A group of Democrats on the House and Senate armed services committees want to know who sat on the expert panel that helped draft Defense Secretary Jim Mattis’ new transgender policy.
The Pentagon panel’s conclusions about the fitness of transgender people to serve in the military are at odds with outside medical associations and experts, who have challenged the underlying scientific basis for excluding most, according to a letter to the secretary from Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking members on the committees.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., also signed the letter.
Mattis unveiled a 44-page review of transgender service drafted by the panel and a set of recommendations that bars transgender people diagnosed with gender dysphoria or have undergone hormone treatment and surgery from enlisting. Troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria could stay as long as they do not seek such treatment.
“Although you state that the panel received input from civilian medical professionals, the recommendations appear to us to be inconsistent with what we have heard from the civilian medical community,” the lawmakers wrote. “Numerous recognized experts, former military officials and Surgeons General, and organizations representing medical professionals have released statements criticizing the Report’s recommendations and the underlying scientific basis for these recommendations.”
The Democrats asked Mattis to name the members of the panel and who they consulted with. The Pentagon did not name the panel in its released transgender review.
The American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association have called the Pentagon’s proposed transgender policy discriminating. The American Medical Association also opposes the policy and wrote a letter to Mattis questioning the scientific basis.
For now, the Pentagon’s new transgender policy remains on hold as the Trump administration battles transgender troops and rights groups in federal district court. Four federal judges have granted injunctions that block any policy change while lawsuits are being heard.
