This Was Inadvertent
Policymaking, a masterclass
Some excerpts, from various sources:
20 January 2025, my submission:
I am responding to the Ministry of Health public consultation about puberty blockers, and wish to express my not-inconsiderable concern about the prospect of additional restrictions on the use of these medications by transgender youth.
I am a transgender woman who transitioned in my early 20s, too old for adolescent gender care. However, I feel obliged to respond to this consultation for two key reasons: because I wish to preserve the access to needed medication for future generations more fortunate than myself; but also for self-interested reasons, as the distinction between gender affirming treatment for adolescents and adults is much less than has been implied and so changes here will have ramifications for my own treatment.
[…]
What is your main interest in the consultation topic?
Other: I am an adult transgender woman who takes the same class of drugs for the same basic purpose under the same legal framework.
17 November 2025, Order in Council, explanatory note:
These regulations, which come into force on 19 December 2025, amend the Medicines Regulations 1984. The first amendment inserts a new regulation that restricts authorised prescribers prescribing prescription medicines that are gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues. The prescription medicines may not be prescribed for the treatment of gender incongruence or gender dysphoria. The second amendment makes it an offence, punishable on conviction by a fine not exceeding $500, for an authorised prescriber to breach the restriction.
1 December 2025, Order in Council, explanatory note:
The Medicines (Restriction on Prescribing Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Analogues) Amendment Regulations 2025 restricted authorised prescribers prescribing prescription medicines that are gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues. The prescription medicines may not be prescribed for the treatment of gender incongruence or gender dysphoria. This was not specifically limited to puberty suppression, and could also include adults undergoing transition. This was inadvertent.
The original version of the regulation did include a grandfather clause, meaning that I was not about to lose access to my medication: it’s not for myself that I’ve been so upset about all this, and what remains after the amendment is still awful legislation. But when there’s a little oopsie like this it’s hard not to wonder if what you submit to consultation actually gets read.
As and when legal challenges ask for support overturning this, please help them.