fueled the public’s increasing awareness and distrust of GAC.

Self-Regulation and the GAC Controversy

The GAC debate, central to the FTC’s workshop, underscores the limits of pediatric self-governance. The AAP’s 2018 policy established GAC as standard care despite weak longitudinal evidence, prompting polarized responses. Unlike centralized medical systems in Sweden and Finland, where systematic reviews were able to lead to GAC restrictions for minors, the U.S.’s self-regulatory model has enabled fragmented oversight. California upholds AAP’s affirmation-only guidelines for minors, while many other states have moved to age-restrict GAC. The AAP’s 2023 reaffirmation of its 2018 policy, despite promising a systematic review of the evidence, drew criticism from 22 state attorneys general in 2024, who accused it of promoting puberty blockers as safe without robust proof. The FTC’s June 9, 2025, announcement that it will examine whether “medical professionals or others omitted warnings about the risks or made false or unsupported claims about the benefits and effectiveness of gender-affirming care for minors” directly targets this autonomy, highlighting how the AAP’s unchecked guidelines have escalated public and legal debates.

The FTC’s Role in Fostering Accountability

The FTC’s workshop investigates whether GAC providers, following AAP guidelines, exaggerate benefits or misrepresent outcomes, such as making statements that subtly imply to vulnerable young people that treatments can change biological sex, potentially constituting deceptive practices under Section 5. Detransitioners like Kayla Lovdahl and Prisha Mosley will share experiences of inadequate informed consent, while whistleblowers like Jamie Reed, who exposed rushed protocols at a Missouri clinic, will highlight failures of internal oversight. Medical experts, including Dr. Miriam Grossman and Dr. Lauren Schwartz, will challenge the AAP’s claims, citing the Cass Review. Legal experts like Alabama Solicitor General Edmund LaCour, Jr., and attorney Erin Friday will explore framing GAC as consumer fraud, arguing that the AAP’s self-regulatory model enables misleading claims. Policy advocate Paul Dupont will propose mandatory risk disclosures to enhance transparency. By featuring diverse perspectives, the workshop will challenge pediatric medicine’s autonomy, advocating that it be subject to evidence-based accountability.

Join the Debate

The FTC invites the public to submit feedback. You can watch the whole presentation here. The following email address appears on the announcement: healthcareworkshop@ftc.gov. By confronting medicine’s self-regulatory model, which has fueled the proliferation of GAC through limited oversight, the FTC’s inquiry could pave the way for greater transparency and evidence-based standards in children’s healthcare.