Judge delays state from moving forward with teen medical gender transition against parents' will

Tim Dunn, Boston Herald on Oct 29, 2026

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

A juvenile court judge has delayed state officials from moving forward with providing a teenage girl with a medical gender transition against the will of her parents as a high-profile custody battle continues.

A judge postponed testosterone treatment for Sophie Kutzko, now 17, also pushing back the start date of a trial to determine if Joseph and Arlene Kutzko can regain custody of Sophie to March. The trial was originally set to begin next month.

The ongoing child custody battle has gained national attention as the Kutzkos have been denied custody of their daughter for nearly two years. They say the state took custody of Sophie when she was 15 years old in December 2024 after they would not recognize her as a boy or call her by male names and pronouns, issuing a permanent restraining order against them.

The Kutzkos say Sophie’s high school — Algonquin Regional High School in Northboro — initiated the process without their knowledge.

On top of gaining national media attention, the Kutzkos' case has also drawn support from the Trump administration, with the Justice Department filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court last month in support of parental rights as part of a lawsuit out of the state of Washington, where petitioners are suing Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson over a state law allowing state officials to make medical referrals for minors when the child asks, regardless of parental consent.

That same week, the U.S. Education Dept. launched an investigation into the Northboro-Southboro School District to determine if the district violated the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

The school district says it’s aware of the federal probe, releasing a statement saying it “welcomes and will cooperate fully with any authority investigating this matter.”

Gov. Maura Healey defended DCF when asked about the case by reporters, saying the Kutzkos’ claims are “incorrect,” adding that Sophie was taken by the state due to criminal charges brought against them.

“Let me be clear about the facts in that matter. First of all, DCF did not remove the child because of a health issue or a gender-affirming care issue. DCF removed the child after there were criminal charges filed against the parents, including the father,” Healey said.

Broyles told the Herald that Healey was misrepresenting the truth and that no criminal charges stand against the parents.

Court documents obtained by the Herald indicate Sophie accused Joseph of allegedly punching her, pulling her hair, and threatening to kill her.

Those allegations led to no finding of guilt in both juvenile and criminal court in February 2025, with the Kutzkos reaching a non-guilty disposition with prosecutors. Broyles says the Kutzkos reached this agreement after their legal fees exceeded $150,000, resulting in a pre-trial probation. She says the probation set on the Kutzkos will be lifted after one year as long as they commit no crimes during that period.

Broyles says a restraining order still stands against the parents after an unidentified adult allegedly assisted Sophie in obtaining a restraining order against them after she had been in state custody for nearly a year.

_____