Impacts of Trump’s Anti-Trans Actions Already Felt in California
57:46 Share

Support for KQED Podcasts comes from Star One Credit Union, now offering real-time money movement with instant pay. Make transfers and payments instantly between financial institutions, online or through Star One's mobile app. Star One Credit Union, in your best interest.

From KQED.

From KQED in San Francisco, I'm Nina Kim. Coming up on Forum, how Trump's anti-trans executive orders are being felt in California. Since taking office, the president's orders have targeted trans Americans' access to medical care and sports teams, positions in the military, their passports and other federal documents.

California's Attorney General and others have affirmed the state's commitment to protecting trans rights amid the directives, but many health programs and other services rely on federal funding. How have Trump's orders affected you? Tell us. After this news, welcome to Forum. I'm Mina Kim.

A judge on Friday paused Trump's executive order against gender-affirming care for trans youth. It was the second time in two days that federal judges put the president's directive on hold. But the future remains uncertain, and the raft of orders and policies from the administration targeting trans Americans has already created disruptions in care, confusion, pain, and fears of federal funding losses, including in California, where officials have been reiterating the state's trans protections and

How have you or a loved one been affected? We take a closer look this hour at statewide and national impacts with Dani Sassenia, Director of California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network. Dani, welcome to Forum. Good morning. Thank you for having me join you. Glad to have you with us. Joe Yerkeba is also with us, reporter for NBC Out, the LGBTQ section of NBC News. Joe, glad to have you back as well.

Thanks so much for having me. We're also joined by Jim Mongeau this hour, president and CEO of St. John's Community Health in Los Angeles. And Jim, I want to start with you. St. John's Community Health was among the first providers in California to report a pullback of funding after President Trump took office. Tell us what happened in February, February 1st, I think. Yeah, so the court ruled, you know, issued an injunction against the Trump administration

funding freeze, but they went ahead anyway on the first and started to cut funding, particularly for trans programs and DEI programs.

So we received that notice on the first from the CDC saying that in keeping with the executive order regarding gender, that our funds would be cut and our grants would be eliminated. And so we were contacted by the attorney general's office in California. We submitted a declaration in support of the attorney general going back to the same judge and

to show the judge that the Trump administration had been violating the injunction. And he issued another restraining order. And the funding was restored by Tuesday or Wednesday of the following week. So what was it that the CDC was trying to stop funding? An HIV services program? What does it do?

Yes, it was an HIV services and infectious disease services grant for the trans community. So St. John's Community Health has a very large transgender health program. We serve more than 5,000 trans individuals. We provide all of their medical, dental, and behavioral health care, as well as

as well as a host of wraparound services. So this grant allowed us to provide HIV testing, prevention, and treatment, as well as STI testing and treatment, TB testing and treatment, and so on. And it allowed us to do that for more than 500 trans individuals. And so that cut would have eliminated their ability to receive free HIV medicine through this grant.

So, Joe, Jim is referencing the CDC's executive order as their justification. Can you tell us about the main executive orders that have been directed at trans Americans that have come out of the Trump administration since he took office?

Sure. Yeah. So there have been at least four directly affecting trans people. And then one that includes references to gender ideology related to K through 12 schools. But the four are one defending women from gender ideology, extremism and restoring biological truth to the federal government. And that basically just

Claire's that the government will define sex as male and female, assigned at birth and unchangeable. And then we had the order protecting children from quote, "chemical and surgical mutilation." And that prohibits federal funding of gender affirming care for anyone under 19 and does a host of other sort of changes that could further restrict care.

And then there's the order prioritizing military excellence and readiness, which is the transgender military ban. It bars people, trans people from enlisting and serving in the military. We're unclear on how that will really be implemented just yet. And then we have an order, quote, keeping men out of women's sports. And that prohibits schools receiving federal funding from allowing trans girls and women to play in women's sports.

And then there's the last order is ending radical indoctrination in K through 12 schools. And that prohibits schools from directly or indirectly supporting the social transition of a minor student, including through school staff or teachers, concealing the minor's social transition from the minor's parents. And it also makes some restrictions on like teachers using the correct pronouns for trans students.

Let me invite our listeners to join the conversation. How have these executive orders that Joe is telling us about and their rhetoric

targeting trans Americans affected you or a loved one. You can tell us by emailing forum at kqed.org, finding us on our social channels on Blue Sky, Facebook, Instagram, and others at KQED Forum. And you can call us at 866-733-6786, 866-733-6786. Now, Jo, the executive orders that were halted last Thursday and Friday, that was the one related to gender affirming care. Is that right? So what has happened with that? And what does that mean for that EO?

Correct. Yeah. So two judges now have blocked Trump's order seeking to restrict care for people under 19. And that will essentially mean that hospitals shouldn't have the fear of having their federal funding revoked if they continue to provide that care to people under 19.

But some hospitals are still not continuing to provide that care. We had about half a dozen or more than half a dozen that said they were going to completely stop or sort of review their care programs for trans people under 19. Some of those have said that they'll continue care now, but we know at least Lurie Children's Hospital in Chicago has said that they're going to continue sort of pausing care until they get more clear guidance under the EO. So as far as we know, it's still having...

effects on access to care despite those orders from judges. Right. And Dani, before the judges' orders, it sounds like a lot of clinics in California were nervous, even after that very first executive order on January 21st. How did some of them react?

Yeah, so here in California, it was very much a what do we do type situation. When the orders first came in regarding gender-affirming care for those 19 and under, many medical facilities were confused on should we stop gender-affirming care? However, California state law states that we have to provide it.

So there was a lot of uncertainty and a lot of education that had to go around to the different medical facilities.

But then when you throw in the research funding on top of that, it caused even more mass confusion where a lot of board of directors had told their hospitals and research institutions, pause all care, pause all research, which also affects other transgender organizations throughout the state who are engaged in research with these different universities and hospitals.

And everything was a waiting game for several days as everyone was trying to figure out how to navigate the funding, waiting on the injunction from the courts on what was going to happen with the funding, and then hearing from the Attorney General as well.

And even today, there's still a lot of confusion on how to move forward, even with research. And a lot of institutions really are taking it day by day and saying, continue on with the research, go one day at a time. But we can't guarantee that tomorrow this can continue on, depending on what happens at the national level. And then in terms of clinical care, did people actually have appointments sort of postponed or rescheduled, Dani? Yeah.

Yes. So we have had a lot of complaints about youth and even young adults, those who are even 18, 19 years old, who are legal adults,

their surgeries or appointments completely canceled and not even rescheduled. I know of one young trans patient who is 18 years old who was supposed to receive top surgery. And the day that the executive order came out was the day they received the notification of like, we're canceling your surgery. And even with the court's injunctions, the hospital still refuses to reschedule their surgery.

So Jim, in your case, you were able to get the funding restored within a little over a week, but did it have an effect on your patients? Or just more broadly, what effect have you seen on your patients in terms of these attempts by the Trump administration to pull back funding and target your trans patients? Well, there's a tremendous amount of fear, and people are very concerned about the hatred that is being leveled against the trans community.

We at St. John's, we're committed to providing this care and to continuing to provide this care, regardless of whether the federal government supports it or not. Obviously, when these grants come up for renewal, we expect that they will not be funded. But we're already reaching out to the county, to the state, to private foundations to continue to support this care. And regardless,

We're going to continue to be there for the trans community because we believe that everyone has a fundamental human right to health. But I don't think we could understate the psychological impact of this trauma on on the LGBTQ community, because there is this tremendous amount of effort.

and hatred that's targeting communities across the board. So it's the trans community, it's also black women, it's also people of color, anything that has to do with anything related to DEI, diversity, equity, and inclusion, those funds are on the chopping block. So I think what we have to do is really stand firm and begin to plan our fight back

Because our communities need to know that we have their backs and that we're going to fight to prevent this kind of attack from continuing. When you say fight, do you mean that you will pursue litigation, like you will sue if you need to?

Oh, yes. We've retained a law firm. We're preparing to sue. We are going to do all kinds of activities. We're working with members of Congress. We're getting them stories from our patients so they could read them on the floor. And we're also planning a whole...

campaign to save Medicaid. So we're going to be in swing Republican districts where we have clinics in the Inland Empire, and we're going to be pressuring through television commercials, door-to-door outreach, social media advertising, to put those Republicans on notice that we will hold them accountable if they vote to cut Medi-Cal or Medicaid.

And you are finding that the people you're reaching out to at the local and state level are being helpful partners to you, Jim?

Yes, our local congresspeople in particular and our county supervisors have just been incredible. You know, Congresswoman Batagon, Congresswoman Komlager Dove. We have an amazing set of elected officials in South Los Angeles and Southern California that have been really stepped up and supported us in a big way.

Jim Mongeau, President and Chief Executive of St. John's Community Health in Los Angeles. Thanks so much for talking with us. Thanks for having me. Listeners, we will have more with you and with Joe Yerkeba, reporter for NBC Out, and Danny Cessenia, Director of the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, after the break. You're listening to Forum. I'm Mina Kim.

Turing with Tia is the quirky YouTube talk show where Tia Creighton is the host and all her guests are talking AI chatbots. Whether it's health and beauty, science and technology, pop culture, or current events, Turing with Tia delivers answers about everything. That's T-U-R-I-N-G, Turing with Tia, a funny and fascinating way to experience artificial intelligence. Only on YouTube at Turing with Tia.

Xfinity Mobile was designed to save you money. So you get high speeds for low prices. Better than getting low speeds for high prices. Jealous? Xfinity Internet customers, get a free unlimited line for a year when you buy one unlimited line. Bring on the good stuff.

You're listening to Forum. I'm Mina Kim. We're talking this hour about how Trump's executive orders are affecting trans people in California. Things like the ability to access health care, their treatment in the military, their treatment on federal documents and so on. Though the executive orders are facing legal challenges, they're not affecting trans people.

They are already having impacts. Joe Yurkaba is a reporter for NBC Out, the LGBTQ section of NBC News. Danny Cessenia is director of California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network. And you, our listeners, are joining the conversation. How have Trump's executive orders and rhetoric targeting trans Americans affected you or a loved one? What questions do you have about their impacts?

Are you a Californian who worries about trans friends in other states as well? The email address is forum at kqed.org. Find us on Blue Sky Facebook, Instagram, threads at KQED Forum. Call us at 866-733-6786, 866-733-6786.

And Casey on Discord writes, my VA psychologist friends are at risk of losing their jobs if they provide gender-affirming care to veterans. So basically, they can either be good clinicians or lose their jobs. Trans vets are just not going to seek care, and it's going to result in loss of life. That's the heartbreaking result of scapegoating a small and vulnerable community. Joe, I know you have looked at how the VA is reacting to all of this, service providers, VA hospitals. What are you hearing, and what's your response to what Casey is saying there?

Yeah, it definitely echoes what I've heard, which is that, you know, VA providers have described the last few weeks as chaos. A lot of them, the social workers and psychologists in particular, have told me that they're terrified for their trans patients.

And so far, what I've heard is that care for trans veterans hasn't been directly affected. So no services have been cut or anything. But what I have heard is that hospitals are already making really broad, far-reaching changes to their messaging to LGBTQ plus veterans generally. So, for example, at a VA hospital in Virginia, the former LGBTQ care coordinator there who resigned told me that part of why she resigned was because the hospital said that due to the order –

related to gender ideology extremism, they basically were going to remove all LGBTQ affirming messaging from the hospital. So they took down all of the rainbow signs or anything like sharing info about the LGBTQ plus therapy groups. They took down magnets from doors. They haven't collected people's rainbow lanyards yet, she said. But she's afraid that regardless, these kinds of changes will tell LGBTQ plus veterans that, you know, they aren't welcome. There isn't a space for them.

Casey also said a small group. What percentage of the U.S. population of trans people make up, Jo? About 1%. So yeah, we're talking about an extremely small portion of the population, even less when you look at the number of trans veterans in particular or the number of trans youths.

So Danny, this listener writes, my cousin and his wife are on their way to Thailand right now to get her sex reassignment surgery. They are very worried about coming back into the country next month. Is there anything they can do to assure that they will have no issues getting back in the country? Joe, I'll go back to you. But also, Danny, if you have some thoughts on this, too, please go right ahead after Joe. But but what do you think about what this person is concerned about?

Yeah, I absolutely understand the concern. The information we've gotten from the State Department regarding

passports for trans people so far is that they will continue to be recognized. So if you have a valid passport, it will continue to be valid for exiting and entering the country, including if you have a passport with an ex-gender marker, though the State Department has said they'll no longer issue those. They also are no longer issuing trans people passports with updated or changed sex markers, regardless of the documentation and even regardless of if they had a passport that previously corrected their lived gender.

So what we're hearing is that people shouldn't have issues getting back into the country, but it's really hard to say whether that will actually happen because you just don't know how TSA agents will respond or react under this guidance or if there would be increased hostility when people are trying to get back into the country.

And this person is leaving for a sex reassignment surgery. I mean, Dani, a couple things here. What do major medical organizations say about transition care and providing that kind of care to transgender adults as well as transgender youth?

Yeah. So, you know, with medical providers who provide gender for mean care, you know, this isn't a decision that's taken lightly. You know, there's years of therapy that goes into this, you know, talking with mental health providers, talking with your mental health

your primary care physician, your endocrinologist, researching the different types of surgeries, even researching different surgeons and talking with them to see if they're a good fit. So this isn't something that's like taken willy-nilly or just like, hey, this is something I wanna do and I'm just gonna do it right now.

You know, this isn't just an individual transition. Like for myself, when I came out and I transitioned, it wasn't just myself that transitioned. It was also my wife. It was my family. It was my friends. It was everyone around me.

And there was a lot of conversations to be had. And that was something that my medical providers really wanted to make sure that I engaged in before I even started hormone replacement therapy, before I even considered any type of surgeries. So medical providers, you know, have been very much, you know,

We want to support you. We're here in your corner. We're right next to you every single step of the way. But it's done with such an intentional setting to make sure that we are making the right decision because this is life changing and it's permanent. So they really want to make sure that this is a decision that we are not only comfortable with, but that we understand and recognize that we are going to live with for the rest of our life. And Joe, yeah.

Medical associations like the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and so on, what do they say about access to transition care for minors, for example?

All major medical associations in the U.S. support access to this care and describe it as medically necessary and oppose restrictions to it. And they have for years since we saw some of the first restrictions passed a couple of years ago. And, you know, they note the fact that this care has been provided for decades now.

And they also note that the care isn't restricted for cisgender youth, so that's youth who aren't transgender, when it's used for other medical purposes. So, for example, puberty blockers have been used to treat early or precocious puberty for decades. But these bills and efforts to restrict care for trans minors don't provide the same restrictions on that kind of care.

Chris writes, although I cannot confirm that it is directly a result of the executive orders, our private health insurance has just stopped covering hormone therapy for my trans son. I suspect that they didn't ever want to pay, but that they are now using the national actions as cover for limiting our coverage.

So, Dani, we were talking with Jim about how he's working with state officials, and I know you have too. So what exactly is California trying to do about all of this? How are they trying to help organizations providing care and other services to trans people specifically?

Yeah, so right now there's a major, there's actually two major coalitions that are taking place. One is called Fight for Our Health, which Jim had mentioned, you know, protecting Medicaid and Medicare, ensuring that those federal dollars continue to come through. And then the other one is Protect Trans Kids, where we are really working to ensure that California is preemptively ensuring that we do not lose access to gender-affirming care.

One of the things that we know with California, especially with Medicaid and Medicare, which funds California's Medi-Cal, right now there's a little over 30,000 transgender folks who are on Medi-Cal. So that means that if we lose Medicaid, Medicare for TGI folks, then how is California going to supplement those dollars? How do we provide that coverage? So that's one thing we need to think about.

And then if we're thinking about, you know, even longer term, you know, if this is just the beginning of the Trump's administration of attacking gender affirming care, where it eventually now goes down to private insurance and employer based insurance of those insurances no longer being able to cover gender affirming care, then how does California cover that as well?

And when you look at how many transgender folks are in California, and then we're looking also at what are the potential annual costs that insurances pay out per year per transgender individual for gender-affirming care. And again, when we're talking about gender-affirming care, we're talking about therapy, psychiatry, doctor's appointments, prescriptions, surgeries. There's just so much that goes into it.

And I had read one estimate through one insurance plan that they can pay anywhere from $63,000 to $150,000 per year just for one transgender patient. So how does California cover 30,000 plus transgender patients per year?

per year if we lose this funding or if we lose this coverage. So right now we're all thinking and trying to identify like, okay, do we start setting up, you know, state funded transgender clinics?

and who are our partners that are already available that have clinics set up that can just be provided funding to directly. Because to start a whole new clinic is going to take a lot of money. But to partner with folks such as St. John's, to partner with folks such as Planned Parenthood or the Los Angeles LGBT Center, who already have clinics available, and provide state funding there to have those services provided,

could be an option. And I'm not saying that that's the exact route California is going to go. That's just one option that we're considering and that we're potentially going to propose as a budget ask and more as a trigger budget ask of if this happens, if this executive order goes through, then let's have this trigger in the budget for this to be covered with facilities that are already providing gender affirming services.

So a lot that is being discussed right now, though the answers are still being figured out, it sounds like, Dani.

Yes, absolutely. Especially because California is in a budget deficit right now. And even though we have what's called a rainy day fund to tap into, it'll be really hard to get the legislature to tap into it to fund TGI services because, you know, the state wants to save that rainy day fund.

For other potential like natural disasters, California has been on fire a lot lately. There's other legal items coming up with ice and those that are undocumented. So there's going to be a lot of budget asks coming from different communities.

So really trying to figure out like what is attainable and what will be easier to push through in that budget ask is literally what we have been meeting about for like the past month and a half.

We're talking with Danny Cessenia, director of California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network. Joe Yurkeva, reporter for NBC Out. We're talking about how California is responding to Trump's executive orders targeting trans Americans. And we're hearing from your listeners about how you're being affected as well at 866-733-6786 at the email address forum at kqed.org.

and by her posts on Blue Sky and Instagram and threads and others at KQED Forum. The Cisner writes,

And for getting a California driver's license? Are there concerns about having one gender on there and a different one on their passport? I'm trying to keep my kids safe, and it's hard to know what to do these days. Joe, I'll ask you first just about, I believe you are waiting to see if your own passport comes back with an X or not. Is that right? And I'm wondering if you wouldn't mind just sharing how that's weighing on you.

Yeah, I submitted my passport the week of the inauguration, my passport application. My old passport was expired and had the wrong sex marker. And the State Department said they received it on January 28th. And so yesterday was exactly three weeks that they've had the application and it still says it's in process.

I paid for expedited processing, which is supposed to take about two to three weeks. So we're at the real tail end of the max amount of time that that should be processed. And I haven't received any updates. My expectation is that I'll probably get it back with my birth sex on it, just because that's what I've heard from people so far is that they're receiving letters that say, we've corrected your passport to show your biological sex

And so I kind of expect that that's what's going to happen. But I've heard a variety of accounts from people that, you know, even if they submitted an application after the inauguration and after the executive order regarding the definition of sex, that they still were getting their gender markers updated. So it also seems like it could be something that depends on the passport agent that you get who's processing the application.

And that second part of this listener's question, Dani, I think about 16,000 Californians have access to their gender on their driver's license. How should they approach their passports and passport renewals? Do you have any thoughts?

Yeah, so I mean, of course, I'm not, you know, a lawyer and cannot provide legal advice or anything. But California, you know, recognizes three genders, we're not going to stop recognizing three genders, we're going to continue to provide X on driver's license and such. But as for like, how to go about with the passport, to be honest, you know, I'm not even sure 100%. I even have my own personal fears.

You know, I have mail on my passport. You know, I was assigned female at birth. And I'm concerned myself about coming back into the country when I got out of the country later this summer. You know, and some of the things that I'm doing is, you know, I have my original birth certificate. I'm going to get my amended birth certificate as well. I'm even getting my updated marriage license. Like, I'm just really trying to make sure that I have this paper trail

for myself that I'm going to carry with me and my wife, you know, so that way when we do try to come back into the country, if I have any issues, you know, I'm hoping that with all of the different original and amended birth certificates and original and amended marriage certificates,

That I don't have too, too many problems coming back. But, you know, should folks apply for X marker? It sounds like the State Department's not allowing it. But but really, I think it's just all about what folks feel the most comfortable with at this point. Joel writes, the GOP loves to use the issues which only impact a few to instill fear in the general public.

In the meantime, our democracy is down to the final hours. I think liberal media outlets and Democrats should stop touching this third rail of cultural issues. It's a losing formula in general elections. Jo, have you heard that sentiment? And what are your thoughts?

I haven't heard that sentiment, maybe in part because I'm a trans reporter for a section of NBC News that specifically covers the LGBTQ plus community. So and our motto is by us for everyone. And so what I've heard from the community is just, you know, I mean, I can't count the number of DMs I've received from people who are terrified and confused about, you know,

travel, whether they'll be able to get back into the country, whether they'll be able to access gender-affirming care, whether their kids will be able to continue receiving care. So I think that maybe my view is a little affected by the fact that this is really what I focus on, and the community that I'm hearing from needs answers to these questions. And so that's sort of how I've been approaching the coverage. I mean, I have heard from some people that they think...

trans, you know, just reporting on trans people or continuing to talk about the issue is somehow a losing issue. But I think that it's sort of, it just begs the question of who are we writing for? And, you know, I'm writing for everyone, including this community. So that's sort of what I've been prioritizing.

Yeah. Steve in San Francisco writes, why do taxpayers need to pay for gender affirming care? I don't really have a position on it, but I feel I pay enough taxes already. I'm just curious where the country is. I've been seeing, you know, survey results that show that, that actually a majority of American support saying allowing transgender men and women to serve openly in the military, though I think 80% do not believe transgender female athletes should be allowed to compete in women's sports. Then there are other things that are

you know, that show general support for trans Americans rights, but there are some specific areas that tend to get a lot of pushback. I'm just curious if you feel like support for transgender Americans is generally on the increase or on the decline, I guess the percentage of people who even said allowing transgender men and women to serve openly in the military is a majority, but that it reflects a decline since 2019?

Right, yeah. I mean, I think it depends on the survey. And I think something that's really important to keep in mind is that those survey results can vary widely depending on how the question is asked and also how much information people are given. And that's really the case, especially when we're with surveys about trans athlete inclusion.

But I think that generally what we're seeing is a decline in support, not necessarily because people, you know, don't support trans rights, but in part because still a lot of people don't know a trans person. And also because we're in an information age right now where there's rapid spread of mis- and disinformation on the Internet about trans people. So it's really hard to say if those survey results are accurate. We're talking about trans rights in Trump's America. More after the break.

Turing with Tia is the quirky YouTube talk show where Tia Creighton is the host and all her guests are talking AI chatbots. Whether it's health and beauty, science and technology, pop culture, or current events, Turing with Tia delivers answers about everything. That's T-U-R-I-N-G, Turing with Tia, a funny and fascinating way to experience artificial intelligence. Only on YouTube at Turing with Tia.

Support for KQED Podcasts comes from Star One Credit Union, now offering real-time money movement with instant pay. Make transfers and payments instantly between financial institutions, online or through Star One's mobile app. Star One Credit Union, in your best interest.

Welcome back to Forum. I'm Ina Kim. We're talking about how Trump's executive orders are affecting trans people in California, which has reaffirmed its trans protections in light of Trump's executive orders affecting their access to health care, the treatment in the military, on sports teams and on federal documents, among other things. Legal challenges are pending, but they're having an impact. And we're talking more about them with Joe Yurkeba, a reporter for NBC Out, the LGBTQ section of NBC News.

and Danny Cessenia, Director of the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network. And with you, our listeners at 866-733-6786, at the email address forum at kqed.org, and on our social channels at kqedforum.

This listener, Neil, writes, isn't preventing a teacher from using a student's preferred pronouns a violation of that teacher's First Amendment rights? Danny, let me ask you about this, about students being able to be properly gendered at school. Has that been an issue in California at all?

You're hearing about? Yeah. It absolutely has been. Back in 2015, we passed AB 1266, which is the School Inclusive Act, where transgender students could come out to their teachers or counselor.

and develop a student support plan of how they want to be referred by, their pronouns, what restroom they would like to use, what sports they like to play, all of the things to make them feel safe and secure at school. And lately, especially in the last four years, we have seen a shift from a lot of support of AB 1266

to more inland and rural school districts pushing back and wanting to out transgender students without their permission, either like to their parents or to different folks, and even refusing to call them by their authentic name, you know, or address them, you know, by the correct pronouns and such. You know, there's lawsuits going on against Chino Valley Unified School District,

There's also been lawsuits with Temecula Valley as well. And then as well as in Northern California, really pushing back against these school districts, you know, wanting to harm transgender students. But again, it goes back to what Joe said earlier of, you know, a lot of these folks not knowing a trans person or even being educated on, you know, what being trans is and who we are.

Patrick writes, social security abruptly stopped the ability to change gender on their records. This means gender will be incongruent when trans people apply for jobs. It means trans people are unable to change their medical insurance to match their gender. It can be traumatizing when a trans person is dead named or misgendered when they are in the waiting room by health care providers. And Danny, I think you were touching on this as well. But and also you've made the point that health care is ingrained in all of these areas at schools as well.

Yes, you know, and, you know, being incongruent with your gender on your insurance, on your social security cards, you know, it means that this is you're consistently being outed every time you see a medical provider, you know, and they're calling your name. For example, I'll use myself as an example. You know, here I am. I'm I identify as trans male. I have short hair. I have a long beard and whatnot.

And if they were to call my name, my birth name at a doctor's office, you know, and expect someone that's female, because that's what my insurance says, that's what's pulling up on my medical records, you know, then here I am saying like, I'm right here, you know, they're, they're going to be caught off guard. And, and,

And I have been in those situations, you know, where the nurse that's calling me back, you know, is cut off guard, doesn't know how to address me. It's super uncomfortable for them. It's super uncomfortable for me. And what ends up happening at that point is I end up closing off as the patient. You know, things that I wanted to talk to my doctor about, about, you know, my medical needs.

nothing about being trans, you know, but just about like, hey, I have worries about my diabetes, my blood pressure, I want to get my vitamins checked and all of this different stuff.

I'm now closed off where I'm just like, I'm just here for my general checkup. That's it. You know, instead of getting the actual medical help and services that I need. And this is what we have seen previously before we have been allowed to change our name and our gender. And before it was made easier to update our insurance and social security card was we saw less and less people.

TGI folks receiving access to medical care because they didn't feel safe. And that is my biggest fear and concern is we're going to go backwards in accessing healthcare instead of forwards. And this means that we are going to be undiagnosed with many types of comorbidities and we're going to receive the lack of medication that we didn't realize we need. While we're talking about the importance of language and their impacts,

I also just want to ask you about the language in these executive orders and the tone. What has been your reaction to how they've been worded? There was a...

New York Times piece that really described things like saying that transgender teenagers are mutilated or that trans people are denying biological reality and so on, suggesting a deception. There's language in them that has really stood out to me. And I'm wondering, Joe, what has stood out to you and what messages you think it's trying to send?

Right. Yeah. The messages that it's sending, you know, seems to be that there's something inherently wrong with being trans. And I think that what I've I haven't really been surprised just because this is the same language that we've seen in state bills looking to restrict access to trans care, for example, over the last few years. And they always describe care for minors as chemical and surgical mutilation, which, you know, isn't accurate. It's inflammatory medication.

But I think what has surprised me is how some of the orders have gone a lot further than in Trump's last presidency. So, for example, in the trans military ban, this ban specifically describes being trans as dishonorable, untruthful. And that says that it conflicts with a soldier's commitment to a disciplined lifestyle, even if they're doing it in their personal life.

You know, and so it makes this assertion that being trans is fundamentally, you know, dishonorable and wrong, which goes further than what we saw previously. And in terms of language that basically denies the validity of a transgender existence, what broader effects were you around that, Jo?

Well, from what I'm hearing from parents already is that it's having effects on their children. You know, I get messages from parents all the time that their kids generally, because they're supported and they have access to the care that they need, are thriving. But hearing this language every day has...

negatively affects their mental health. It, you know, makes it harder for them to go to school. It makes them afraid to use the bathroom at school. And so that's their general, their biggest fear. Dani, your thoughts on that as well, just in terms of the language of the EOs and the broader impacts that you're hearing that people in the trans community are concerned about?

Yeah, so really the language is very dehumanizing, you know, and one of the things that I've been hearing about from parents, especially parents of transgender youth, is why their youth are being othered, why their youth are being made out as monsters, or why they as parents, you know, are being seen as monsters for mutilating their children when that isn't the case.

So there's really been a lot of mental health trauma with parents as well as with their youth. And one of the things that I've really been working towards is connecting them to mental health services, connecting them to support groups, letting them know that, you know, their children are valid, their identity is valid and that they are gifted.

good parents, you know, and to remind them like you're doing this because you love your child and you want to see them flourish. You want to see them succeed and you only want what's best for them. So there's been a lot of tears, a lot of anger, a lot of frustration and a lot of need for mental health support.

We're talking with Danny Sassenia, director of the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, and Joe Yurkeba, reporter for NBC Out. And we're talking with you, our listeners. Have Trump's executive orders and rhetoric targeting trans Americans affected you or a loved one? Have you tried to get gender-affirming care or renew your passport or take other actions targeted by the Trump administration and noticed changes?

You can tell us by emailing forum at kqed.org, finding us on Blue Sky, Facebook, Instagram, or Threads. We're at KQED Forum. You can call us at 866-733-6786, 866-733-6786. Madeline writes, I have multiple trans people in my life, and at least one of them is planning to leave the country. All of them are afraid for their safety. I can't express enough how much we need every person to speak up, no matter if you know a trans person or not.

This is an attack on all of us. To my trans brothers and sisters, you are the bravest people I know. We must all take a lesson from their bravery to fight against bigotry, hate, and fascism. One of the executive orders we haven't talked about in detail yet has been the one that is trying to roll back the Biden administration's guidance on Title IX. How is the Trump administration interpreting that, Jo?

Right, yeah. So the Trump administration is basically interpreting Title IX to only refer to what they describe as biological sex. And we've seen that in the order banning trans women and girls from playing in women's sports.

And so they're basically saying that they're going to use the education department for as long as it exists to investigate schools that have that are alleged to have included trans women and girls on women's sports teams. And we'll also likely see that with trans students being allowed to use the bathrooms of their gender identity. And so

Schools could have their federal funding threatened if they allow that or include, you know, trans students in any other ways in allowing them to just be present at school consistent with their gender identity. How have organizations like the NCAA and so on responded to this?

The NCAA actually just one day after Trump signed the trans athlete ban executive order issued a new policy that said that they would comply and that basically trans women would be barred from competing in NCAA sports in the women's category. The

Education Department went even further after that and said that they hope the NCAA and this federation that oversees high school sports will go back and revoke the titles and wins and records set by trans women and girls in sports, which is something that we've never seen before. And it'll be interesting to see how they respond to that. Let me go to caller Linda in New Orleans. Hi, Linda. You're on.

Hi. I called because this is such a painful subject to me for myself, but for my daughter mostly. I have a trans grandchild, and Rio decided that she was trans at three, and she's nine now. And my daughter is going through such a terrible situation.

And you're calling from New Orleans. Is your daughter and grandchild also living in Louisiana as well? No.

No, thank goodness. They live in New York, in Brooklyn. But still, it's federal, right? Yes, yes. Thank you for calling. And I'm really, I'm really appreciating the fact that you shared that with us. And Joe, with that nationwide perspective, like, what are you hearing in terms of, you know, resistance from Americans?

And providers from local officials in other states, even in states like New York, I think there's been a pretty high-profile case of resistance in New York as well, if I'm remembering correctly.

Yeah, absolutely. Even though some hospitals in New York said that they were pausing care, NBC News spoke with a doctor named Jeffrey Birnbaum, who's a pediatrician, who said that even prior to the two judges blocking Trump's order regarding trans care for minors, that he would continue care because Attorney General Letitia James reminded doctors that New York state nondiscrimination law requires them to continue providing treatment in this way.

So we've definitely seen some doctors saying that, you know, based on their state laws, they're going to continue providing care. And we're talking about how Trump's executive orders are affecting you or a loved one. And let me remind listeners, you are listening to Forum. And let me thank Linda for that call. Let me go next to Scott in Martinez. Hi, Scott, you're on.

Yeah, hi. Just a real basic question. I'm having a really hard time understanding how such a just a private, personal, family, medical matter is even in the legislative or political arena. Like how is it even, how is Trump even able to do this? It's so private and personal. What's the connection? Joe, you want to try taking that one? Thank you, Scott. Sure.

Yeah. So this has been, you know, in the works for years now. Basically, you know, since the conservative religious right lost the battle on marriage equality, they've kind of pivoted to restricting trans rights and

efforts to restrict trans care go back to 2017, 2018 now. And the first law to pass a restriction on trans care for minors was Arkansas in 2021. And now half of the country has those laws. And so this has been an effort that they've been sort of chipping away at. And one of the things mentioned for Trump's presidency as a key issue was to restrict this care nationwide.

And so that's part of why, you know, advocates have told me they think there isn't more pushback is because the legal groups pushing these restrictions have sort of been able to make people, you know, more OK with them by pushing them at the state level and successfully getting them passed. Danny, do you have thoughts on on why we're seeing this extensive targeting of trans people from the Trump administration as well?

You know, just to kind of piggyback on Joe, you know, and this is just my own personal viewpoint is, you know, again, you know, they the conservative right lost marriage equality and there needs to be some type of quote unquote bad guy or community to attack, you know, as conservative.

you know, the villain and it happens to be us. You know, they couldn't, you know, keep, you know, Joma. You know, we saw what happened with the clerk, you know, who refused a gay couple wanting to get married. So next on their list is to target us, you know, and I agree, this is a personal family matter. But

and such, this has nothing to do with anyone being governed. Legislation should not dictate our medical choices or what we work through with our parents and with our family and friends.

And really, you know, it comes down to community education. Like Joe said, you know, the states are becoming okay with it because it's getting passed at the local level. And we just really need to go out there and educate communities more and more on who we really are. We are human. We're everyday people. I pay taxes just like anybody else. You know, I contribute to this economy.

And that education just really, really needs to take place. And not so much by us as transgender people, but by our allies, by people who are in our corner, by people who are rooting for us, who are trying to protect us and such. My grandparents are constantly educating their friends in their senior community all the time. Even when my grandmother goes to the grocery store, she wears a little trans flag pin.

And people ask her, why are you wearing that? And she says proudly, you know, my grandson is transgender and I love him so much. And, you know, they just go into this big conversation and we just need more of those conversations. Well, Erin writes, the attack on trans Americans should alarm anyone with a child in public education.

Especially children who receive accommodations. The attack on gender affirmation in schools weakened Section 504, which protects students with disabilities. If you think everyone deserves access to equitable education, you should be outraged that the trans community is being scapegoated and used as cover for stripping rights from children. I...

I want to ask you, Danny, just in terms of your messaging to your partners and to the people who reach out to you as head of the California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, what do you message them about? And I guess what are your hopes around California's ability to be able to

maintain its position and enforce its laws protecting trans rights in the face of a very unknown future and very, you know, unclear legal decisions by the courts.

Yeah, I really remind folks, educators, parents, school psychologists, everyone that there is a whole army fighting and advocating for them. There is a whole army working with legislatures, with school districts, pushing back with school districts.

Additionally, our coalition that we're a part of, we compiled a statewide messaging memo that we sent out to everyone to let everyone know what their rights are, as well as what the law still says here in California and how they can enforce it. Danny Sassenian, Joe Yerkeva, thank you both so much. Thank you, listeners. And thank you, Caroline Smith, for producing this segment. This is Forum.

Funds for the production of Forum are provided by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Generosity Foundation, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Support for KQED Podcasts comes from Star One Credit Union, now offering real-time money movement with instant pay. Make transfers and payments instantly between financial institutions, online or through Star One's mobile app. Star One Credit Union, in your best interest.