The Australian Psychological Society (APS) has faced criticism following the unopposed election of Andrew Chua as its next president, amid concerns raised by parents of gender-distressed children about his conduct and the society’s stance on gender-affirming care.

The APS’s position paper released earlier this year endorses the gender-affirming model of care for children and teenagers experiencing gender dysphoria. This marked a significant shift from its previous recommendations advocating a more evidence-based approach, which had referenced studies—including the Cass report from the UK—that questioned the effectiveness of affirmation-only care. The updated position has sparked debate among clinicians, families, and advocacy groups.

Two mothers, both of children experiencing gender distress, have publicly expressed dismay over Mr. Chua’s correspondence with them, describing his communication style as intimidating and hurtful. One mother, whose teenage daughter has faced multiple mental health challenges including anorexia nervosa, dissociation, and a recent autism diagnosis, first contacted the APS in February hoping to provide context to inform the society’s approach. She said she was troubled by Mr. Chua’s email response in April, in which he suggested her concerns risked drifting “away from the welfare of your child.” She also described feeling unsettled when Mr. Chua sought extensive personal details about her daughter’s treatment and wellbeing, shifting the focus from the APS’s guidelines to her family’s private circumstances.

Another mother, of a 22-year-old who previously medically transitioned but later detransitioned, said Mr. Chua’s emails implied that parents questioning the gender-affirming model could be seen as abusive or harmful. Both parents voiced disappointment that Mr. Chua’s conduct did not preclude his selection as APS president. The second mother criticized the APS board for aligning fully with an affirmation-only approach and warned that parents raising concerns risk being viewed with suspicion.

In response to inquiries, outgoing APS president Dr. Kelly Gough acknowledged that Mr. Chua’s correspondence would be reviewed by the society’s board. Dr. Gough emphasized the APS’s commitment to respectful and professional communication and stated that it does not consider parents who raise concerns to be viewed disparagingly. While the society reviewed the concerns raised, Dr. Gough declined to comment on internal processes or the outcome of that review, citing confidentiality. She noted the APS’s position statement was developed with input from a working group and remains subject to ongoing evaluation as research evolves.

Andrew Chua was the sole nominee for the presidency and accordingly was elected without opposition.

A spokeswoman for Parents of Adolescents with Gender Distress expressed serious reservations about the APS’s professionalism and its handling of divergent views on gender distress. She said the suggestion that parents questioning current policy might endanger their children undermines trust and open dialogue necessary for ethical care. The spokeswoman warned that with Mr. Chua assuming leadership and no apparent revisions to the position statement, the APS may no longer be a safe environment for clinicians or parents seeking alternatives to the affirmation-only model.