A New York jury found a psychologist and surgeon liable for malpractice after they supported and performed breast removal surgery on a 16-year-old girl who identified as transgender at the time. According to The Epoch Times, the six-member jury awarded Fox Varian, now 22, $2 million in damages following a three-week civil trial in Westchester County.

Varian no longer identifies as transgender. She described the aftermath of her surgery in stark terms during testimony:

"Shame. I felt shame. It's hard to face that you are disfigured for life."

The jury determined that psychologist Kenneth Einhorn and Dr. Simon Chin committed missteps that constituted a "departure from the standard of care." Both defendants declined to comment after the January 30 verdict.

What the Jury Heard

The trial centered on whether Einhorn and Chin adequately evaluated Varian before proceeding with an irreversible surgical procedure. Varian's attorney, Adam Deutsch, argued the health care professionals failed to correctly diagnose and treat her for gender dysphoria.

Deutsch characterized Einhorn's approach during closing arguments:

"Whatever the kid wants, the kid gets."

At the beginning of the trial, Deutsch suggested Einhorn "drove the train" and had been "putting ideas in [Varian's] head." He argued Einhorn should have reached out to the Albany Pride Center for records, and that Chin and Einhorn should have communicated by phone at least once before proceeding with surgery.

Einhorn wrote a referral letter to Chin in October 2019 supporting Varian's surgery decision. That letter, according to trial testimony, contained omissions and inaccuracies. Varian had first raised the idea of chest surgery to Einhorn in March 2019. By year's end, the procedure was complete.

The Defendants' Own Admissions

Perhaps the most damaging testimony came from the defendants themselves. Einhorn testified he might not have written the referral letter had he known Varian was unsure of her gender identity. Chin testified that had he known of that uncertainty, he would not have performed the surgery.

Records from the Albany Pride Center—which neither defendant obtained—told a different story than what they apparently understood. Before surgery, Varian told staff at the center that she "felt pressure to decide" on a male or female identity "by family, friends, and culture." She continued to question her gender identity but was afraid she might "lose credibility" if she brought it up with her mother.

The professionals tasked with safeguarding a teenager's wellbeing never accessed this information. They proceeded anyway.

A Mother's Fear

Varian's mother, Claire Deacon, testified she was against the surgery. She consented out of fear that her daughter would commit suicide if she did not get it. Deacon testified that Einhorn increased that worry.

This pattern—parents pressured into consent by fears of suicide—has become a recurring feature of these cases. Medical professionals present transition as the only path to safety, leaving parents to choose between affirming their child's stated identity or risking losing their child entirely.

The defense argued Varian made similar self-harm threats on multiple occasions. But the question isn't whether a distressed teenager made threats. It's whether medical professionals should respond to that distress by performing irreversible surgery on a minor who, by her own admission to a counseling center, wasn't sure who she was.

The Aftermath

Varian continued to live as either male or non-binary for years after the procedure. She told Einhorn, Chin, and her mother she was "happy" with the results. Ten months after surgery, she wrote an essay that defense attorney Neil Kornfeld read to the jury:

"It's such an immense relief to wake up and not feel at odds with my body."

The defense argued Varian did not express regret until years later when she filed suit in 2023. But Varian described her post-surgery comments as "cognitive dissonance"—the internal conflict of someone trying to convince herself that an irreversible decision was the right one.

When Varian finally confronted the reality of what had been done to her, she described her first reaction:

"I immediately had a thought that this was wrong, and it couldn't be true."

She now lives with what she described as nerve pain—"searing hot ... ripping sensations"—and the knowledge that she is, in her words, "disfigured for life."

The Verdict's Limits

The jury awarded $1.6 million for past and future pain and suffering, plus $400,000 for future medical expenses. Deutsch had asked for $8 million.

Notably, the jury was not asked whether gender-related surgical procedures are appropriate for minors. The verdict addressed only whether these specific professionals met the standard of care with this specific patient. The broader question—whether 16-year-olds should be eligible for irreversible surgeries based on feelings about their identity—remains unresolved in the courts.

But the implications extend beyond this case. Josh Payne of the Campbell Miller Payne firm, who was in court observing the proceedings, put it plainly:

"A jury of everyday Americans sent a clear message: Justice will be served for vulnerable individuals who were misled into gender-transition procedures without appropriate safeguards."

The firm was founded three years ago and was not involved in Varian's case. Its presence in the courtroom suggests more litigation is coming.

What This Case Reveals

Fox Varian cycled through multiple names and identities—Isabelle, Gabriel, Rowan, then Fox—before and after her surgery. She was a teenager in distress, searching for answers, pressured by what she described as "family, friends, and culture" to commit to an identity she wasn't certain about.

The adults who should have protected her instead facilitated an irreversible procedure. They didn't obtain relevant records. They didn't communicate adequately with each other. They didn't pause when a confused adolescent presented with the kind of uncertainty that should have triggered caution rather than a referral letter.

Both Einhorn and Chin admitted under oath they would have acted differently with more information. The information existed. They didn't seek it out.

Varian wept and hugged her mother and attorney after the verdict. She won her case. But she cannot undo what was done to her body when she was 16 years old and didn't know who she was.

A jury of six ordinary Americans looked at the facts and called it malpractice. The medical establishment that promoted these procedures as lifesaving care should take note.