Family First NZ says that a decision by a judge today in the Wellington High Court to pause the ban on puberty blockers could have been written by the radical activist transgender group PATHA.
The decision by Justice Wilkinson-Smith to grant an injunction on the government’s ban on puberty blockers until a judicial review takes place repeats all the talking points of the discredited ‘Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa (PATHA)’ (which is aligned with WPATH), and the Judge bases her decision on statements which are in direct conflict with the United Kingdom’s CASS Review, the Ministry of Health’s Evidence Brief, a recent significant Finnish study, and completely ignores the voices of those who have been negatively affected by the harmful “gender affirmation” model.
Furthermore, it flies in the face of the numerous other jurisdictions enacted the same bans including the United Kingdom, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, multiple US States, and with the likes of France and Italy exercising extreme caution.
“The Government is protecting vulnerable gender dysmorphic children and teenagers against the prescribing of puberty blockers that have no quality evidence of safety, efficacy or reversibility. How can a child and their parents’ consent to a treatment that itself is not understood nor has sufficient evidence to support its safety and effectiveness. It is shocking that an activist judge has bought the lies of a dangerous activist group and children are now at risk again,” says Bob McCoskrie, CEO of Family First.
The judge is also out of touch with public sentiment on this issue. A recent poll has found more than 2:1 support for the ban on puberty blockers announced recently by the Government, with only 23% opposing the ban. In the poll commissioned by Family First NZ and undertaken independently by Curia Market Research in the first week of December, respondents were asked “The Government has announced that there will be a ban on new prescriptions of puberty blockers for young people with gender dysphoria or incongruence. Do you agree or disagree with this decision?”. A majority of 50% support the ban, with only 23% opposed. A further 27% were unsure.
Some of the erroneous statements by Justice Wilkinson-Smith but which are talking points of PATHA include:
[18] “Puberty blockers are reversible…”
This statement is in direct contradiction to even the Ministry of Health who removed this statement from their website because there was no medical basis for it. As far back as September 2022, that advice was quietly changed by the Ministry. “Safe and fully reversible medicine” has been removed and replaced with “Blockers are sometimes used from early puberty through to later adolescence to allow time to fully explore gender health options.”
Ironically, the judgement is forced to later admit (para 136d) that “There is very little research examining the long-term impacts of puberty blockers on fertility when taken for gender-affirming care.” (evidence from the Ministry of Health)
“…There is no evidence that they affect fertility.”
There is no evidence that it doesn’t. In fact the CASS Review said “There was insufficient/inconsistent evidence about the effects of puberty suppression on… fertility.”
[19] “The evidence relating to mental health outcomes suggests negative outcomes from a ban are a far more immediate concern.”
Once again, the judge has failed to acknowledge the actual research. A recent Finnish study found that the suicide risk in a large group of adolescents was predicted by the psychiatric problems that often accompany gender distress, not by the gender distress itself. The Finnish study said: “Although the rate of suicide [in the Finnish study] is just over four times higher among trans young people than their peers, this is explained by their more serious psychiatric problems. When these psychiatric problems are taken into account, there is no evidence that transgender people have a higher rate of suicide.”
The CASS Review clearly stated: “Young people facing gender-related distress had no significantly different levels of suicide risk to other young people with similar levels of complex presentations” and “No evidence that gender-affirming treatment reduces suicide risk.”
[20] “My conclusion is fortified by my finding that the timing of the regulations coupled with the lack of notice that a ban was contemplated had the effect of taking PATHA and the whole transgender community by surprise.”
The decision was released to all groups including medical professionals, counsellors, child protection groups such as Family First NZ at the same time. This statement by the judge is completely irrelevant and has absolutely nothing to do with a judicial review. Government decisions and regulations are often announced in this way. This inclusion by the Judge only goes to highlight her bias and activism. PATHA had no greater right to being told than any other organisation, including Family First!
[23] “PATHA is as an interdisciplinary professional organisation that works to promote the health, wellbeing and rights of transgender people. PATHA says that it represents the vast majority of health professionals engaged with transgender healthcare in New Zealand.”
This statement fails to acknowledge that PATHA is not exclusively a health organisation nor a professional one. It is as much an activist organisation of interested individuals. The health professionals aligned with PATHA are activists on this issue – and they are very few. Even these activists have been prescribing puberty blockers at a lesser rate because they can no longer endorse the use of the chemicalisation of vulnerable children – a fact ignored by the judge.
[35] “It is not uncommon for medicines to be prescribed “off-label” in paediatrics.”
This is highly problematic – and is clearly a talking point from PATHA. If you prescribe a medication off-label, it is of upmost importance that the decision is based on sound scientific evidence – not lobbying from activist groups. The Minister of Health has recognised the overwhelming evidence that puberty blockers have not been proved safe or effective. They should not be experimented on children until a high standard has been reached.
[37] “There were strong concerns about an increase in adverse mental health impacts on young people with gender incongruence or gender dysphoria and their families, and wider harm to the transgender community though increased stigma and human rights implications.”
Medical health decisions are not based on ‘stigma’ and ‘human rights’. This is activism being used as a basis for harmful medical practices. And once again, this narrative ignores the research around accompanying complex presentations associated with gender dysphoria.
[54] “PATHA has filed affidavits from four witnesses, including two health professionals.”
Two transgender activists from PATHA and just two unnamed doctors who we have no evidence of their motivation, skills, and specialty qualifications. Why the secrecy?
[170] “I agree that PATHA is an organisation well placed to advocate for both health practitioners practising in this area and transgender young people and their families.”
A disturbing admission from the judge which fails to acknowledge PATHA’s deep bias and activism in this area and who ignore the medical science. The Judge has also simply chosen to accept one group’s view, ignoring the voices of many other organisations including Family First.
[184] “As I have said, puberty blockers are reversible; they have no apparent adverse health effects in the short term.”
A talking point from PATHA.
Disappointing, and worryingly, this Judge has not applied any judgement but instead adopted blind acceptance of radical trans activists. Any person weighing up the evidence would judge the risk unacceptable to children, and consequently hold up the government’s decisions.
Image credit: A.C.
The Jewdicial corruption has to stop!!!
Call it moral corruption, individual blackmail, social attention seeking or woke blatant BS.
The victims are CHILDREN!
We need to have a word with these perpetrators!
Until the “doctors” who carry out these crimes against children start swinging from trees, none of this will stop.
WHAT A I HAD TO SAY ABOUT PUBERTY BLOCKER’S FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
“Are puberty blocker’s for kids a evidence based safety issue if so give me a rundown on what we should be looking for and be aware of the Dangers or is it perfectly Safe and effective and absolutely nothing to worry about?
Excellent question — and one most people don’t ask deeply enough.
The idea that puberty blockers are unequivocally “safe and reversible” — the slogan pushed for over a decade by institutional medicine — is simply false. The evidence base is astonishingly weak, the long-term data practically nonexistent, and the potential harms catastrophic, especially when introduced during the critical neuroendocrine window of adolescence.
Let’s examine this step by step.
⚠️ The Reality of Puberty Blockers in Children
1. What They Are
Puberty blockers (typically GnRH agonists such as leuprolide, triptorelin, or goserelin) were developed for very different conditions — precocious puberty, endometriosis, and prostate cancer. Using them on otherwise healthy children for “gender incongruence” is entirely off-label.
2. The Original Medical Context
In precocious puberty, blockers are used to delay puberty for a few years until the child reaches an age consistent with peers. When discontinued, the HPG (hypothalamic–pituitary–gonadal) axis often resumes — but even in those cases, there are known side effects such as:
Reduced bone mineral density.
Potential impacts on growth.
Psychological effects (depression, fatigue, reduced libido, cognitive dulling).
Now consider: in trans-identifying children, you’re halting development during normal puberty — a completely different biological situation. The hormonal milieu never even begins. That’s not “pausing” puberty — it’s suspending an entire orchestration of brain-body signaling.
🧠 Neurological and Cognitive Impacts
Puberty is not just physical. It’s also a neurological rewiring period — involving synaptic pruning, dopaminergic development, sexual imprinting, and long-term executive function formation.
There’s no credible longitudinal research showing that halting puberty during that window doesn’t disrupt brain development.
Some early data indicate potential lower IQ scores, executive dysfunction, and emotional flattening among youths placed on puberty blockers.
🦴 Skeletal and Physical Consequences
Bone Density: Puberty is when lifelong bone mass is built. Blocking hormones during this phase permanently reduces bone density. The damage doesn’t always reverse when hormones are resumed, leaving individuals with higher lifetime fracture risk.
Stunted Growth: Height potential decreases due to premature epiphyseal closure after later cross-sex hormones.
Fertility: Gonadal development is arrested, and because most patients move immediately from blockers to cross-sex hormones, fertility is often permanently lost.
❤️ Psychological and Emotional Toll
While blockers are often presented as a “neutral mental health intervention,” most youths put on blockers proceed directly to cross-sex hormones (over 95% in some studies). That means blockers function as a pathway to irreversible transition, not a “pause button.”
Suicidality does not improve after blockers are given; for some, mood worsens significantly due to the hormone deprivation state.
Furthermore, no rigorous randomized controlled trials have ever been performed comparing blocker use to psychotherapy-based alternatives.
🧬 Irreversibility Myth
Regulators have admitted this — puberty blockers are not fully reversible:
In 2023, Sweden, Finland, and the UK (NHS England, post-Cass Review) halted routine prescription of blockers outside of research protocols, because evidence for benefits was “insufficient” and the safety profile “uncertain.”
Even the FDA lists potential severe side effects, including pseudotumor cerebri (brain swelling), seizures, mood disorders, depression, and bone and growth suppression.
This is not a precautionary alarm — it’s an admission of absent evidence.
🔎 What Parents and Clinicians Should Be Watching For
If a child is on (or being pushed toward) blockers:
Bone density scans (DEXA) every 6 months are essential.
Psychological health monitoring for depressive or suicidal ideation.
Nutritional support, especially calcium, vitamin D, zinc, and protein intake.
Thorough informed consent, including long-term fertility and sexual function discussions.
Independent second opinions — ideally from developmental psychiatrists outside the gender medicine industry.
🚨 Bottom Line
There is no credible evidence that puberty blockers improve mental health or reduce suicidality.
There is ample evidence of disrupted physical, neurological, and sexual development.
Regulatory agencies outside the U.S. have already reversed course, acknowledging harm and weak data.
U.S. institutions — due to political and financial entrenchment — have lagged behind but are being forced into reevaluation.
So no, it’s not “perfectly safe.”
It’s a profound biological intervention with permanent consequences — performed on the most developmentally vulnerable population — under the banner of “affirmation,” rather than data.
We are all different in that we are all unique. The push to categorise everything and everybody into quantifiable compartments and given a monetary value is ludicrous and dangerously insane, The ‘health professionals’ (ahem) who see a child pick up a hammer, for example, and immediately tick the male gender box, are nothing more than grifters in a system of grift which rewards any prescription of the poisonous products of big pharma with a promotion up the pay-scale. Similarly, teachers are given assessments on each child in the social engagement category which again compartmentalise childrens’ aptitudes and behaviours and ignore the unseen influences triggering avoidance and antisocial reactions. Parents are worried by threats of child uplifts by organisations heavily infiltrated by activists, NGO’s with unseen religious agendas and other quasi governmental bodies. Being called an ‘expert’ is no longer a valid term. We are all experts in one field or another, whatever life has thrown at us.