Wellington law firm defends letter warning gender care providers

By Bill Hickman of RNZ

A Wellington law firm is defiant in the face of complaints to police and the Law Society over a letter sent to practitioners of gender-affirming care earlier this month.

Franks Ogilvie director Stephen Franks said the letter was sent out to a list of more than 20 practices supplied to his firm by group Inflection Point NZ.

Earlier in the week he told RNZ the letter was “a warning” to practices that they may be held liable for future litigation if they were found to be lax in their processes when offering gender-related medical treatment.

Franks said yesterday he was unconcerned about the complaints made against the letter.

“I hope police don’t go for them for wasting police time,” Franks said.

He said his firm had written the letter “with a very keen eye” over their legal obligations.

“I think it’s a joke, I don’t think the police would give it any attention whatsoever, or the Law Society.

“I think it’s the sort of letter that the ministry should have circulated to practices in this area. Te Whatu Ora could have written something like that so no – I don’t have the slightest concern – we’ve been ethical,” Franks said.

But Wellington lawyer Tess Upperton disagreed.

She filed a complaint to the New Zealand Law Society and would encourage her colleagues to do the same.

Upperton said she had “reasonable grounds” to suspect that the letter contained examples of misconduct and she was obligated to report them.

“If you read the letter you can see that the law is being used as a threat to create an outcome that the lawyer or the client wants.

“So – in my view – this is in breach of the lawyers’ obligations because they are using the law to create distress and inconvenience for both practitioners and the children seeking their care,” Upperton said.

Paul Thistoll of Countering Hate Speech Aotearoa said – in addition to his complaint to the Law Society – he had also complained to police about the letter.

He said he felt the letter contravened aspects of the Summary Offences Act 1981 which related to acts of intimidation.

Photo / 123RF

“It could be seen as an attempt to intimidate. Section 21.2 of the act describes intimidation where you try to ‘forcefully hinder someone in the exercise of their lawful occupation’ and it’s very clear that the letter is trying to do that.”

He said it was surprising that the letter had been sent by a lawyer of Franks' seniority.

“That is extremely troubling. He should know better.

“It is clear that the letter contains zero statements of legal claim or factual claim. It is just designed to be intimidating, threatening and bullying.”

Thistoll said another concern was the identity of the people behind Inflection Point NZ was not publicly divulged.

“It’s actually an intimidating aspect of the letter is that it’s not possible to find out who – legally – Inflection Point is or who Stephen Franks is writing the letter on behalf of.

“I asked a CHSA researcher who’s brilliant at finding stuff out on databases on the internet and the only thing we can find is the speakers at an Inflection Point event last year. What you want to know is who signed the client agreement with Franks Ogilvie and there’s absolutely no way to know that.”

Professional Association of Transgender Health president Jennifer Shields highlighted their concerns about the hidden identities of the group behind the letter.

“The letter was sent on behalf of Inflection Point. They organised a controversial conference against gender-affirming care in 2024, where speakers included Brian Tamaki, who last weekend encouraged violence against rainbow communities.

“We condemn any attempts at intimidating or threatening clinicians who provide gender-affirming care. This care will continue to be provided in line with clinical guidelines.”

In the week following the letter being sent out Te Whatu Ora’s chief medical officer, Professor Dame Helen Stokes-Lampard, wrote to its recipients acknowledging it was “distressing” and “threatening” in tone.

She wrote the letter “appears to be designed to discourage clinicians from providing gender-affirming care”.

Practitioners were assured that they would be supported by the agency in the event of any legal action.

“The organisation and its legal team would support you and take the lead in responding to any complaints or legal proceedings issued in relation to that care,” Stokes-Lampard wrote.

“You would also have access to individual legal support from your own professional indemnity insurer.”

- RNZ

Sign up to The Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.