LINCOLN, Neb (KELO) — All parents want to do what’s best for their kids.
For Mike Hornasek that meant reaching out to doctors to get his daughter the best care possible.
“It’s really best practice. American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association and many other medical associations have said, this is the best practice. This has been settled,” said Hornasek.
Hornasek’s daughter is transgender and is receiving gender-affirming care.
Gender-affirming care encompasses a number of different interventions, including psychological, medical, social and even legal to help affirm an individual’s gender when it conflicts with what they were assigned at birth.
While gender-affirming care is quickly becoming common medical practice it still remains controversial politically and is the target of a new bill making its way through the unicameral.
“We have laws that protect kids from abuse, exploitation and exposure to dangerous substances like alcohol and drugs. As adults we understand that a child’s brain is not fully formed and cannot comprehend the ramifications of making irreversible medical decisions,” said Kathleen Kauth, the author of LB574.
The bill in question is LB574. It was introduced by Senator Kathleen Kauth and would ban gender-affirming care for anyone under the age of 19.
Supporters of the bill argue that children are not mature enough to understand the consequences of gender-affirming care and that many change their minds and de-transition when they get older.
“At 16 the very first medical intervention I had was a double mastectomy. Then a few months later I was put on cross-sex hormones both through UNMC,” said Luka Hein, a former trans man who has since de-transitioned.
The opposition to the bill was significant at Wednesday’s hearing. A large crowd packed the rotunda to rally against the bill and lines to testify against the bill stretched through the halls of the capitol
“Trans people keep telling us it’s not going anywhere, the attacks are getting worse. It’s time for us to listen,” said Senator Megan Hunt.
For Mike, the passage of LB574 means the end of his family’s time in Nebraska.
Hornasek says his daughter needs the care and support that she is receiving and if Nebraska takes that away, they will find somewhere else.
“We don’t have a choice. We would have to leave. We would be leaving our church behind, we would have to sell our house. I have to leave a non-profit id spent the last 13 years building. People just want to be included, be a part of their community and be welcomed,” said Hornasek.