Testimonial Response:
Intro:
Good afternoon members of the House Health and Human Services committee. My name is Ren Q. Dawe, and I am a proud member of Rocky Mountain Equality’s Trans Steering Committee. I am also a trans person whose life was saved by gender-affirming care. I am testifying today in opposition to HB 25-1068, because it is a direct attack on the ability of trans youth to access medically necessary care, and on the providers who serve them.
Gender-affirming care is not experimental, and it’s not controversial within the medical community. It is supported by every single major medical association as evidence-based and lifesaving.
What the bill does:
This bill doesn’t just restrict care—it scares doctors out of providing it. By allowing malpractice insurers to deny coverage, cancel policies, or impose penalties on providers who offer gender-affirming care, HB 25-1068 is a backdoor ban on care for trans youth.
We have already seen the chilling effect of similar policies in other states—clinics shutting down, doctors leaving and ceasing to offer gender-affirming care.Â
Let’s be clear: banning gender-affirming care doesn’t stop trans people from existing. It just makes life harder, riskier, and more painful in what is already a sensitive decision for families.
State-run hospitals like those in Pueblo and Fort Logan could lose malpractice coverage, forcing them to cut care or spend more taxpayer dollars finding alternative options elsewhere.
Ask:
I am standing here today because I received the care I needed. Trans youth deserve the same access to medically necessary care as any other child in Colorado. No insurance company should have the power to decide which kids get healthcare and which kids don’t.
I urge you to vote NO on HB 25-1068 and stand on the side of medical freedom, patient rights, and the well-being of Colorado’s youth.
NOTES:
Summary of HB 25-1068:
This bill would allow medical malpractice insurance companies to discriminate against healthcare providers who offer gender-affirming care to minors by doing the following:
Denying coverage – They could refuse to provide malpractice insurance to doctors or clinics that offer gender-affirming care.
Canceling policies – If a provider already has insurance, the company could terminate their coverage.
Refusing to renew coverage – If a provider’s policy is up for renewal, the insurer could decline to continue coverage.
Imposing penalties – Insurers could raise rates, impose fines, or create other financial burdens for providers who offer gender-affirming care to minors.
Additionally, the bill prohibits malpractice insurers from using state funds to cover policies that insure providers offering gender-affirming care to minors.
Why It Matters:
Financial/legal pressure on providersÂ
This bill would make it harder and more expensive for doctors and clinics to provide gender-affirming care to minors, potentially forcing them to stop offering these services.
Possible reduction in accessÂ
If fewer providers in Colorado offer gender-affirming care due to loss of malpractice insurance, families may have to seek care out-of-state, increasing costs and logistical barriers.
State budget implications
Colorado’s Medicaid program (HCPF) may need to cover travel and out-of-state care costs for minors who can no longer access gender-affirming care locally.
Impact on state hospitals
Public mental health hospitals (like those in Pueblo and Fort Logan) that offer gender-affirming care could also face challenges if their malpractice insurance is affected.
Key Points:
The bill targets doctors and facilities providing gender-affirming care to minors by allowing insurers to deny them malpractice coverage.
If passed, this could limit access to gender-affirming care for minors in Colorado.
It may increase costs for the state, as Medicaid might have to fund out-of-state care.
State-run health facilities could lose insurance coverage, creating new financial burdens.