SUBJECT: GENDERED LEGAL STATUS
PURPOSE: This briefing note
is a recommendation for changes in policy pertaining to changing genders on
government identification.
ISSUE: There is too little
restriction on the ability for people to change their gender on government
identification.
Background:
The World Health Organization in 2019 recently removed gender identity disorder from its list of mental health diagnosis. What was formerly known as gender identity disorder is now referred to as gender incongruence, now classified as a, “condition related to sexual health.” Gender disorder is a condition wherein someone’s gender identity does not align with their assigned sex at birth. Many major psychiatric bodies now use the term, “gender dysphoria,” to identify what was formerly referred to as, “gender identity disorder.” This change in terminology is widely recognized in the LGBTQ community. However, there, “win,” of this case serves only to normalize gender dysphoria. The current belief is that there are 63 different genders and that gender is fluid and constantly changing. The point of this briefing note is not to dissuade from this belief but rather to point out the deception that is currently going on with trans people. These people seek to have their government identification changed from male to female and vice versa. This poses some negative liabilities for many in the community. This legal change seeks to deceive people who are looking to date others. More importantly the change can have negative consequences and liabilities in the medical community.
Considerations:
It is known in the community that transsexual people are commonly victims of hate crimes. A hate crime can be defined as a crime typically involving violence motivated by prejudice. These transsexual people often get attacked because the suspect believes that they are deceiving other people. Or perhaps the suspect wants to display their disdain towards these people. Never the less, hate crimes have gone up 81% in the UK. Data obtained by the BBC showed that there were 1944 crimes across 36 forces in 2018. This can be compared to 1073 in 2016 – 2017. Transphobia is increasing in the UK. There are various interest groups in the community that have been fighting for equality. Here in Canada, they have achieved the ability to be able to change the legal status of their gender. This is very concerning because it could pose some risks to health care providers who give care to these individuals, especially emergency care. What is also concerning is the deception that these transsexual people cause others to believe that their legally changed gender is their biological gender. This therefore removes the equality that each and every citizen is entitled to under the Canadian Constitution. The stakeholders here are the government, health care providers, the average citizen and those who seek to change their gender.
Options:
Option 1: Prohibit legal status change to gender.
This option is very feasible however, it may cause some significant backlash from the LGBTQ community. It will not be easy to revoke what rights have been given to these people. This option gives citizens equality, as there will not be a single person that is able to legally change their gender on their government identification. The deception towards other people could be resolved. Perhaps a reduction in hate crimes would follow. It is also noted that medical professionals looking to provide care will have the validity they need to be able to provide interventions as according to the gender they see on the government identification of patients. This is especially important when being a paramedic, for example there is not another person to inform him or her that the person needing care changed their legal gender on their identification. Biologically males and females have different bodies which are more or less responsive to certain types of therapies when compared with the opposite sex. Giving an intervention designed for the male body to a female who changed their gender to, “man,” could have severe health implication. But more importantly, liability for the health care provider. Therefore, numerous lawsuits can occur as a result of such change in gender on the government identification. Government identification is supposed to tell people the biological facts about an individual such as their age. Changing the legal gender on government identification is like changing the age of an individual on that same identification. It is not factually correct. Are we at risk for a society that is run on consensus rather than facts? We must be very cautious about what we harbor as it can have severe implication for the future or our communities. We need to be careful as allowing consensus to supersede facts is not sustainable. Through this option, we can ensure that we meet the safety and security needs of people . It is expected that there may be low public interest in this option as LGBTQ groups have convinced the public of their point of view. It may be a challenge to revoke what has already been done because once again a right is being taken away.
Option 2: Status Quo.
This option is very feasible. Doing nothing will ensure that the current state of affairs pertaining to legally changing genders will remain the same. However, this option puts the safety and security of people at risk. The safe administration of medical interventions could be impacted, so much so that it causes liabilities which could severely bring the medical community under a negative light. The security of people will become impaired because what is shown on government identification is no longer facts based but rather consensus based. This is therefore, not a sustainable option as it creates mass deception in part of those that seek to legally change their gender. Public acceptability for this option is expected to be high as the right to legally change genders has been just recently been permitted.
Recommendation:
Option one is recommended.
No comments:
Post a Comment