New Zealand’s government has ignited a nationwide debate after announcing a halt on new prescriptions of puberty blockers for young people with gender dysphoria, a move that echoes recent policy shifts in the United Kingdom and several Nordic countries. The decision, revealed on November 19, 2025, by Health Minister Simeon Brown, will take effect from December 19, 2025, and has already drawn strong reactions from across the political spectrum, the medical community, and transgender advocacy groups.
According to RNZ, Brown described the pause as a “precautionary approach” while the world awaits the results of a major clinical trial in the United Kingdom, expected to conclude in 2031. “These changes are about ensuring treatments are safe and carefully managed, while maintaining access to care for those who need it,” Brown explained in a public statement. He emphasized that the new rules would give families confidence that any treatment prescribed is “clinically sound and in the best interests of the young person.”
Puberty blockers—specifically, gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues—are at the center of the debate. While the new policy suspends new prescriptions for gender dysphoria, it still allows ongoing access for those already using the medication and for other medical conditions such as early-onset puberty, endometriosis, and prostate cancer. Existing youth gender services will remain in place, with information consolidated into a national online hub to support families and young people navigating the healthcare system.
Brown’s announcement closely follows the UK’s Cass Review, a comprehensive four-year investigation commissioned by the National Health Service (NHS) and published in April 2024. The Cass Review, led by pediatrician Dr. Hilary Cass, concluded that the evidence base for gender-affirming medicine was “remarkably weak,” with study results often misrepresented by advocates on all sides of the debate. The review called for a formal clinical trial to rigorously test whether puberty blockers are safe and effective for young people—a trial now underway at King’s College London, set to run until 2031.
In the wake of the Cass Review, the UK government banned private prescriptions of puberty blockers for trans youth, a policy that was extended indefinitely in December 2024. Sweden, Finland, and Norway have also tightened access and guidelines for these treatments. Brown stated that New Zealand’s Cabinet “decided to align our approach with the UK” and would wait for the UK trial’s clinical evidence before reconsidering any decisions.
“When it comes to children’s health, clinical evidence must guide decisions to ensure any medicine given to young Kiwis is proven, safe and effective,” Brown wrote in a statement shared on X.com. He added, “The independent Cass Review, commissioned by the UK’s NHS, identified considerable uncertainty about the long-term safety and clinical effectiveness of hormone-suppressing treatments for gender dysphoria or incongruence. This wasn’t a political review, it was clinical.”
New Zealand’s Ministry of Health reached similar conclusions in a November 2024 report, which found “significant limitations in the quality of evidence regarding both benefits and risks when hormone-suppressing treatments are used for the treatment of gender dysphoria or incongruence.”
Reactions to the government’s decision have been swift and polarized. According to RNZ, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters claimed his party was the only one to campaign on stopping the use of puberty blockers in children, calling the government’s move “commonsense.” The ACT party’s children’s spokesperson, Karen Chhour, declared the decision a victory for science, evidence, and the safety of children, stating, “I believe young people should be supported to love themselves, not change themselves with experimental medication.”
On the other hand, Green Party MP Ricardo Menéndez March accused the government of “buying into imported culture wars” and targeting trans people on the eve of Transgender Day of Remembrance. “We know from queer people that gender affirming healthcare can be life-saving,” he told RNZ. “The government should focus on addressing the core issues that our health system faces... rather than waging culture wars on trans people.”
The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa (PATHA) has been especially critical of both the Cass Review and the government’s response. PATHA president Jennifer Shields told RNZ that the Cass Review “did not include trans or non-binary experts or clinicians experienced in providing gender affirming care in its decision-making, conclusions, or findings.” She further noted, “Instead, a number of people involved in the review and the advisory group previously advocated for bans on gender affirming care in the United States, and have promoted non-affirming ‘gender exploratory therapy’, which is considered a conversion practice.”
PATHA’s vice-president, Dr. Elizabeth McElrea, issued a strong warning about the impact of the ban: “The ban will lead to a deterioration in mental health, increased risk of suicidality and increased dysphoria in gender diverse children and young people, and will put them at a higher risk of experiencing marginalisation and discrimination.” She emphasized, “The prescribing of puberty blockers is always undertaken with the utmost care and consideration. They have been prescribed safely for decades for transgender children and banning their use will lead to profound distress in this already vulnerable group.”
McElrea also highlighted the importance of clinical experience and patient preferences in evidence-based medicine, arguing, “Practising medicine, and paediatric medicine (not just within gender affirming healthcare), often necessitates providing care without a high-quality evidence base. The absence of high-quality clinical evidence does not mean providing this care is wrong.”
Within the medical community, opinions are divided. Youth health specialist Dame Sue Bagshaw told RNZ she believes puberty blockers are safe and reversible, cautioning against any “moral panic.” Public health expert and Otago University emeritus professor Charlotte Paul, however, said the Cass Review’s findings should give New Zealand clinicians “pause for thought,” suggesting that some had abandoned “normal standards of informed consent for children.”
The Cass Review itself has not escaped scrutiny. According to PinkNews, the British Medical Association and other organizations have criticized the review as “deeply flawed,” citing what they describe as a “selective and inconsistent use of evidence.” Despite these criticisms, the review’s recommendations have reshaped policy in the UK and now in New Zealand.
For now, the conversation in New Zealand is far from settled. The government has promised that existing youth gender services will remain available, and families are being directed to a new national online hub for information. As the international clinical trial continues and debate simmers at home, many will be watching closely to see how the policy affects the lives of transgender youth and the broader healthcare landscape.
The next several years will test the government’s gamble on caution and evidence, as well as the resilience and needs of those directly affected by the pause. The world will be watching—and waiting—for the data that could shape the future of gender-affirming care.
