| Gender Recognition Bill [Lords]
|
|
Dr. Harris: I do not agree with what the hon. Gentleman has just said, but that is not the purpose of my intervention. I wish to deal with a point that he and my hon. Friend the Member for Teignbridge (Richard Younger-Ross) raised. Someone who wants to change back does not have two years of not being able to live in their preferred gender, because they can still adopt the social identity of their birth gender. It is simply that they have a certificate. Clearly, that is a problem, but it is not necessarily the same as the two years of misery that might be felt by someone who is trapped in the wrong body, as is said colloquially, and who is unable to live the lifestyle of what they feel is their gender. It is important to make that point. Andrew Selous: The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point, with which I agree. However, we must recognise the real need and distress of someone who wants a certificate that recognises their preferred gender. They may want their birth certificate and other documents to be restored to the state they were in at the time they were born. Lynne Jones: I am concerned that in pursuing the issue the hon. Gentleman is trivialising the whole process. It is not simply a matter of someone changing their mind. I must remind him that the person to whom he referred has not gone through the process of legal recognition. They have received some treatment, the extent of which we do not know, and it is part of a complaint against an individual medical practitioner that has brought the issue into the news. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman can use that case as an example of someone who has gone through a legal process and then decided that they wish to revert to their birth gender through another legal process. The type of case that he cites is very rare. It is a serious matter, whether we are talking about the change in the first instance or someone wishing to revert to their birth gender. I hardly think that such cases are likely, although I could never say never, but in those rare cases in which that does happen, the matter should be treated as seriously as the first process. Column Number: 22 Andrew Selous: I accept that the matter should be taken seriously. I am concerned that the hon. Lady accuses me of trivialising it; I assure her that I do not intend to do so. I am choosing not to name the case to which I think we are both referring, because I do not particularly want to give it further publicity, but I assure her that I have been in contact with people and am aware of a number of other cases in which people have found themselves in the situation described. That is also the situation internationally. My request is wholly reasonable. I am simply saying that there should be explicit recognition that such people's concerns should be treated sympathetically. The Minister has assured us that that will be the case, but I am concerned that, in some instances, it will be an unduly lengthy process for someone to return to their original gender, and perhaps that warrants the matter being considered slightly differently. That said, I am content to beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill. Mr. Boswell: I shall make a general point first and then raise a particular concern. The tone of the debate so far has made it clear that a change of gender, or an application for a change of gender, and recognition of that is a serious process. Usually, it will not be a painless process and will not be embarked on without due and careful thought. Equally, the panel will consider the matter in a serious manner. We shall discuss the panel's operation shortly, but no one should view what we are discussing as a light matter of whim whereby someone wakes up one morning, decides to change gender and goes through some simple process. That is the stuff of tabloid newspapers. We have not had that type of debate so far, and I am sure that we will not in future. Instead, there is serious engagement on a proper issue. As I said, the process will not be painless. For reasons that will be deployed later in the Bill, it will not be without consequences either, possibly in financial terms as well in terms of personal relationships with other members of the family. That is in addition to the change in legal status. Indeed, certain people, whether or not they are married or in existing relationships, may feel unable to take the steps that are prescribed and operated under the first part of the Bill, particularly clauses 1 and 2. Some people may feel that they just cannot do that. In certain cases, to which I have referred, they may have a medical condition that suggests that they may not be able to complete the process within the time scales. For a number of years, because we all realise that there are grave difficulties for transgendered people in meeting the requirements of modern life in the absence of legal status, a series of legal accommodations has been possible for them in relation to matters such as driving licences. I confess that only very late in the day was it drawn to my attention that there is no statement in the Bill—perhaps there cannot be—of a continuation of that option. However, if people feel Column Number: 23 that they cannot go through the process of making an application, or they wish to withdraw from it because it has become so painful, they should, in my view, be entitled to do that before the certificate is granted. There is no suggestion in the Bill, and nor should there be, that there should be a compulsory reassignment of gender on such criteria. That would be intolerable. However, it would be unfortunate if the existing privileges—civilised accommodation might be a better way of putting it—for transgendered people were withdrawn.I have seen no suggestion of that. It would be helpful if the Minister would assure the Committee that if people wish to continue legally in their birth gender but have assumed the style of an acquired gender and do not wish to avail themselves of the right to apply for a certificate to change their birth gender, they would still be entitled to reasonable accommodation by officialdom in a way that made their lives tolerable. That is all I seek, and I hope that the Minister will give that assurance. Mr. Lammy: Clause 1 provides the building blocks for the gender recognition process and it sets out who may apply for recognition in the acquired gender and, quite properly, who will determine the applications. Those building blocks reflect the general principles of the Bill. The Government are committed to allowing transsexual people who have taken decisive steps to live fully and permanently in an acquired gender to gain legal recognition of that gender. The hon. Member for Daventry asked me about those who may consider the option set out by the Bill. They may well be examining tomorrow the Hansard record of the debate. What if they decide, ''No, thank you. Actually, I do not want to go through the process''? When I met Press for Change last week to discuss the Bill, it brought to my attention the situation of transsexual people who have lived in an acquired gender for some 40 to 45 years. Couples who are now well over pensionable age may not want to go through the process. We are not requiring people to do that, but it is right that we make that process available to people. I hope that the ways in which authorities and institutions such as the Passport Agency and the Driver and Vehicle and Licensing Agency—it is not the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Centre any more—have sought to accommodate people continues. There are other areas of life in which I hope that the Bill gives those institutions a lead, and makes it clear to people that transsexual people have rights. It is an important condition that they have to bear in mind.
11 amMr. Boswell: I rise simply to record that I regard that as an entirely satisfactory set of assurances, which is what I sought. Mr. Lammy: I am very grateful for that. It is also important that applications should not be restricted to UK citizens. We have discussed that this morning. Column Number: 24 Citizens from other countries live, work and marry in this country and they should be free to do so in their acquired gender if they meet the criteria that will be applied by the gender recognition panel. To that end, a robust and credible process must be established to determine applications for recognition. Clause 1 provides that applications will be dealt with by gender recognition panels, which will be composed of medical and legal members appointed to the list by the Lord Chancellor. On that basis, I hope that we have dealt with clause 1 in some detail.Question put and agreed to. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2004 | Prepared 9 March 2004 |
