Texas Supreme Court Weighs Medical Malpractice Deadline for Detransitioner

A Legal Challenge Over Transition Regrets

Soren Aldaco, a Fort Worth resident at the time, alleges various counselors and doctors recklessly pressured her into medical gender transition as a teen and were biased toward encouraging hormones and surgery as a remedy for gender dysphoria . Now 22, Aldaco ultimately "detransitioned," the process of stopping or reversing gender transition , and is seeking over $1 million in damages from the providers involved in her care.

The case centers on a seemingly mundane legal question with potentially far-reaching implications: when does the clock start ticking for medical malpractice lawsuits? Health care liability claims in Texas must be filed within two years from the date the tort, or civil wrong, occurred . The dispute hinges on whether that deadline began with the therapist's recommendation letter in February 2021 or with the actual surgery months later.

Texas Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical that a woman who regrets her gender transition can't sue her therapist. Justices appeared amenable to Aldaco's claims and skeptical of the defense that the limitations period started before Aldaco could sue . This represents a notable shift for a court that has historically sided with medical providers in malpractice cases.

The Story Behind the Lawsuit

According to her lawsuit, Aldaco had a troubled family life, struggled with her body image and started exploring her gender after interacting with transgender friends online. Aldaco was hospitalized for a manic episode in 2018, during which she alleges a Fort Worth doctor pressured her to identify as transgender . These experiences, she claims, led her down a path toward medical transition.

Aldaco began telehealth counseling with Barbara Wood of Three Oaks Counseling in 2020. She said the therapy primarily focused on relationship issues with her partner at the time, not assessing or resolving her "gender curiosity." Wood wrote a letter on Feb. 22, 2021, recommending Aldaco for a double mastectomy . Aldaco alleges Wood didn't adequately examine her mental state and falsely claimed in the recommendation letter that she was treated for gender dysphoria and had lived as a transgender man for a year .

The surgery took place in June 2021, but the effects of the surgery did, and Aldaco came to regret it. On Allie Beth Stuckey's Relatable podcast, Aldaco revealed many of the complications that followed the surgery, including extensive abdominal bleeding and bruising . Just six months after the surgery, Aldaco claims to have "detransitioned medically and ideologically."

A Broader Political Context

The timing of this case is particularly striking given Texas's recent legislative history on transgender issues. In another major case dealing with transgender health care, the Texas Supreme Court in 2024 upheld the state law banning doctors from providing gender-affirming care to minors . Now, the same court is considering whether to make it easier for adults to sue over transition-related care they later regret.

In 2003, Texas Republicans championed sweeping medical malpractice reforms aimed at protecting doctors from frivolous lawsuits. The changes capped most malpractice damage awards at $250,000 and required patients to file lawsuits within two years, making it significantly harder to bring such claims before a judge. Two decades later, the party is now asking the Texas Supreme Court to make an exception to that strict two-year deadline for one specific group: people who say they were harmed by gender-transition procedures .

A coalition of 60 Texas House Republicans signed a statement Feb. 4 urging the court to allow Aldaco's claims to proceed. The letter states the lawmakers plan to advance legislation in next year's legislative session to extend malpractice limitations period for "detransitioners harmed by negligent providers."

Implications Beyond Texas

The Texas Supreme Court on Wednesday will become the first state top court to hear oral arguments on the time limit for people who regret having gender-affirming care to file medical malpractice suits. Plaintiff Soren Aldaco is one of a handful of "detransitioners" appealing rulings dismissing their cases for being filed too late . The outcome could establish precedent for similar cases nationwide.

Studies show around 1% of people who undergo gender-affirmation surgeries later regret the procedures, but the exact number is unknown . While detransition remains relatively rare, the legal framework for addressing such cases is still evolving. Resolution of this relatively run-of-the-mill issue in civil cases could derail a new litigation trend .

The court's decision will likely influence how other states handle similar claims and could reshape the landscape of medical malpractice law as it applies to gender-affirming care. Whether Texas chooses to carve out special protections for detransitioners while maintaining strict limitations for other medical malpractice cases remains to be seen, but the political momentum appears to be building in that direction.