In recent months, a growing controversy has emerged in the United States, particularly in New Jersey, where hospitals have begun asking parents to identify the gender identity and sexual orientation of their newborn babies.
This practice, tied to state legislation, has ignited widespread discussion, with critics calling it absurd and supporters arguing it aligns with efforts to improve healthcare equity.
Drawing from multiple news sources, this article explores the origins of this policy, the reactions it has provoked, and the broader implications for parents and healthcare providers.
According to a report from The Telegraph, Inspira Health, a hospital network in New Jersey, has been distributing a form to new parents that includes questions about their newborn’s gender identity and sexual orientation.
Options on the form reportedly include categories such as “transgender male,” “transgender female,” “genderqueer,” and “additional gender,” alongside sexual orientation options like “lesbian or gay,” “straight,” and “questioning/unsure.”
The hospital claims a New Jersey state law passed in 2022 mandates this questionnaire. The law requires healthcare providers to collect demographic data—including race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and gender identity—in a “culturally competent and sensitive manner.”
The Hindustan Times reported, that this Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) questionnaire stems from legislation signed into law on June 30, 2022, by Democratic Senators Joseph Cryan and Angela McKnight.
According to Democratic Representative Herbert Conaway, who helped craft the bill, the intent was to gather data to help public health officials address disparities and develop inclusive health measures.
Conaway emphasized that the law does not require parents to answer these questions for newborns, stating, “Newborns are not subjected to this data collection because parents are not required to fill out the form.”
However, Inspira Health has maintained that compliance with the law is obligatory, though parents can decline to respond.
A spokesperson for the hospital network told The Telegraph that, as of March 2025, they had sought a waiver from the state to modify the form but had not yet received approval.
The policy has drawn sharp criticism from parents, lawmakers, and commentators. Republican State Senator Holly Schepisi, quoted in both The Telegraph and Hindustan Times, described the questionnaire as lacking “common sense” and serving “no purpose whatsoever.”
As a mother, she highlighted the exhaustion and stress of new parenthood, arguing that asking such questions immediately after birth has “no medical value” and places an unnecessary burden on families.
Schepisi shared an image of the form on social media, prompting disbelief among users who questioned its authenticity, according to Daily Mail Online on March 15, 2025.
U.S. Representative Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) also weighed in, calling the practice “absolutely insane” in a statement reported by Shore News Network on March 7, 2025.
He pointed out the absurdity of asking whether a “one-day-old infant” identifies as bisexual or transgender, emphasizing that this is a state-mandated requirement funded by taxpayer dollars.
Schepisi has since announced plans to introduce legislation to restrict such data collection to patients aged 16 and older, questioning how the original bill moved through the legislature with minimal scrutiny.
Social media reactions, as noted by Daily Mail Online, reflect a broader public outrage. Comments ranged from “This is mental illness” to “What planet are we on?”—indicating a significant disconnect between the policy’s intent and public perception.
Supporters of the law, including Conaway, argue that it was modeled after an Indiana statute and is designed to enhance public health data collection, not to impose gender identities on infants.
Conaway clarified to The Telegraph that the legislation was never intended to target newborns specifically and that parents are free to opt out of answering.
An Inspira Health spokesperson echoed this sentiment, telling Hindustan Times that the form is a legal requirement but optional for parents to complete.
Despite these assurances, the inclusion of newborns in the data collection process has perplexed even some lawmakers involved in the bill’s creation.
The Daily Mail Online noted that neither Cryan nor McKnight, the bill’s original sponsors, responded to requests for comment, leaving the policy’s application to infants a point of contention.
This isn’t the first time such questions have surfaced in healthcare settings. Posts on X from as early as June 2, 2023, highlight similar concerns about a health center asking parents if their newborns were transgender or non-binary, suggesting this debate has been simmering for years.
However, the New Jersey case has amplified the issue due to its explicit tie to state law.
Critics argue that asking about gender identity and sexual orientation at birth is premature and irrelevant, given that such concepts typically emerge later in life through self-identification.
The Hindustan Times quoted Schepisi questioning the medical utility of the data, while The Telegraph cited experts who note that newborns lack the cognitive capacity to express such identities.
On the other hand, proponents see it as a step toward inclusivity in healthcare.
The law’s roots in tracking health disparities reflect a growing movement to recognize diverse gender identities and sexual orientations across all age groups, even if the application to newborns raises practical and ethical questions.
