A landmark ruling issued in Texas will allow a detransitioner’s lawsuit against her former therapist to move forward, overturning a statute of limitations defense that would have shielded the provider who signed off on a double mastectomy for a teenager.
Soren Aldaco was a struggling minor when transgender procedure providers offered her opposite-sex hormones. Then, when she was 19, surgeons removed both her breasts upon the recommendation of her then-therapist Barbara Wood. At the time Aldaco suffered from gender dysphoria and other mental illnesses, which Wood allegedly overlooked to secure Aldaco a mutilating double mastectomy.
The effects of the surgery were physically and mentally brutal. Excessive bruising and swelling, surgery site drains, and the evasive behavior of the surgery clinic’s staff took a toll, Aldaco said. The drastic, irreversible disfigurement she suffered at the hands of those she entrusted with her healing led her to seek damages.
‘Gross Negligence’
Aldaco filed a lawsuit against Wood and her employer in July 2023, alleging negligence and fraud. Although Wood had not counseled Aldaco for gender dysphoria, she had been more than willing to sign her over to surgeons for an irreversible transgender procedure, the suit claimed, one that did nothing to allay the young woman’s identity struggles.
The suit was heard in a trial court and a court of appeals, but those courts dismissed it on the grounds of the expired two-year statute of limitations. The disagreement revolved around the timeline of the required surgery recommendation letter Wood signed. The statute of limitations had expired by the time of the filing, the lower courts held, but Aldaco continued to appeal. Her lawyer argued that as the therapist who signed off on the irreversible, mutilating surgery, Wood should be held liable from the date of the surgery that caused harm, not from the date of the letter she signed recommending it. The surgery, not the letter, was what led to the permanent disfigurement Aldaco now lives with.
Supreme Court Win
Opening arguments were presented to the state’s Supreme Court in February. Near the end of June, Aldaco won her case.
According to the justices, Texas law allows two years for the filing of an injury claim, and notice was given within two years of Aldaco’s surgery. They reversed the court of appeals decision, leaving Aldaco free to sue Wood and Wood’s employer. The Texas high court’s ruling affirms that malpractice cases extend beyond the surgeons involved in transition treatment; practitioners who approve and encourage physical disfigurement as a treatment for mental health disorders are also legally culpable.
More significant, the Texas case clarifies that the timeline of a medical malpractice lawsuit does commence at the time the tort, or injury, occurred, but can extend back to practitioners involved in the approval process. The decision is particularly important for detransitioners seeking legal damages. The harms of transgender interventions are many and varied. Infertility, organ damage, blood changes, and a multitude of cancer risks are associated with opposite-sex hormone use. The mutilating surgeries are irreversible.
Patients harmed by the atrocities of transgender “medicine” may not experience the full effect for years, especially those coerced into treatment as minors. The legal system in Texas has taken a significant step in widening the net of accountability.
Gaining Momentum
Some providers are already reconsidering whether to perform transgender interventions, as detransitioner lawsuits gain ground in the courts. In May, a detransitioned woman privately settled with mental health providers who approved the surgical removal of her breasts, alleging only two telehealth appointments preceded the permanently disfiguring procedure. In January, detransitioner Fox Varian won a landmark lawsuit against the practitioners who approved and conducted her mutilating transgender surgery as a minor. Varian was awarded $2 million in damages.
Another high-profile lawsuit filed by detransitioner Chloe Brockman (Chloe Cole) will go to a jury trial in 2027 after an appeals court ruled against medical giant Kaiser Permanente’s “arbitration clause” defense last year. Cole is suing the medical giant for negligence involving transgender procedures by health providers at Kaiser facilities.
