More? You want more?..of course I do! Transsexualism and birth certificates-changing records or attitudes?
journal contribution
posted on 2005-09-01, 00:00 authored by K GurneyIn 2004, the Victorian Government enacted legislation allowing people treated for transsexualism to correct the record of their sex on the Register of Births, Deaths and Marriages and obtain a new certificate reflecting their contemporaneous circumstances. It was the last of all the States and Territories to do so.
The legislation gave effect to some important changes to the law and was generally couched in terms more sensitive than those already in place in the other jurisdictions. In the view of the author, however, its proponents failed to both understand the import of the expert medical evidence adduced in, and to implement the common law position enunciated by, the Family Court in Re Kevin (validity of marriage of transsexual) [2001] FamCA 1074 and subsequently confirmed on appeal two years later by the Full Court.
The author argues that, while a welcome improvement to the human rights record of successive Victorian Governments, the result is still a largely disappointing piece of legislation. Rather than being truly 'beneficial' to all who need security of their personal identities, it perpetuates some of the very worst discrimination directed at people with transsexualism and their families by continuing to portray them as psychologically deluded rather than physiologically atypical and denying a small number of them their rights on the basis of legal reasoning which is no longer regarded as tenable. She asserts the legislation serves as a clear demonstration that prejudices and misconceptions about transsexualism stilI abound and explains much more is needed if real human rights, acceptance and freedom from discrimination are to be eventually obtained by those affected by the phenomenon.
The legislation gave effect to some important changes to the law and was generally couched in terms more sensitive than those already in place in the other jurisdictions. In the view of the author, however, its proponents failed to both understand the import of the expert medical evidence adduced in, and to implement the common law position enunciated by, the Family Court in Re Kevin (validity of marriage of transsexual) [2001] FamCA 1074 and subsequently confirmed on appeal two years later by the Full Court.
The author argues that, while a welcome improvement to the human rights record of successive Victorian Governments, the result is still a largely disappointing piece of legislation. Rather than being truly 'beneficial' to all who need security of their personal identities, it perpetuates some of the very worst discrimination directed at people with transsexualism and their families by continuing to portray them as psychologically deluded rather than physiologically atypical and denying a small number of them their rights on the basis of legal reasoning which is no longer regarded as tenable. She asserts the legislation serves as a clear demonstration that prejudices and misconceptions about transsexualism stilI abound and explains much more is needed if real human rights, acceptance and freedom from discrimination are to be eventually obtained by those affected by the phenomenon.
