Source: Family First
MEDIA RELEASE – 17 December 2025
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.
The judge needs to listen to the testimony of two New Zealand ‘detransitioners’ – Issy and Zara. These are two young woman whose experiences speak directly to why GnHRa hormones (puberty blockers) and other cross-sex hormones are harmful, as too the current approach to gender dysphoria via WPATH, PATHA, and other activist groups. Their testimonies can be found on our website – www.FamilyFirst.nz
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.
ENDS
* WPATH
Early in 2024, internal files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) prove that the practice of transgender medicine is neither scientific nor medical. Internal files from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which purports to be a medical association that develops “standards” for transgender treatment, have shot to pieces the public line that its recommendations are governed by evidence and science. The “WPATH FILES” include emails and messages from an internal discussion forum by doctors, as well as statements from a video call of WPATH members which was leaked. The research group Environmental Progress analysed hundreds of pages of internal posts and videos.
