Overview

Title

To prohibit an entity from receiving Federal funds if such entity provides to any person any medical or surgical intervention for the purpose of assisting an individual’s disassociation from his or her sex.

ELI5 AI

H. R. 10075 is a plan that says places that help people change their sex can't get money from the government, but they can still get money if they're helping with things someone is born with or if there's been an accident.

Summary AI

H. R. 10075 aims to stop any entity from receiving federal funds if it provides medical or surgical interventions that help individuals change their sex. The bill specifically states that federal funding is not to be given to entities engaging in activities that promote a person's disassociation from their biological sex. However, it allows exceptions for medical or surgical interventions responding to developmental or genetic anomalies or historical accidents. The act is titled the “Stopping the Mutilation of Children Act of 2024”.

Published

2024-10-29
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-10-29
Package ID: BILLS-118hr10075ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
3
Words:
401
Pages:
2
Sentences:
14

Language

Nouns: 116
Verbs: 38
Adjectives: 28
Adverbs: 2
Numbers: 9
Entities: 20

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.34
Average Sentence Length:
28.64
Token Entropy:
4.64
Readability (ARI):
16.84

AnalysisAI

Editorial Commentary

General Summary

The proposed bill, introduced in the House of Representatives on October 29, 2024, and titled the “Stopping the Mutilation of Children Act of 2024,” seeks to prohibit the allocation of federal funds to entities that provide medical or surgical interventions aimed at assisting individuals in changing their biological sex. The measure does allow exceptions for procedures that address developmental or genetic anomalies or responses to historical accidents. By restricting federal funding, the bill aims to limit the availability of medical and surgical interventions related to gender transition.

Summary of Significant Issues

One major issue with the bill is its use of ambiguous language, particularly the phrase “disassociation from his or her sex,” which lacks clear definition. This vagueness could result in varying interpretations, leading to inconsistent enforcement and potentially affecting a broad spectrum of medical practices unintentionally.

Another area of concern is the bill’s broad prohibition against federal funding. The terms “directly or indirectly” could inadvertently impact entities that are not the intended targets, possibly affecting a range of medical services that are not related to gender transition.

The “Rule of Construction” clause, which allows exceptions related to genetic conditions or historical accidents, might lead to confusion. Without clear criteria, this could result in inconsistent determinations of what qualifies for exemptions, affecting healthcare providers' ability to deliver necessary services without losing federal funding.

Additionally, the definitions of “male” and “female” based purely on biological terms might not align with contemporary understandings of gender, potentially excluding or marginalizing intersex and gender-nonconforming individuals.

Public Impact

Broadly, the bill could significantly impact individuals seeking gender-affirming medical treatments, as it prohibits federal funding to entities providing these interventions. This may reduce the accessibility and availability of such treatments, impacting the lives of transgender individuals by potentially increasing barriers to obtaining surgeries or therapies associated with transition.

Healthcare providers and organizations could face financial challenges if they lose federal funding due to offering these services. Even entities offering services unrelated to gender transition could be indirectly affected due to the bill’s broad funding constraints.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Transgender Individuals: The bill could negatively impact transgender individuals by limiting their access to gender-affirming care paid for with federal funds. This demographic might face greater obstacles in receiving necessary medical services, affecting their wellbeing and quality of life.

Healthcare Providers: Providers who offer gender-affirming surgeries or treatments might experience financial strain if they rely on federal funding. They may need to restrict services or discontinue offering certain interventions to comply with the bill, limiting available care options for patients.

LGBTQ+ Advocacy Groups: These organizations may view the bill as a setback for transgender rights, as it could undermine access to healthcare services that align with an individual’s gender identity.

The bill, if enacted, would necessitate careful consideration of its broad impacts and potential unintended consequences. Policymakers and stakeholders might need to weigh the benefits of regulating federal funding against the risks of impeding access to necessary medical care.

Issues

  • The bill's use of the term 'disassociation from his or her sex' in Section 2 is considered vague and may require further definition to clarify what specific medical or surgical interventions are included. This lack of clarity could lead to inconsistent interpretations and applications of the law.

  • Section 2's prohibition on Federal funds could create ambiguity regarding which services and entities are affected. This could necessitate more precise language and definitions to ensure consistent enforcement and avoid affecting unintended services or entities.

  • The 'Rule of Construction' clause in Section 2 may cause confusion by leaving interpretation open regarding what constitutes a 'developmental or genetic anomaly or historical accident,' potentially leading to inconsistent application and understanding.

  • The term 'sex' defined as 'biological sex, either male or female' in Section 3 might be seen as overly simplistic or not inclusive of contemporary scientific understandings of sex and gender, potentially excluding intersex or gender-nonconforming individuals.

  • The broad phrasing 'directly or indirectly' regarding funding in Section 2 could unintentionally impact a wide variety of entities that may not be the primary targets of this provision.

  • The definitions for 'female' and 'male' in Section 3 include complex language, such as 'but for a developmental or genetic anomaly or historical accident,' which may be confusing or unclear, requiring further explanation for accurate understanding.

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

1. Short title Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The first section of the bill states that it can be referred to as the “Stopping the Mutilation of Children Act of 2024.”

2. Prohibition Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section prohibits the use of federal funds to support any entity that provides medical or surgical procedures to help a person change their sex. However, it allows funding for medical procedures related to developmental or genetic issues or due to historical accidents.

3. Definitions Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

This section defines the terms "female" and "male" based on reproductive systems that produce eggs and sperm, respectively. It also clarifies that "sex" refers to biological classifications of male and female.