We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
New Zealand’s High Court has ruled its puberty blocker ban unlawful. We explain the decision, why it matters for trans+ young people and families, and the questions it raises for the UK.
On 21 October, the High Court of New Zealand ruled that the government’s ban on new puberty blocker prescriptions for trans+ and gender diverse young people was unlawful.
The ban, announced in November 2025, was paused by the court before it could start, after the Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa (PATHA) launched judicial review proceedings.
The final ruling found two major problems with the ban. Firstly, the government did not listen to the community it was impacting. It failed to consult properly and never spoke directly to gender diverse young people. The people most affected were completely left out of the conversation. The ban on puberty blockers was unfair.
Secondly, the court also found that it discriminated specifically against gender diverse young people, breaching the Bill of Rights. Puberty blockers are still used for other health needs for cisgender patients, but only trans+ young people were singled out.
It’s important to note that the court did not say that every limit is wrong, but it did state that a full ban on new patients went too far, noting that NZ trans+ young people already face a high risk of serious harm, including self-harm and suicide.
Submitted in the case was a paper by Dr Natacha Kennedy, titled Harming Children, the effects of the UK puberty blocker ban, in which she presents an analysis of the consequences of the UK puberty blocker ban on trans and non-binary children. It reveals “very serious adverse effects, less than a year after its imposition, including sharply declining mental health, increased depression, social isolation, anxiety, stress, self-harm, school avoidance and suicide ideation.”
While this is a win worth celebrating, especially during this era of global pushbacks and attacks on trans+ healthcare, this should be seen as a significant pause, not the finish line. The New Zealand government has said that it still wants new safeguards put in place, and New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has called for an immediate appeal.
So, does this change anything in the UK with regard to access to puberty blockers for trans+ young people? Not in the short term. A New Zealand court cannot change UK law. So if you or your child are waiting to access them, nothing will shift overnight, and we at Anne Health know how hard that is to hear. Nevertheless, this case matters.
New Zealand said it was following the UK’s lead when it introduced its ban on access to Puberty Blockers, citing the much-contested Cass Review. The UK halted access to puberty blockers for gender care for trans+ young people in March 2024, and later made that ban indefinite, despite 59% of respondents opposing the ban in a targeted consultation. Now, a court has found serious problems with a ban built on that approach.
This raises important questions for the UK. Were trans young people listened to? If not, why not? And is it right or justifiable to treat trans+ patients differently from everyone else?
In the UK, the PATHWAYS trial is currently the only legal way for trans+ young people to access puberty blockers through UK-based prescribers. However, many trans+ people, parents and health experts have expressed concern that that’s not the answer it’s made out to be. The trial is limited to a tiny sample of 226 young people, while more than 6,000 are currently sitting on waiting lists.
Most families will never be offered a place, and even if they are accepted to the trial, a place is not a promise of treatment. Young people are randomly split into two groups. One starts puberty blockers straight away, whilst the other waits a year before being able to start the medication. That means a young person can go through the whole process and still wait, while puberty carries on.
On top of this, young people face more than 13 hours of assessments and around 50 forms, including questions on trauma and suicide, before treatment. This is an extremely heavy process to ask of a child, and of the parents beside them, even more so when bearing in mind that half the trial participants will still not be able to access puberty blockers for a year.
The trial itself has had a troubled start: it was paused in February 2026 after the medicines regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), raised safety concerns, then allowed to resume with a new minimum age of 11 or 12 depending on sex registered at birth, and only began recruiting in August after the High Court threw out a legal challenge.
Three leading trans health organisations, the European, World and US Professional Associations for Transgender Health, have warned that some families may feel forced to join because there is no other route to gain access for their child expressing signs of distress, expressing concern that this puts research goals ahead of young people’s wellbeing.
Despite these criticisms, the UK government says the trial passed strict scientific and ethical checks. Dr Hilary Cass, who led the controversial UK review, has also defended the trial, saying more children will be harmed without it.
In understanding the banning of puberty blockers for trans+ young people, it’s important to recognise that these bans are often linked. Many governments are leaning on each other’s decisions; some are watching, others are copying. For instance, the Northern Territory in Australia pointed to New Zealand’s ruling when it announced its own ban. Queensland has paused treatment until 2031, when the UK trial results are due.
Queensland has also pointed to restrictions in France, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Sweden. This is important because when one is challenged in court, the rest should also be looked at again. If one government’s policy rests on another country’s decision, what happens when that decision is overturned?
This latest ruling by the New Zealand High Court is by no means the finish line, but it most definitely highlights glaring issues with how these bans on life-saving gender-affirming care are implemented.
Especially how trans+ people are rarely, if ever, at the table while such sweeping decisions are made that heavily impact their lives and wellbeing.
If you’re trans+ and experiencing thoughts about self-harm or suicide, please know that there are people who can listen and help. Below are some incredible UK-based organisations; please reach out to them if you need to speak to someone. You are not alone.
Call 0800 0119 100
Open 10am–10pm daily
Call 01273 234839
Call 116 123
Free, day or night
Take the first step with Anne Health.
We’re here to guide and support you with inclusive, gender-affirming care built around you.