The V Chamber of the National Court of Appeals in Federal Administrative Litigation has just suspended, until a final ruling exists, the effects of DNU 62/2025. The measure had prohibited minors under eighteen from accessing hormonal treatments and surgical interventions to adapt their bodies to a self-perceived gender identity. The Chamber revoked the first instance rejection and re-enabled the previous regime while the trial continues. This is a severe setback in the defense of the most vulnerable.
It must be said without hesitation: the judicial decision once again exposes children and adolescents to medical interventions with consequences that, in many cases, are irreversible. The decree sought to restore common sense: to set a firm limit against hormonal treatments and irreversible sex change interventions in minors. Before the age of eighteen, the State must protect and preserve the physical, sexual, psychological, and moral integrity of Argentines.
For years, the validity of the Gender Identity Law of 2012 introduced a foreign agenda in Argentina where we abandoned biology. But when this cultural experiment crossed the boundaries of minority age, the issue took on the dimension of a public health tragedy. The Law went much further than what people know. Article 11 allowed minors to access hormonal treatments with the consent of parents or guardians and also contemplated surgeries, in this latter case with judicial intervention. Additionally, it required the public system, social security, and private health insurance to guarantee these services and incorporate them into the Mandatory Medical Plan. We are not talking about an ideological discussion, but about a law, a policy funded by all Argentines.
When the DNU was issued, progressives first claimed that rights were being suppressed. Then they said that the Government was prohibiting something that supposedly was not happening. The very judicial files that halted the DNU contradict this. One case involved a teenager who had received hormonal blockers since the age of twelve and then testosterone from the age of fifteen; another involved a seventeen-year-old who was already receiving testosterone and had a mastectomy indicated. The Justice ordered to continue or cover both practices. Interventions in minors were indeed occurring.
It is also not true that the Government's caution is an Argentine "whim." The most comprehensive systematic reviews available conclude that there is a lack of quality research on blockers and masculinizing or feminizing hormones in adolescents. For blockers, no firm conclusions can be drawn about dysphoria, mental health, cognitive development, or fertility. For hormones, the evidence of psychological benefits is limited and mainly short-term; uncertainties about fertility, bones, and cardiometabolic effects persist.
The National Academy of Medicine of Buenos Aires also stated in 2025 that it does not endorse these treatments in minors and recommended a comprehensive approach, focused on children, their families, relationships, and the support of mental health services.
