A new study by the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law finds that over half of providers in states where gender-affirming care remains accessible for minors reported that the demand for care from adults (54%) and youth (55%) at their practice had increased due to recent legislation limiting access to care.
About one-third (31%) of providers who saw out-of-state clients said that those clients sought care due to restrictive laws in their own states.
Using data collected anonymously from 133 gender-affirming care providers in the fall of 2024, researchers examined the professional and personal experiences and challenges facing providers primarily in states that, at the time of data collection, had not enacted any legislation restricting or banning the provision of gender-affirming care to youth or adults.
Results show that almost half (47%) of respondents sought to become more visible as gender-affirming care providers due to the legislation affecting this care. However, as a result of the legislation, approximately 80% reported heightened levels of stress, over three-quarters experienced increased anxiety (77%), and more than half noted elevated depression (53%).
About one-quarter of providers had been personally threatened online (26%), and nearly one-third said their workplace had received threats related to their provision of gender-affirming care (29%).
“In recent years, gender-affirming care has become heavily politicized, and efforts to limit access, particularly for youth, have put providers under considerable stress,” said lead author Abbie E. Goldberg, Affiliated Scholar at the Williams Institute and Professor of Psychology at Clark University. “This study finds that gender-affirming care providers are committed to delivering high-quality, evidence-based care to their patients. Therefore, it is essential for workplaces to establish policies and procedures that ensure their safety and well-being.”
On average, the providers surveyed reported feeling personally burned out or experiencing work burnout about half the time (55% and 49%, respectively). They experienced lower levels of burnout associated with their actual interactions with clients. On average, participants experienced client burnout 29% of the time.