Ohio Rep: Ending Trans Care Will Make Trans Youth "Less Of An Issue"

The Republican Representative, who was the prime sponsor of Ohio's bathroom ban targeting trans youth and some adults, implied that a gender affirming care ban would mean fewer trans youth.

Ohio has become increasingly hostile territory for transgender people. The state has already enacted laws banning gender-affirming care for transgender youth and barring transgender athletes from participating in sports, while also refusing Medicaid coverage for transition-related care for individuals of any age. Last week, Ohio went even further, passing one of the nation’s harshest bathroom bans. The new law bars transgender youth and adults from using bathrooms matching their gender identity on college campuses, including private institutions. Over the weekend, the bill’s sponsor, when pressed on the practicality of enforcing such a ban against transgender youth, suggested that the legislature’s decision to prohibit gender-affirming care would make transgender youth “less of an issue” in bathrooms—a chilling implication that restricting care was meant to reduce the number of transgender youth in the state.

Representative Adam Bird, the sponsor of Ohio’s new transgender bathroom ban, appeared on CNN with Borris Sanchez and was asked about its impact on transgender students. Sanchez pressed him: “What about the concerns of transgender students who feel that it’s a difficult time for them to find privacy when they have to use the bathroom for a gender they don’t identify with… it can trigger harassment in most cases, what would you say to those folks?”

Bird responded, “Certainly the concern there is real, I understand that. I think there may be the practical offshoot of this legislation will mean there will probably be more construction across Ohio of single-use restrooms,” despite the law containing no provisions requiring such construction. He then added, “But then there’s also the point that in Ohio, we passed a bill that said we were not going to allow chemical castration or gender mutilation surgery anymore for those under 18, so I think that will become less of an issue over time,” suggesting that the state’s prohibition on gender-affirming care for minors would lead to fewer transgender youth in Ohio, effectively reducing the population impacted by the bathroom ban.

You can watch the exchange here, first reported by senior reporter at The Independent Justin Baragona:

The statement is alarming, given what is known about the devastating impact of gender-affirming care bans on transgender people. A recent CDC study revealed that 25% of transgender youth have attempted suicide in the past year, many requiring medical intervention. Likewise, a landmark study in the prestigious journal Nature Human Behavior demonstrated that anti-trans laws causally increase suicide attempts among transgender youth by as much as 73% in certain states. When Bird says transgender youth would “become less of an issue,” it’s hard not to interpret his remarks as either celebrating or at least callously acknowledging this grim reality.

The statement echoes sentiments expressed during an earlier Twitter space meeting between Ohio and Michigan Republicans, where they discussed strategies for targeting transgender people through legislation. In that meeting, Representative Gary Click, author of several anti-trans bills in Ohio, openly confirmed that the “endgame” of their proposed laws was to “stop this for anyone,” referring to gender-affirming care at any age. Click elaborated on the approach, stating, “That’s a very smart thought there. I think what we know legislatively is we have to take small bites… We have to take one bite at a time, do it incrementally.”

A more charitable interpretation of Bird’s words is the assumption that transgender youth will cease to be transgender if they cannot access gender-affirming care. This sentiment was echoed throughout the campaign in rhetoric about school officials "transitioning" students, with Trump himself making the outlandish claim that schools would perform sex-change operations on cisgender youth and send them home as a different gender—a claim both absurd and unfounded, particularly given the strained budgets of school nurses and the total lack of evidence. Even under this interpretation, however, denying medical transition does not make transgender youth cisgender; it forces them to endure untreated gender dysphoria, often with devastating consequences.

Ohio’s bathroom ban takes effect on February 25th, giving transgender people in the state just 90 days to figure out how to navigate schools and college campuses under the new restrictions. Transgender students and faculty will still exist—they will simply face heightened scrutiny, harassment, and the impossible task of planning around facilities that now legally exclude them. If transgender people do become “less of a problem,” it won’t be because these laws erased their identities; it will be because they were forced to flee the state or endure far worse consequences.