Government withdraws transgender appeal

DubArk

That's one small step for man/women kind and one giant leap again for Ireland.... even if they were pushed into it!!!




“The Government has dropped its challenge to a High Court declaration that Irish law on transgender rights is in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Government must now introduce legislation recognising the new gender of transgender persons and allowing them to obtain new birth certificates or it will face condemnation from the European Court of Human Rights.”


http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0621/foyl.html

rainbow kirby

Hopefully the required legislation is introduced as soon as possible! Great news.

LittleSam

well I'm all for equal rights but i still dont think its correct that the birthcert should be changed. lydia was a man for most of her life and fathered children. Id love to have been a fly on the wall in her european courtcase & find out how legally the birthcert can be changed. At the end of the day, lydia was born a man - she may hvae got the snip, takes hormonal medicine and feels like a woman but that does not make her a woman.

Annasopra

LittleSam wrote: »

well I'm all for equal rights but i still dont think its correct that the birthcert should be changed. lydia was a man for most of her life and fathered children. Id love to have been a fly on the wall in her european courtcase & find out how legally the birthcert can be changed. At the end of the day, lydia was born a man - she may hvae got the snip, takes hormonal medicine and feels like a woman but that does not make her a woman.

It's legally changed in EVERY other member country of the EU and the Council of Europe

Freiheit

The problems which denial of such have caused are huge.....Our government should have spent it's time and resources on more important matters than stamping on the rights of a minority group.

22 Billion to Anglo-irish Bank, that's more than half the national income for a year,I'm truly shocked by our government...shocked, ashamed and bewildered.

Rev Hellfire

Guess it all depends on if the birth cert is a historical record which should not be altered, or just another form of personal identification in which case it can. Kind of like getting a new passport once you've shaved off your beard.
There's validity in both stances I guess.

DubArk

LittleSam wrote: »

well I'm all for equal rights but i still dont think its correct that the birthcert should be changed. lydia was a man for most of her life and fathered children. Id love to have been a fly on the wall in her european courtcase & find out how legally the birthcert can be changed. At the end of the day, lydia was born a man - she may hvae got the snip, takes hormonal medicine and feels like a woman but that does not make her a woman.

You’re not really been controversial, you're just going along with the a mind set that has on many occasions reflected your outdated opinion.

As been a fly on the wall, you’ll probably find it more useful to do some research on the subject and inform yourself.

wonderfulname

LittleSam wrote: »

At the end of the day, lydia was born a man - she may hvae got the snip, takes hormonal medicine and feels like a woman but that does not make her a woman.

Rev Hellfire wrote:

Guess it all depends on if the birth cert is a historical record which should not be altered

At the end of the day Lydia was born with the outward appearance of a man, she is a woman, hence the historical record is wrong and should be altered.


I find this case interesting. I know theres a lot of areas of Irish law where the government challenges things so they do not show up on the EUs radar, as the Irish law in these instances goes against EU legislation, and the whole thing can affect money coming in. Can anyone who knows better than I (which I'm pretty sure is most people here, I'm not very well read on the case) tell me if this is one of those instances or simply Irish conservatism? How long do you think it will take the advisory group to come up with something watertight, i.e. unchallengeable?

ANXIOUS

I think that this is disgraceful. The person in question is a man, was born a man and will always be a man. Just because he got it into his head that he was a she, shouldnt mean he can get a new birth cert.

Birth certs deal with fact, and the fact is the doctor who delievered him confirmed he was male. I believe i was born in the 15th century, can i have my birth cert changed?

ANXIOUS

Johnnymcg wrote: »

It's legally changed in EVERY other member country of the EU and the Council of Europe

That doesnt make it right.

ANXIOUS

wonderfulname wrote: »

At the end of the day Lydia was born with the outward appearance of a man, she is a woman, hence the historical record is wrong and should be altered.

I find your post laughable. Should we only issue birthcerts, when people are old enough to state what sex they want to be? While i feel sorry for his situation, you can not pick your own sex its a lottery. How exactly is the historical record wrong? The man was born with a penis, male bone structure, male hormones and the list goes on.

The only thing female about him is that he thinks he is a female. Serious question has he/ will he have to have a pysc. report done?

rainbow kirby

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I think that this is disgraceful. The person in question is a man, was born a man and will always be a man. Just because he got it into his head that he was a she, shouldnt mean he can get a new birth cert.

Lydia Foy is a woman, who happens to have been born male. The birth certificate is the document required to have a lot of other documents adjusted to reflect transition, so adjustment of the gender marker should be allowed.

Nevyn

ANXIOUS she has had psyc reports done before she started the transition from male to female and before hormoane treatments which happens before surgry.

ANXIOUS you seem very ignorant about the issues surrounding those who are Transgendered and transistion I suggest you go read up on it before you start banging on how about wrong it is when you are coming from a position of ignorance.

I am glad this is happening at last, but it is a shame that yet again the Governemnt of this country has to be strong armed by the EU courts to do what is right.

Rev Hellfire

wonderfulname wrote: »

At the end of the day Lydia was born with the outward appearance of a man, she is a woman, hence the historical record is wrong and should be altered.

All this talk of birth-certs might be a red herring; the issue is the refusal of the Irish government to recognise their state post operation.

That doesn't necessitate a change in the birth cert, not sure why it would. Altering passport etc should be enough you would think.

Beruthiel

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I think that this is disgraceful. The person in question is a man, was born a man and will always be a man. Just because he got it into his head that he was a she

I suggest you educate yourself on this particular subject, your total lack of knowledge is showing.

rainbow kirby

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I find your post laughable. Should we only issue birthcerts, when people are old enough to state what sex they want to be? While i feel sorry for his situation, you can not pick your own sex its a lottery. How exactly is the historical record wrong? The man was born with a penis, male bone structure, male hormones and the list goes on.

The only thing female about him is that he thinks he is a female. Serious question has he/ will he have to have a pysc. report done?

If all you can post is transphobic rubbish, don't post in this thread again.

28064212

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Lydia Foy is a woman, who happens to have been born male. The birth certificate is the document required to have a lot of other documents adjusted to reflect transition, so adjustment of the gender marker should be allowed.

IMO, a birth cert is an historical document that records the circumstances of birth. It should be corrected to allow for errors (e.g. a subsequent paternity test for changing the father's name), but if a detail is true at the time of birth, it shouldn't be changed. Regardless of someone's gender identity when they are an adult, they were born as (physically) a male or a female. The problem is the use of birth certs as a reference for details which may have changed. A transgendered person should absolutely be issued with a new passport, driver's licence etc. but a birth cert is not a mutable document

Nevyn

And the problem with the birth cert being non mutatble on the status of gender is that it then causes issues when a person who has transitions goes to marry.

MicraBoy

28064212 wrote: »

IMO, a birth cert is an historical document that records the circumstances of birth. It should be corrected to allow for errors (e.g. a subsequent paternity test for changing the father's name), but if a detail is true at the time of birth, it shouldn't be changed. Regardless of someone's gender identity when they are an adult, they were born as (physically) a male or a female. The problem is the use of birth certs as a reference for details which may have changed. A transgendered person should absolutely be issued with a new passport, driver's licence etc. but a birth cert is not a mutable document

And by that logic any one born with some kind of genital abnormality should be classified as non-sex on their birth cert.

The whole point is that our understanding of gender has gone beyond just looking at a baby's bits and making a immutable decision. That is proven to be a flawed method.

Rev Hellfire

Thaedydal wrote: »

And the problem with the birth cert being non mutatble on the status of gender is that it then causes issues when a person who has transitions goes to marry.

That's not an issue if the change is recognised in current state documentation.

28064212

Thaedydal wrote: »

And the problem with the birth cert being non mutatble on the status of gender is that it then causes issues when a person who has transitions goes to marry.

With their partner? Or with the state? In the former, I would be of the opinion that a partner has the right to know. For the latter case, that's what I meant about the problem of using certs for reference, it should be a current document (passport etc.), not a historical record

wonderfulname

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

That doesn't necessitate a change in the birth cert, not sure why it would. Altering passport etc should be enough you would think.

Even from that perspective a change in the birth cert is necessary to change all other documentation, the information on your passport reflects the information on your birth cert and besides if your a woman do you really want to be looking at a mans birth cert when you look at your own? or vice versa?

wonderfulname

MicraBoy wrote: »

The whole point is that our understanding of gender has gone beyond just looking at a baby's bits and making a immutable decision. That is proven to be a flawed method.

+1, you articulated my position so much better than I managed

Rev Hellfire

wonderfulname wrote: »

Even from that perspective a change in the birth cert is necessary to change all other documentation, the information on your passport reflects the information on your birth cert and besides if your a woman do you really want to be looking at a mans birth cert when you look at your own? or vice versa?

If the law is updated to reflect a change in gender then the issuance of state documentation will also reflect this change. The birth-cert would simply be the default state.

DubArk

ANXIOUS wrote: »

That doesnt make it right.

NO it makes it Her Human Right!

wonderfulname

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

If the law is updated to reflect a change in gender then the issuance of state documentation will also reflect this change. The birth-cert would simply be the default state.

but is it really a change in gender?

Oh, answer the question you quoted too, would you mind if your own birth cert did not reflect your gender?

deirdre_dub

she may have got the snip, takes hormonal medicine and feels like a woman but that does not make her a woman.

So, what would make her a woman? Please don't tell me that you define a woman by her genes!!! Are someone's genes more important to you than how they relate to you, how they relate to the world, and how they feel about themselves? If so, then what about those people whose genetic gender is neither male nor female (e.g. Klinefelter's syndrome)?

the fact is the doctor who delievered him confirmed he was male

And doctors never make mistakes? If you ask any doctor who knows what the word "intersex" means, then they will tell you that doctors regularly make mistakes in determining someone's gender.

Current research suggests that transgender women have a female brain in a body that is otherwise male. In other words, we cannot but consider ourselves to be female. Call it a birth defect if you must, but it is a real phenomenon that has existed since the year dot.

Should we only issue birthcerts, when people are old enough to state what sex they want to be?

Nope - we should issue birth certs when people are born, and correct them when people are old enough to know if the doctor got it right.

I'm a transgender woman, and I want to make one thing vitally clear. I do not "want" to be a woman. Got it? So why am I taking hormones, why am I growing breasts, why am I asking the doctors for surgery etc? Because I am a woman. I have tried very very very hard, for almost 40 years, to live as a male, and it just doesn't work. I can't do it anymore.

BEING TRANS ISN'T ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT - IT IS ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE.

Got it?

For the men reading this - imagine you were living in a society which pretty much required you to constantly express "femininity" in your mannerisms, your dress and in the way you relate to society. That would be pretty horrible - wouldn't it? Imagine you were looked down on, or even taunted, if you played rough-and-tumble, pursued relationships as men do, and dressed as men do. That is the society I am living in, though in reverse. I am living in a society which expects me to express "masculinity", and I just can't stand it.

The path I am on is the most difficult thing I've ever done, or am ever likely to do. It isn't a "choice". We aren't going to end up in a society where people change their gender willy-nilly, for the simple reason that it isn't possible to change your gender willy-nilly, regardless of how much support the legal and medical professions give to the process. Taking estrogen isn't a walk in the park, even if the results of taking it bring you closer to who you are - it is a major upset to the body's chemistry, and the body reacts in kind.

Altering passport etc should be enough you would think.

It would be IF you never needed to use your birth cert as a document of identity.

Links234

This is wonderful news, I'm very very happy for Lydia Foy and glad that this his finally happened for all transgender people in Ireland.

This "historical document" talk is nonsense.
Trans people aren't trying to alter their histories! Nobody is going around digitally altering all their childhood photos to reflect themselves as they are now. This is about getting legal status as the gender you are, and that impacts on your life in very serious ways, it's not some ploy to re-write history, it's a serious right that transgender people needed but was denied.

But even if we're talking about the birth certificate as a historical record, I would insist that mine is in error. It says male, but that's something I have never been. Some day I would like to get that changed, hopefully in the near future. What I don't want to do is go get all those old christmas morning photos digitally altered and pretend santa brought me Barbies instead of Transformers. I loved those Transformers, and I know there's an irony in that.

Rev Hellfire

wonderfulname wrote: »

but is it really a change in gender?

Yes, its a physical alteration, though I accept your point that neurologically there many be no change in state.

wonderfulname wrote: »

would you mind if your own birth cert did not reflect your gender?

I'm happy to say I can't reliably answer that question, since I believe my birth-cert does reflect my identity.

28064212

deirdre_dub wrote: »

It would be IF you never needed to use your birth cert as a document of identity.

^--- This. Or at least, never needed to use your birth-cert in a situation where gender was an issue.

To my mind, there are two separate facets that make up a gender: physicality and identity. I fully accept that a woman can be trapped in a man's body. Regardless, it is a man's body, and that is what the birth-cert is recording. It's nothing to do with what you may identify as in the future, but it is what you will be identified as for the next 10 minimum years until you're old enough to define it yourself

When you get your name legally changed, is your birth cert changed? (Genuine question, I have no idea). I don't think it should be, but if it is, then the Government have already removed the immutability of the birth cert and don't have a leg to stand on

IrishTonyO

Have to say I am all for equal rights but I do not believe a birth cert should be changed, it is a document of fact at the time of birth and should reflect that. By all means change passports, drivers licence etc. but the birth cert should remain as it was.