Endocrinology · testified for the side defending the laws
Across expert reports, declarations, and deposition testimony filed between 2020 and 2024, Michael K. Laidlaw, M.D. consistently argues that gender dysphoria is a psychological diagnosis with no objective biological marker, that biological sex itself cannot be changed by any current medical technology, and that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries carry serious, often irreversible physical risks (infertility, sterilization, hyperandrogenism-related harms, reduced bone density) that outweigh a weak evidentiary base for benefit. He repeatedly characterizes WPATH and the Endocrine Society as advocacy bodies whose standards of care reflect political and liability considerations rather than rigorous, GRADE-compliant science, a critique that sharpened in his October 2024 supplemental report after he reviewed internal WPATH/HHS discovery documents. He maintains that minors (and, in his view, their parents) cannot meaningfully consent to interventions whose long-term consequences a child cannot yet grasp. Under oath, he has acknowledged the limits of his own primary-research record on gender dysphoria and his outsider relationship to WPATH and its guideline-writing process, while continuing to defend his substantive critiques of the desistance literature, the Dhejne suicide-rate study, and WPATH's Standards of Care 8.
Cases and documents
The documents are listed as the archive holds them. A document labeled with its kind alone, such as "Expert report", is one the archive attributes to the expert. One labeled "Mentions or contains" names the expert or includes the expert's testimony, and is not attributed to the expert.
Exhibit 128 - Memo Outlining Evidence for Change for Gender Identity Disorder in the DSM-5, 2013 Zucker, et al.
Exhibit 129 - A Developmental, Biopsychosocial Model for the Treatment of Children with Gender Identity Disorder, 2012 Zucker
Exhibit 130 - APA Statement on Zucker (2008)
Exhibit 131 - Working for Inclusion: Time for Congress to Enact Federal Legislation to Address Workplace Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Americans, Briefing Report
Exhibit 132 - Position Statement on Conversion Therapy, APA (Dec. 2018)
Exhibit 133 - Do Clinical Data from Transgender Adolescents Support the Phenomenon of Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, 2022 Bauer et al.
Exhibit 134 - American Society of Plastic Surgeons, State Focus on Gender Affirmation Intensifies, Feb. 25, 2021,
Exhibit 135 - Plastic surgeon: Sex-change operation utterly unacceptable and a form of child abuse, Sept. 9, 2019,
Exhibit 136 - Transphobic tweets linked to Oxford sociology professor, The Oxford Student (Oct. 26, 2018)
Exhibit 137 - Long-term outcomes of the treatment of central precocious puberty, 2016 Guaraldi, et al.
Exhibit 138 - Fertility of Women Treated during Childhood with Triptorelin (Depot Formulation) for Central Precocious Puberty, 2021 Martinerie, et al.
Exhibit 140 - Gender Identity 5 Years After Social Transition, 2022 Olson et al.
Exhibit 141 - Puberty Suppression in Adolescents With Gender Identity Disorder, 2011 de Vries, et al.
Exhibit 142 - Understanding the Well-Being of LGBTQI+ Populations, 2020 Natl Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Exhibit 143 - The Health of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People, 2011 Natl Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
Exhibit 144 - The Right to the Best Care for Children Does Not Include the Right to Medical Transition, 2019 Laidlaw, et al.
Exhibit 145 - Strangers in a Strange Land, 2020 Donovan & Sotomayor
Exhibit 146 - Effect of antidepressant medications on semen parameters and male fertility, 2020 Beeder & Samplaski
Exhibit 147 - The effect of antidepressants on fertility, 2016 Casilla-Lennon, et al.
Exhibit 148 - Trends in Gender-affirming Surgery in Insured Patients in the U.S., 2018 Lane et al.
Exhibit 149 - Gender-Affirming Treatment of Gender Dysphoria in Youth, 2022 Clayton et al.
Exhibit 150 - AAP News, Risk of Pseudotumor Cerebri added to Labeling for Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists, (2022)
Exhibit 151 - Longitudinal Impact of Gender-Affirming Endocrine Intervention on the Mental Health and Well-Being of Transgender Youths, 2020 Achille et al.
Exhibit 152 - Long-Term Effect of Gender-Affirming Hormone Treatment on Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Transgender People, 2020 Aldridge et al.
Exhibit 153 - Off-Label Medication use in Children, More Common than We Think: A Systematic Review of the Literature, 2018 Allen et al.
Exhibit 154 - Association Between Gender-Affirming Surgeries and Mental Health Outcomes, 2021 Almazan et al.
Exhibit 155 - Top Surgery and Chest Dysphoria Among Transmasculine and Nonbinary Adolescents and Young Adults, 2022 Ascha et al.
Exhibit 156 - Hormone Therapy, Mental Health, and Quality of Life Among Transgender People: A Systematic Review, 2021 Baker et al.
Exhibit 157 - GRADE Guidelines: 3 Rating the Quality of Evidence, 2011 Balshem et al.
Exhibit 158 - Harry Benjamin, The Transsexual Phenomenon (1966)
Exhibit 159 - Anabolic Steroid Abuse and Dependence, 2002 Brower et al.
Exhibit 160 - Transgender and Gender-Nonbinary Patient Satisfaction after Transmasculine Chest Surgery, 2021 Bustos et al.
Exhibit 161 - Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis of Prevalence, 2021 Bustos et al.
Exhibit 162 - Effects of Long-Term Exogenous Testosterone Administration on Ovarian Morphology, Determined by Transvaginal (3D) Ultrasound in Female-to-Male Transsexuals, 2017 Caanen et al.
Exhibit 163 - Short-term Outcomes of Pubertal Suppression in a Selected Cohort of 12 to 15 Year Old Young People with Persistent Gender Dysphoria in the UK, 2021 Carmichael at al.
Exhibit 164 - Psychosocial Functioning in Transgender Youth after 2 Years of Hormones, 2023 Chen et al.
Exhibit 165 - Pubertal Delay as an Aid in Diagnosis and Treatment of a Transsexual Adolescent, 1998 Cohen-Kettenis & van Goozen
Exhibit 166 - Hormonal Treatment Reduces Psychobiological Distress in Gender Identity Disorder, Independently of the Attachment Style, 2013 Colizzi et al.
Exhibit 167 - Psychological Support, Puberty Suppression, and Psychosocial Functioning in Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria, 2015 Costa et al.
Exhibit 168 - Young Adult Psychological Outcome After Puberty Suppression and Gender Reassignment, 2014 de Vries et al.
Exhibit 169 - An Analysis of All Applications for Sex Reassignment Surgery in Sweden, 1960-2010: Prevalence, Incidence, and Regrets, 2014 Dhejne et al.
Exhibit 170 - Gender Nonconforming Youth: Current Perspectives, 2017 Ehrensaft
Exhibit 171 - What makes clinical research ethical?, 2000 Emanuel et al.
Exhibit 172 - Treatment of Central Precocious Puberty, 2019 Eugster
Exhibit 173 - Cross-Sex Hormone Treatment and Psychobiological Changes in Transsexual Persons: Two-Year Follow-Up Data, 2016 Fisher et al.
Exhibit 174 - Chest Surgery in Female to Male Transgender Individuals, 2017 Frederick et al.
Exhibit 175 - Off-Label Use of Drugs in Children, 2014 Galinkin et al.
Exhibit 176 - Association of Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy With Depression, Thoughts of Suicide, and Attempted Suicide Among Transgender and Nonbinary Youth, 2022 Green
Exhibit 178 - Satisfaction with Male-to-Female Gender Reassignment Surgery, 2014 Hess et al.
Exhibit 179 - Effects of Different Steps in Gender Reassignment Therapy on Psychopathology, 2014 Heylens, et al.
Exhibit 180 - Supporting Sexuality and Improving Sexual Function in Transgender Persons, 2019 Holmberg et al.
Exhibit 181 - Outcome of Vaginoplasty in Male-to-Female Transgenders: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques, 2015 Horbach et al.
Exhibit 182 - The Quality of Evidence for Medical Interventions Does Not Improve or Worsen: A Metaepidemiological Study of Cochrane Reviews, 2020 Howick et al.
Exhibit 183 - Testosterone Treatment and MMPI2 Improvement in Transgender Men, 2015 Keo-Meier et al.
Exhibit 184 - Bone Mass in Young Adulthood Following Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analog Treatment and Cross-Sex Hormone Treatment in Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria, 2015 Klink et al.
Exhibit 185 - Fertility Options in Transgender and Gender Diverse Adolescents, 2017 Knudson & De Sutter
Exhibit 186 - Australian Children and Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria, 2021 Kozlowska et al.
Exhibit 187 - Body Dissatisfaction and Mental Health Outcomes of Youth on Gender-Affirming Hormone Therapy, 2020 Kuper et al.
Exhibit 188 - Transgender Men Who Experienced Pregnancy After Female-to-Male Gender Transitioning, 2014 Light, et al.
Exhibit 189 - Psychosocial Assessment in Transgender Adolescents, 2020 Lopez de Lara.
Exhibit 190 - Christy Mallory et al., Conversion Therapy and LGBT Youth 2 (2019 ed.)
Exhibit 191 - Successful Oocyte Cryopreservation Using Letrozole as an Adjunct to Stimulation in a Transgender Adolescent after GnRH Agonist Suppression, 2021 Martin et al.
Exhibit 192 - Experience of Chest Dysphoria and Masculinizing Chest Surgery in Transmasculine Youth, 2021 Mehringer et al.
Exhibit 193 - Breast Augmentation in Male-to-Female Transgender Patients: Technical Considerations and Outcomes, 2019 Miller et al.
Exhibit 194 - Guiding the ConversationTypes of Regret after Gender-Affirming Surgery and Their Associated Etiologies, 2021 Narayan et al.
Exhibit 195 - Individual Treatment Progress Predicts Satisfaction with Transition-Related Care for Youth with Gender Dysphoria, 2021 Nieder et al.
Exhibit 196 - Sexual Experiences in Transgender People, 2018 Nikkelen & Baudewijntje.
Exhibit 197 - Quality of Life of Treatment-Seeking Transgender Adults, 2018 Nobili et al.
Exhibit 198 - Chest Reconstruction and Chest Dysphoria in Transmasculine Minors and Young Adults: Comparisons of Nonsurgical and Postsurgical Cohorts, 2018 Olson-Kennedy et al.
Exhibit 199 - Mental Health of Transgender Children Who Are Supported in Their Identities, 2016 Olson, et al.
Exhibit 200 - Association Between Gender Confirmation Treatments and Perceived Gender Congruence, Body Image Satisfaction, and Mental Health in a Cohort of Transgender Individuals, 2018 Owen-Smith, et al.
Exhibit 299 - (Redacted) Email communication between AHCA and Magellan regarding coverage of GnRH to treat gender dysphoria
Exhibit 300 - AHCA communication regarding the Special Services Criteria for puberty blockers 6/10/2022
Exhibit 301 - Communication between Jason Weida and Dr. Van Mol about a witness for the July 8th hearing 6/14/2022
Exhibit 302 - Email communication between Dr. Christopher Cogle and Jeffrey English 6/27/2022
Exhibit 303 - Communication regarding meeting between Miriam Grossman, Dr. Van Mol, Jason Weida, Andrew Sheeran, and Holtzman Vogel regarding July 8th hearing 6/30/2022
Exhibit 304 - Communication between Dr. Van Mol and AHCA - 7/2/2022
Exhibit 305 - Brief of the July 8th rule hearing 7/8/2022
Exhibit 306 - Transcript from July 8th rule hearing 7/8/2022
Exhibit 307 - Email from Miriam Grossman 7/10/2022
Exhibit 308 - Email communications with Jason Weida and Dr. Van Mol 7/14/2022
Exhibit 309 - Communications regarding AHCAs development of public comment binder provided to the consultants 7/19/2022
Exhibit 310 - Invoice from Dr. Van Meter 8/4/2022
Exhibit 311 - Communication to Jason Weida regarding witnesses for a hearing 8/10/2022
Mentions or contains: declaration: SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION Open↗(opens another site) · In the case's documents
Mentions or contains: declaration: SUBPOENA TO PRODUCE DOCUMENTS, INFORMATION, OR OBJECTS OR TO PERMIT INSPECTION OF PREMISES IN A CIVIL ACTION Open↗(opens another site) · In the case's documents
Trial testimony: MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony of Michael K. Laidlaw, filed by All Plaintiffs. Noting Date 3/14/2025, (Gonzalez-Pagan, Omar) Open↗(opens another site) · In the case's documents1 attachment
Each ruling that discusses their testimony, by what it did for the side that called them. The counts are the profile's own, for the rulings it lists.
Helped the side that called them: 2Credited against the side that called them: 0Discounted, criticized or limited: 1Neither: 1
2021
Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder
Helped the side that called themRelied on
U.S. District Court, D. Arizona · preliminary injunction · court order
Their role: Retained by Defendant (the director of Arizona’s Medicaid agency, AHCCCS) to give an expert opinion on the standards of care for treating minors with gender dysphoria and on whether male chest reconstruction surgery was appropriate for the two minor plaintiffs.
Denying plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction that would have required Medicaid coverage of male chest reconstruction surgery for two transgender minors, the court found the parties’ conflicting expert declarations — including Dr. Laidlaw’s opinion that no high-quality study shows the WPATH standard of care’s recommended surgery is safe or optimal for minors — left medical necessity and safety in genuine dispute, and held plaintiffs had not clearly shown the surgery was medically necessary, safe, or effective.
“Dr. Laidlaw has been retained to provide his expert opinion as to the standards of care for treating minors diagnosed with gender dysphoria and the appropriateness of D.H. and John undergoing male chest reconstruction surgery.”
Discounted, criticized or limitedGiven little weight
U.S. District Court, M.D. Tennessee · preliminary injunction · court opinion
Their role: Retained by Defendants (State of Tennessee officials) to opine, alongside Dr. Levine, on standards of care and alleged health risks (infertility, loss of sexual function, cardiovascular disease, cancer) of the medical procedures banned by Tennessee’s SB1.
Granting the preliminary-injunction motion in part, the court found Dr. Laidlaw’s testimony on loss of sexual function ‘equally as unpersuasive’ as Dr. Levine’s, criticizing his reliance on a reality-television example; found his cardiovascular-risk testimony comparatively stronger than Levine’s but still insufficient against contrary record evidence; and preferred plaintiffs’ expert (Dr. Adkins) on infertility and cancer risk. A footnote observed that other courts have treated Laidlaw’s and Levine’s testimony ‘with a dose of skepticism,’ while declining to decide whether this court shared that view.
“The Court also notes that the testimony of both Dr. Laidlaw and Dr. Levine, on topics virtually identical to those on which they testify on behalf of Defendants in this case, has been treated by courts with a dose of skepticism.”
L. W. v. Jonathan Skrmetti: MEMORANDUM OPINION
“Dr. Laidlaw’s testimony regarding loss of sexual function is equally as unpersuasive as Dr. Levine’s testimony on the subject.”
L. W. v. Jonathan Skrmetti: MEMORANDUM OPINION
“In discussing the potential impact of gender-affirming treatment on sexual function, Dr. Laidlaw relies on the presentation of an individual who appeared on a reality TV show.”
L. W. v. Jonathan Skrmetti: MEMORANDUM OPINION
“Dr. Laidlaw’s testimony regarding an increased risk of cardiovascular disease appears to rest on firmer ground than that of Dr. Levine, but it ultimately falls short in light of the additional evidence in the record pertaining to this subject.”
L. W. v. Jonathan Skrmetti: MEMORANDUM OPINION
Source: L. W. v. Jonathan Skrmetti: MEMORANDUM OPINION
2025
L.B. v. Premera Blue Cross
NeitherNot assessed
U.S. District Court, W.D. Washington · summary judgment / class certification · court order
Their role: Retained by Defendant (Premera Blue Cross, health insurer) as one of seven experts opining that a minor plaintiff’s gender-affirming mastectomy was not medically necessary.
The court held that, because a medical-necessity rationale cannot justify facial sex discrimination under ACA §1557, it need not reach the substance of Premera’s experts’ opinions — including Dr. Laidlaw’s report — at this stage, and denied plaintiffs’ motions to exclude that testimony as moot without ruling on its admissibility, credibility, or weight.
“the Court need not, at this stage of the proceedings, further consider Premera’s experts’ opinions. Thus, plaintiffs’ motions to exclude their testimonies are moot with respect to dispositive motion practice and will be addressed, if necessary, in later proceedings.”
Helped the side that called themCredited in partmedium confidence
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · injunction pending appeal · court order
Their role: Retained by intervenor Commonwealth of Kentucky to opine that cross-sex hormone therapy for gender dysphoria ‘lacks scientific foundation’ and is not ‘healthy’ for inmates, in defense against a transgender inmate’s Eighth Amendment claim.
Denying a transgender inmate’s motion for an injunction pending appeal, the Sixth Circuit recounted that the district court had found Dr. Laidlaw and the plaintiff’s expert to be ‘credible dueling experts,’ each with significant experience researching gender dysphoria, and relied on that mutual-credibility finding to conclude the medical community lacks consensus on hormone therapy for inmates — a factor cutting against the inmate’s claim.
“claims that this hormone therapy “lacks scientific foundation” and is not “healthy” for inmates.”
Maddilyn Marcum v. Cookie Crews: ORDER filed: On the current briefing, Marcum has not made the showing necessary
“the district court found both witnesses to be “credible dueling experts” because each one has significant experience researching gender dysphoria.”
Maddilyn Marcum v. Cookie Crews: ORDER filed: On the current briefing, Marcum has not made the showing necessary
Source: Maddilyn Marcum v. Cookie Crews: ORDER filed: On the current briefing, Marcum has not made the showing necessary
Not in the archive: Several rulings referenced in these documents are not themselves in this file set: (1) the Dekker v. Weida preliminary-injunction decision itself, in which Dr. Laidlaw testified live and was cross-examined (referred to, N.D. Fla. No. 4:22-cv-325); (2) the district court opinion in Marcum v. Crews, 2025 WL 2630922 (Ky.), which made the 'credible dueling experts' finding quoted; (3) C.P. by and through Pritchard v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Ill., No. 3:20-cv-06145, 2022 WL 17092846 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 21, 2022), cited in 's footnote 40 as allowing Dr. Laidlaw to testify as an expert over a 'close question' objection; and (4) any final, signed order on Defendant's motion to quash subpoenas to Dr. Laidlaw and Dr. Levine in Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder (only the parties' proposed order, is in this set).
Cases and roles
Case
Years
Arena
Retained by
What they filed
Boe v. Marshall
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division (Case No. 2:22-cv-00184-LCB)
Also named in these cases' filings, though the archive holds no testimony of their attributed to them: Poe v. Drummond.
Typical stance
Biological sex cannot be changed
He argues that no existing technology can convert a person's chromosomes, gonads, or embryologically-formed sex-specific structures from one biological sex to the other, so gender-affirming treatment alters appearance and function but not underlying sex.
“It is not possible for a person to change from one biological sex to the other, and there is no technology that allows a biological male to become a biological female or vice-versa.”
“It is not possible for a person to change from one biological sex to the other, and there is no technology that allows a biological male to become a biological female or vice-versa.”
“It is not possible for a person to change from one biological sex to the other, and there is no technology that allows a biological male to become a biological”
Seen in: Boe v. Marshall, Dekker v. Weida, Voe v. Mansfield, Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder
Gender dysphoria is a psychological, not endocrine, diagnosis
He argues gender dysphoria has no physical marker and is diagnosed solely through behavioral observation under DSM criteria, distinguishing it from the endocrine diseases he treats, which are confirmed by lab tests or imaging.
“Gender dysphoria, on the other hand, is not an endocrine diagnosis. It is a psychological diagnosis.”
Gender-affirming medical treatment causes serious physical harm
He argues puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones can cause infertility, sterilization, and (for testosterone) hyperandrogenism-related cardiovascular and other risks, and that surgeries permanently remove healthy organ function.
“In fact, as I will discuss, gender affirming therapy can lead to infertility and potential sterilization.”
“In doing so they are inducing severe hyperandrogenism. These extraordinarily high levels of testosterone are associated with multiple risks to the physical and mental health of the patient.”
Seen in: Boe v. Marshall, Dekker v. Weida, Voe v. Mansfield, Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder
High desistance rates make early affirmation harmful
He argues most children with gender dysphoria naturally outgrow it by adulthood and there is no way to predict who will desist, so affirming treatment will necessarily and unnecessarily harm many who would have desisted.
“Children with [gender dysphoria] will outgrow this condition in 61% to 98% of cases by adulthood. There is currently no way to predict who will desist and who will remain dysphoric”
Evidence does not show gender-affirming treatment reduces suicide or improves mental health
He relies principally on a 2011 Swedish cohort study (Dhejne et al.) to argue that people who underwent sex reassignment had substantially higher rates of completed suicide and psychiatric hospitalization than the general population, and disputes claims that later studies show mental-health benefit.
“the sex-reassigned group had nineteen times the rate of completed suicides and nearly three times the rate of all-cause mortality and inpatient psychiatric care compared to the general population”
“the sex-reassigned group had nineteen times the rate of completed suicides and nearly three times the rate of all-cause mortality and inpatient psychiatric care compared to the general population”
Seen in: Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder, Boe v. Marshall, Dekker v. Weida, Voe v. Mansfield
WPATH functions as a political advocacy body, not a scientific one
He argues WPATH's guideline process is driven by political activism, litigation defense, and insurance-coverage goals rather than rigorous evidence grading, citing the removal of minimum-age recommendations from SOC 8 and internal communications about liability and legal necessity.
“WPATH has functioned primarily as an advocacy organization for promoting social and political activism rather than as a strictly scientific organization.”
“the deliberate crafting of the SOC 8 to both help insure medical necessity for their proposed treatments and also to protect clinicians from liability”
Minors and their parents cannot meaningfully consent to these treatments
He argues a child or adolescent lacks the maturity to consent or assent to the long-term risks of gender-affirming treatment, and separately argues a parent or guardian cannot validly consent on the child's behalf to irreversible harms such as infertility.
“The child or adolescent cannot consent (or assent) to these harms when they are not mature enough to fully comprehend what they mean.”
“A parent or guardian cannot consent to dubious treatments which result in irreversible changes to their child's body, infertility, sexual dysfunction, and in many cases eventual sterilization.”
The core clinical claims are stable and reused nearly verbatim from his earliest declaration in this set (Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder, 2020) through his 2024 filings in Boe v. Marshall and Voe v. Mansfield -- most visibly the 'biological sex cannot be changed' passage and the Dhejne suicide-rate statistic, which recur essentially unchanged across four years and three cases. What changes over time is the WPATH critique: his 2022-2023 reports fault WPATH and the Endocrine Society on scientific-methodology grounds (GRADE non-compliance, weak desistance evidence). By his October 2024 second supplemental report in Boe v. Marshall, obtained after discovery into internal WPATH and HHS communications, he adds a document-based institutional argument -- that SOC 8's removal of minimum-age recommendations was driven by litigation-defense and medical-necessity concerns revealed in WPATH's own emails, going beyond his earlier purely evidentiary critique.
Under cross-examination
Their own answers in depositions.
His research since 2022 · Voe v. Mansfield
Question (paraphrased): Asked whether he has done original research on the treatment of gender dysphoria since 2022
“Since 2022, no. The answer is no.”
Literature reviews · Voe v. Mansfield
Question (paraphrased): Asked whether he has conducted or published a systematic or narrative literature review on the treatment of gender dysphoria since 2022
“There's nothing published as of the moment.”
WPATH membership · Voe v. Mansfield
Question (paraphrased): Asked to confirm he is not a member of WPATH
“I am not a member of WPATH, that's correct.”
Guideline quality · Voe v. Mansfield
Question (paraphrased): Asked whether he has done a study of differences in the quality and development of treatment guidelines
“I have no published study about that.”
Testimony that travels
Sentences that appear word for word in their filings in different cases.
“It is not possible for a person to change from one biological sex to the other, and there is no technology that allows a biological male to become a biological female” in 4 documents: 102396, 101977, 112042, 114777
“the sex-reassigned group had nineteen times the rate of completed suicides and nearly three times the rate of all-cause mortality and inpatient psychiatric care compared to the general population” in 2 documents: 101977, 114777
“A parent or guardian cannot consent to dubious treatments which result in irreversible changes to their child's body, infertility, sexual dysfunction, and in many cases eventual sterilization.” in 2 documents: 102396, 112042
Curriculum vitae
Current positions
Solo private practice in endocrinology, diabetes, and metabolism, Rocklin, CA, since 2006 source
“Michael K Laidlaw, MD Inc. Private Practice – Endocrinology, Diabetes, and
Metabolism. Rocklin, CA”
Education and training
Endocrinology and Metabolism Fellowship, LAC/USC Keck School of Medicine, 2004-2006 source
“Endocrinology and Metabolism Fellowship - Los Angeles County/University of
Southern California Keck School of Medicine”
Internal Medicine Residency, LAC/USC Keck School of Medicine, 2001-2004 source
“Internal Medicine Residency - Los Angeles County/University of Southern
California Keck School of Medicine”
M.D., University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, May 2001 source
“University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine
Doctor of Medicine Degree May 2001”
B.S. in Biology (Molecular Biology concentration), Cum Laude, San Jose State University, 1990-1997 source
“San Jose State University
Bachelor of Science Degree in Biology with a concentration in Molecular
Biology, Cum Laude”
Past positions and roles
Vice President, Joint Council of Interns and Residents, 2004-2005 source
“Vice President - Joint Council of Interns and Residents”
Council Member, Joint Council of Interns and Residents, 2002-2004 source
“Council Member – Joint Council of Interns and Residents”
Clinical practice
Self-described length of private endocrinology practice as of a 2022 declaration source
“I have been practicing endocrinology in private practice in Rocklin, CA for the past 15”
Self-described scope of clinical practice: hormonal/gland disorders with psychiatric overlap source
“In my clinical practice as an endocrinologist, I evaluate and treat patients with
hormonal and/or gland disorders.”
Publications and research
2021 JCEM letter to the editor on erythrocytosis in trans men using testosterone, with Van Mol, Van Meter, Hansen source
“Letter to the Editor from M Laidlaw et al.: “Erythrocytosis in a Large
Cohort of Trans Men Using Testosterone: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study on
Prevalence, Determinants, and Exposure Years.””
May 2019 invited speech to the U.K. House of Lords on medical harms of pediatric gender-affirming hormonal/surgical therapy source
“Speech to the U.K. House of Lords – Laidlaw MK. “Medical Harms Associated
with the Hormonal and Surgical Therapy of Child and Adolescent Gender
Dysphoria”. Parliament, London, U.K. 15 May 2019.”
2019 American Journal of Bioethics article with Cretella and Donovan opposing a right to medical transition for minors source
“Laidlaw MK, Cretella M, Donovan K. "The Right to Best Care for
Children Does Not Include the Right to Medical Transition". The American
Journal of Bioethics. Volume 19. Published online 20 Feb 2019. 75-77.”
2018-2019 JCEM letter to the editor critiquing the Endocrine Society's clinical practice guideline on gender-dysphoric/gender-incongruent persons source
“Laidlaw MK, Van Meter QL, Hruz PW, Van Mol A, Malone WJ.
Letter to the Editor: “Endocrine Treatment of
Gender-Dysphoric/Gender-Incongruent Persons: An Endocrine Society Clinical
Practice Guideline.””
2018 opinion piece, 'The Gender Identity Phantom' source
“Laidlaw MK. "The Gender Identity Phantom".
gdworkinggroup.org, 24 Oct 2018.”
Licenses, boards, honors
California physician and surgeon license, issued 2002 source
American Board of Internal Medicine, Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism, 2006 source
“American Board of Internal Medicine - Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Metabolism – 2006”
American Board of Internal Medicine, Internal Medicine, 2005 source
“American Board of Internal Medicine - Internal Medicine - 2005”
National Board of Physicians and Surgeons certification, Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism, listed 2018-2024 source
“National Board of Physicians and Surgeons - Endocrinology, Diabetes, & Metabolism 2018-2024”
Endocrine Society Harold Vigersky Practicing Physician Travel Award, 2010 source
“Endocrine Society Harold Vigersky Practicing Physician Travel Award”
Disclosed compensation
Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder: $367/hr for preparation and testimony (2020 declaration) source
Paul Eknes-Tucker v. Governor of the State of Alabama / Boe v. Marshall: $450/hr prep, $650/hr testimony, $250/hr travel (May 2022 declaration) source
Dekker v. Weida: $450/hr prep, $650/hr testimony (2023 report) source
Voe v. Mansfield: $500/hr prep, $750/hr testimony (October 2024 declaration) source
Testimony they lists themselves
Dekker v. Weida 2022 · trial
C.P. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois 2022 · deposition
Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder (DH and John Doe v. Jami Snyder) 2020 · report
A.B. v. C.D. and E.F. (British Columbia Court of Appeal) 2019 · affidavit
and 2 other matters they lists that are not in the litigation archive.
What the parties argued about them
Party filings, not rulings: motions, briefs and proposed findings.
L.W. v. Skrmetti (Defendants’ motion for stay pending appeal) (2023): Later pages of this same combined record contain Defendants’ (the State’s) motion for a stay pending appeal, which argues — as the State’s litigation position, not a judicial finding — that the district court had improperly disregarded Dr. Laidlaw’s testimony that the minor plaintiffs could stop treatment quickly enough to comply with SB1. filing
Boe v. Marshall (State’s brief describing Dekker v. Weida proceedings) (2023): In a brief opposing a stay of nonparty discovery, the State of Florida recounts (as advocacy, not as a court speaking) that it called Dr. Laidlaw as its expert witness at the Dekker v. Weida preliminary-injunction hearing, and that plaintiffs’ counsel cross-examined him at length to show his views conflicted with major medical organizations’ positions. This brief does not state how the Dekker court weighed his testimony. A near-identical filing is duplicated at doc_id 106794. filing
Hennessy-Waller v. Snyder (motion to quash subpoenas) (2021): This document is an unsigned ‘[PROPOSED] ORDER’ filed as an exhibit to Defendant’s motion to quash plaintiffs’ subpoenas to Dr. Levine and Dr. Laidlaw. It is the moving party’s draft order, not a signed judicial ruling, and this file does not show whether the court actually adopted it. filing
Sources and method
Built from the litigation archive: 28 excerpts of opinions and oral arguments and 49 court documents that name them, and 35 filings of their own. Every mention was checked for identity (67 mentions of other people with the same surname were set aside). Every quote on this page (45) was checked word for word against its source; 2 that did not match were left out. Profile version 1. Gaps: Poe v. Drummond has no extracted document text in the local corpus (only an appendix index entry), so retained_by, arena, and a self-authored source_quote could not be established -- the source_quote field for that entry is left empty and should not be treated as a real quote. The L.B. v. Premera Blue Cross record consists only of Plaintiffs' motion to exclude, not any of Laidlaw's own declarations/reports, so 'retained_by' there rests on the opposing party's characterization rather than his own statement. Paul Eknes-Tucker v. Governor of the State of Alabama and Boe v. Marshall share the same civil action number (2:22-cv-00184-LCB) and are almost certainly the same litigation under two case names (captions changed as the named defendant/governor changed); the payload treats them as separate case entries, so both are reported separately here but this overlap should be considered when counting distinct cases. The 92-line deposition text for (Dekker v. Weida) is blank (only page-footer OCR), so it contributed nothing. The Voe v. Mansfield 'deposition transcript' is actually Laidlaw's own deposition rather than a deposition of the named plaintiff, but only a substantive excerpt on WPATH membership/standards was reviewable in the local corpus; no retained-by or compensation statement was found in that excerpt. Court identity for Voe v. Mansfield is inferred only from the case caption/docket number, not from an explicit 'District Court for the District of ___' statement in the excerpts read. Licensure expiration (5/31/2024) and Endocrine Society membership (given as active through 2022 in the 2023 CV and through 2023 in the 2024 CV) are self-reported as of each filing date and not independently verified. No home address, phone, email, or date of birth from the CV exhibits were carried into this file, consistent with the privacy rule.