Poll Results

YES: 10% | NO: 90%

We recently asked our audience to weigh in on a deeply personal and highly debated issue:

“Should your tax dollars fund gender transitions for minors?”

This question raises important concerns about public spending, healthcare policy, parental rights, and how society treats children navigating gender identity. While some argue such procedures are medically necessary, others believe public funding should not support irreversible treatments for minors.

Why This Matters

As gender identity has become a more visible and widely discussed topic in recent years, state and federal governments have faced growing pressure to determine whether treatments like puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgery should be funded — especially when minors are involved.

The issue brings together two central questions:

1. Should minors have access to life-altering gender transition treatments?
2. Should taxpayers be required to fund them?

Arguments from Those Who Said “No – Public Funds Should Not Be Used”

• Minors Can’t Fully Consent:
  Critics argue that children and teens are not developmentally mature enough to make irreversible medical decisions. They believe gender transition procedures should be delayed until adulthood — if pursued at all.
• Long-Term Health Risks:
  There is concern over the long-term effects of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones. Some studies suggest potential impacts on fertility, bone density, and neurological development.
• Taxpayer Choice and Boundaries:
  Many respondents say their tax dollars should not support elective procedures — particularly those involving minors — that intersect with ideology, personal belief, and evolving medical science.
• Rising Number of Regret Cases:
  Increasingly, detransitioners — individuals who regret undergoing gender-related procedures — have spoken out about feeling rushed or unsupported in their decisions. This raises ethical concerns about government-sponsored care for youth.
• Prioritizing Essential Health Services:
  Some feel taxpayer dollars would be better spent on basic healthcare needs — such as cancer treatment, mental health support, or veterans’ services — instead of controversial, non-life-threatening procedures.

Arguments from Those Who Said “Yes – Support Should Be Funded”

• Gender-Affirming Care as Healthcare:
  Supporters say gender-affirming treatments are medically necessary for many transgender youth and that denying them can lead to depression, anxiety, and even suicide.
• Health Equity and Access:
  They argue that families without the financial means to afford private care should still have access to medically approved treatments, especially if recommended by doctors.
• Professional Guidelines Support It:
  Leading medical associations, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society, have supported access to gender-affirming care for minors under careful supervision.
• Public Health is Public Responsibility:
  Just as taxpayers support care for addiction, mental illness, and chronic disease, supporters believe gender care for minors should be available when it can improve long-term well-being.

Conclusion

According to this poll, a strong majority of respondents do not support using taxpayer money to fund gender transition treatments for minors. While the debate continues across legal, medical, and cultural lines, many voters believe public dollars should not be used for procedures they view as elective, controversial, or age-inappropriate.

We appreciate all who took part in this important conversation. Your voice helps shape public awareness and policy around some of the most sensitive issues facing families and communities today.