By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use.
The psychology professor has some questionable beliefs and a retracted study.
On Tuesday, Missouri’s defense of its ban on gender-affirming care for minors faced a significant challenge as its expert witness, John Michael Bailey, came under intense scrutiny during cross-examination. The trial centers on a 2023 law that prohibits puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors, and the outcome could impact the future of transgender health care in the state.
Bailey, a psychology professor from Northwestern University, testified in favor of the ban, citing his research on “rapid onset gender dysphoria,” a discredited theory suggesting social influences lead to youth identifying as transgender. Bailey’s study was retracted due to ethical issues, including improper informed consent and reliance on unverified online sources.
The Missouri Independent reports that Bailey’s credibility was further questioned when he admitted to publicly supporting Jerry Sandusky, the convicted child molester, who was sentenced for crimes he committed while working at Penn State’s football program. In an exchange with Wright County Circuit Court Judge Craig Carter, Bailey affirmed his belief that Sandusky’s accusers had lied. “You believe the people testifying against Jerry Sandusky are lying?” Carter asked. Bailey responded, “I can see that if you are not familiar with the evidence that I am familiar with, you would be shocked.” This response cast doubt on Bailey’s reliability as an expert witness.
The trial is part of a broader national battle over access to gender-affirming care. According to KFF, 26 states have enacted laws or policies restricting access to gender-affirming care for minors, impacting 39 percent of transgender young people aged 13 to 17. Many of these laws, like Missouri’s, face legal challenges. Currently, 17 states are involved in lawsuits over such restrictions, and 24 states impose legal or professional penalties on healthcare providers offering gender-affirming care to minors.
The U.S. Supreme Court will review Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care in U.S. v. Jonathan Skrmetti et al. during its current term that will begin Monday. The ruling could have far-reaching implications for states like Missouri, which are part of a growing movement to limit trans health care.
LGBTQ+ advocates argue that gender-affirming care, which leading medical organizations endorse, is essential and life-saving.
