The head of California’s top taxpayer-funded medical school could not bring himself to say that only women get pregnant when pressed under oath in Congress.
Story Snapshot
- UCSF chancellor Dr. Sam Hawgood told Congress that “transgender men” can carry children.
- Rep. Mary Miller asked if a “non-biological woman” has ever had a baby, and Hawgood answered “a transgender person can.”
- Basic biology says pregnancy requires female reproductive organs, no matter the gender label.
- The clash shows how gender ideology is reshaping medical language, policy, and training at elite schools.
Top med school chancellor dodges basic biology in House hearing
During a recent House Committee on Education and the Workforce hearing, University of California San Francisco Chancellor Dr. Sam Hawgood was asked a simple question about who can get pregnant. Rep. Mary Miller pressed him on whether a “non-biological woman” has ever had a baby, trying to get a clear answer about if men can be pregnant. Instead of stating that only biological females with female reproductive organs can carry children, Hawgood replied, “A transgender person can,” and later said “transgender men” can carry children.
Dr. Hawgood leads one of the nation’s most prestigious medical schools and is a longtime pediatrician and neonatologist. His school trains future doctors, writes clinical guidelines, and influences medical policy far beyond California. Yet under questioning in a public hearing, he struggled to use the word “woman” when talking about pregnancy. That unease was not about the science of how pregnancy works, but about the pressure to use gender-neutral and ideological language like “pregnant people” instead of “women.”
What the science actually says about pregnancy and transgender patients
Medical studies and clinical reports do show that some people who identify as transgender men can become pregnant, if they still have a uterus and ovaries and are not on testosterone during conception and pregnancy. Researchers note that many transgender men retain their female reproductive organs and therefore retain the ability to have children, even after hormone treatments. One review explains that pregnancy in this group is “biologically and medically possible” because they were born with female reproductive systems, even if they now identify as male.
Mainstream medical sources spell this out in plain terms: anyone with a uterus and ovaries can get pregnant, and people born male who live as men cannot. Health sites and clinics that serve transgender patients say the same thing, stressing that “trans men can get pregnant” only if they still have these female organs and stop or pause male hormones. In other words, biology has not changed. Pregnancy still requires female reproductive anatomy. The debate is over the words we use, not over how conception or childbirth actually work.
From biological fact to political flashpoint in the DEI era
This hearing took place as Congress examined diversity, equity, and inclusion in medicine, including how schools like UCSF teach gender and sex. Activist-driven guidance now pushes doctors to say “pregnant people” instead of “pregnant women,” and to talk about “uterus and ovaries” instead of “female reproductive system.” Supporters say this helps transgender patients feel respected. But it also blurs clear language and can leave the public confused about basic facts, such as who can and cannot get pregnant.
This highlights the absurdity of top med school leaders evading basic science under pressure from gender ideology.
Rep. Mary Miller questioned UCSF Chancellor Dr. Sam Hawgood and UCLA’s dean. They pivoted to “transgender patients,” “pregnant people,” and “compliance with laws”… https://t.co/neFuQ3MSuJ
— CHP – Christian Heritage Party (@CHPCanada) July 16, 2026
For many conservatives, the exchange with Hawgood captured a deeper problem. A top medical leader would rather twist words than affirm that women bear children and that men, as males, do not. Lawmakers worry that this kind of language creep will seep into federal rules, medical records, and insurance policies, hiding sex-based realities that matter for safety and research. At the same time, the scientific work on transgender pregnancy can be described honestly without erasing women: people born female who keep their female organs can still get pregnant, even if they later identify as male.
Why this matters for policy, training, and parental trust
When medical schools avoid plain speech about sex, it affects more than classroom debates. It shapes how doctors talk to patients, how hospitals collect data, and how public health agencies track outcomes. Studies on transgender pregnancy already face limits because many records do not clearly state sex at birth. If federal policy and medical charts stop using words like “woman” or “mother,” families may find it harder to get straight answers about risks, protections for women-only spaces, and the impact of gender treatments on fertility.
Parents and taxpayers expect medical leaders to be honest and clear, especially in front of Congress. The research record on transgender pregnancy is important, and doctors should understand it. But that evidence fits inside a simple truth most Americans learned in grade school: only people with female reproductive organs can get pregnant and give birth. The House hearing showed how far elite institutions will go to avoid saying that out loud, even as they quietly rely on that very fact in their own scientific papers and clinical care.
Sources:
townhall.com, edworkforce.house.gov, nypost.com, youtube.com, chancellor.ucsf.edu, ground.news, universityofcalifornia.edu, gendergp.com, sciencedirect.com
