Miles Yardley, a male model formerly known in fashion circles as Salomé Evangelista, has filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, alleging that physicians at CHOP prescribed puberty blockers and cross‑sex hormones to him at age 15, with inadequate evaluation or discernment.
In recent interviews with Chadwick Moore, Yardley opened up about his experience, sharing how he was placed on androgen blockers and later on estrogen after only his second visit to CHOP’s gender clinic. He now links that early medical intervention to serious health consequences, including a pituitary adenoma (brain tumor) and hypothyroidism, both diagnosed in April 2024 and suspected by Yardley to be related to hormone therapy. He described negative outcomes that include a decade of “mental instability,” cognitive impairment, fatigue, and possible permanent sterilization.
As reported, Yardley is now suing CHOP for malpractice, seeking accountability for what he asserts was medical overreach and long‑term harm.
Taxpayer Funding and Pediatric Gender Care
This lawsuit takes place against a backdrop that PA Family Institute has documented extensively:
In October 2023, PA Family Institute uncovered that over $20 million in Pennsylvania taxpayer dollars have been used since 2015 to fund puberty blockers, hormones, and surgeries for minors. The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia has been identified as a prominent provider of these services.
In October 2024, follow‑up research revealed that CHOP ranked among the worst pediatric hospitals nationwide in performing and billing for so‑called “gender-affirming” procedures on children, with thousands of minors treated and millions in Medicaid and CHIP claims. The organization Do No Harm, in a database of children’s hospitals showing the worst offenders of these harmful treatments on minors, found CHOP to be the worst offender, topping their “Dirty Dozen” list.
Medical Oversight and Consent
Our past coverage has raised the alarm about the rapid uptake of puberty blockers and hormones, often without long‑term studies or rigorous consent protocols. Yardley’s experience illustrates the long-term harm in concrete terms: his account suggests doctors initiated irreversible procedures swiftly, with little follow‑up plan for detransition or adverse effects, and little concern for true informed consent.
Financial Incentives
Yardley attributes part of his horrific experience to institutional incentives, accusing hospitals of profiting from maintaining patients on lifelong hormone regimens. This aligns with medico‑financial concerns outlined in our earlier stories, which highlighted testimony from experts estimating tens of thousands of dollars per patient in hospital revenue from such interventions.
Policy Implications in Pennsylvania
Yardley’s lawsuit offers a real example of what can occur under systems where state insurance funds puberty blockers and cross‑sex hormones for minors, with minimal restriction and oversight. As lawmakers in Harrisburg and advocates weigh proposed legislation to ban or curb such treatments for children, his story adds a human face to the broader policy debate.
What Comes Next
Yardley, now 27 and living in California, reports that he has stopped hormone treatments and is navigating detransition largely alone, finding doctors unprepared to guide patients through reversal and detransitioning process.
Looking Ahead: Why This Matters
- For policymakers: Yardley’s lawsuit underscores the need for a ban on these irreversible procedures on minors.
- For taxpayers: The case renews questions about whether state healthcare dollars should fund interventions that may cause lifetime medical consequences.
Miles Yardley’s lawsuit against CHOP demonstrates how early gender-transition protocols always lead to serious health complications and lifelong consequences. His story provides another real-life story exposing the scale and financial scope of such procedures in Pennsylvania’s pediatric hospitals. As public officials and concerned citizens deliberate future restrictions, Yardley’s case adds urgency to re‑examining the fact that minors are receiving these harmful interventions.
