New Zealand
New Zealand blood donation rules shift
One-size-fits-all assumptions about gay, bi, and takatāpui men to end
More gay, bi, and takatāpui men in Aotearoa may soon be able to donate blood, with New Zealand Blood Service changing its sexual activity screening rules in a move that shifts the focus away from sexuality and on to specific recent behavior.
For many queer people, the change represents a move away from treating all men who have sex with men as a single risk category. Instead, all donors will be asked the same questions about new or multiple sexual partners in the past three months, and whether they have had anal sex with those partners.
Under the new approach, donors who have had anal sex with a new or multiple partners in the past three months will still face a three-month deferral. But those who have not — and who meet all other eligibility criteria — will be able to donate. Donors will also be asked whether they have had gonorrhea or any other sexually transmitted infection in the past three months, with a three-month wait applying after treatment and recovery.
That change could open the door for some gay, bisexual, takatāpui and other men who have sex with men who were previously excluded from giving blood. In particular, men who have had anal sex with only one partner in the past three months, where that sexual contact has been ongoing for longer than three months, may now be eligible to donate, including those in long-term single-partner relationships.
For years, blood donation rules have been experienced not just as a public health measure, but as a blunt and often stigmatizing signal that queer men were viewed differently from everyone else. This change suggests a more nuanced approach, one that looks at what people do, rather than who they are, based on findings from the Sex and Prevention of Transmission Study (SPOTS) and international evidence supporting behavior-based screening.
New Zealand Blood Service says the new model will maintain the safety of the blood supply while making donation more inclusive.
Still, the new rules are not a complete removal of the restrictions, and some will see them as progress rather than full equity. The three-month deferral remains in place for donors who have had anal sex with a new or multiple partners, even if they are taking PrEP or using condoms. New Zealand Blood Service says that while PrEP is highly effective for HIV prevention, it can mask low levels of HIV during testing, and condoms are not considered completely fail-safe.
New Zealand
New Zealand High Court strikes down puberty blocker ban
Transgender advocacy group challenged government’s 2025 regulations
New Zealand’s High Court on Wednesday struck down regulations that banned new puberty blocker prescriptions for minors.
The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa Inc. challenged the Health Ministry over the regulations it adopted in 2025.
“The applicant successfully bought a claim for a breach of an obligation to consult under s 105 of the Medicines Act 1981 (Medicines Act),” says a press release that announced Justice Dale La Hood’s ruling. “The applicant was also successful in their claim that the minister unlawfully discriminated against young people with gender incongruence or gender dysphoria on the round of disability contrary to s 19 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Bill of Rights). The applicant’s claims that the minister abdicated his decision-making power to Cabinet and acted for an improper purpose were unsuccessful.”
“The court declined to separately determine the applicant’s claims that the minister made material mistakes of fact or that he reached an irrational decision,” added the press release. “The court also declined to determine whether there was discrimination on the basis of sex or whether the decision breached ss 8, 9 and 10 of the Bill of Rights.”
The Professional Association for Transgender Health Aotearoa welcomed the ruling.
“As clinicians, we see clearly the benefits of puberty blockers and the significant impact they have on the lives of young transgender people,” said Elizabeth McElrea, a doctor who is the advocacy group’s vice president, in a press release. “Decisions about this healthcare are best made by patients and their doctors. The removal of this regulation is crucial and puts that decision back in the consult room.”
“This judgment means that as clinicians we can continue to prescribe GnRH agonists in line with best practice and without fear of retribution for doing the right thing,” added McElrea.
-
Australia4 days agoAustralia’s first gay state governor takes office
-
Commentary3 days agoAre anti-trans campaigns lowering your cost of living?
-
California3 days agoL.A. LGBT Center used canvassing effort to reframe conversation around trans healthcare
-
U.S. Supreme Court3 days agoSupreme Court weighs religious exemptions to LGBTQ+ nondiscrimination protections in Colo. preschool case
-
California3 days agoXavier Becerra wins California governor’s race
-
Politics3 days agoDemocrats poised to flip House, opening door for expanded LGBTQ+ leadership
-
Politics4 days agoMichigan Senate race puts two sharply different LGBTQ+ records head to head
-
a&e features4 days agoIt’s time to get ‘Delulu’ with Ryan Lu
-
Commentary4 days agoLGBTQ+ History Month reminds us: the future we imagine can become reality
-
New Hampshire3 days agoChris Pappas elected to U.S. Senate