Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputies Finian McGrath and Paul Murphy.

Like many Members, I have met people who are transgender, their parents and support groups. I am conscious of the difficult journey that transgender and intersex people have and, therefore, I am sure every Member will hope that the legislation makes the journey less difficult. While the Bill is progressive, it contains some drawbacks and deficiencies with regard to rights and recognition for adults, the stressful procedure for 16 and 17 year olds and the lack of any provision for those aged under 16. While there are reasons for progressing the Bill quickly given it has been so long in coming, we have to get it right for transgender and intersex people. This is a children's rights issue and it is part of what we want in our society, schools and communities, which is inclusiveness, mutual respect and, especially, respect for difference.

I refer to an INTO initiative, Different Families, Same Love. It is a programme for different classes which aims to create a school climate of respect and acceptance of the diverse families in our society. We know how central families are to forming a child's identity and, therefore, it is important to recognise that we are not talking only about the traditional family. The programme begins with the following wonderful quotation from poet, Adrienne Rich: "...when someone with the authority of a teacher, say, describes the world and you are not in it, there is a moment of psychic disequilibrium, as if you looked in to a mirror and saw nothing". I have just come from the Abbey Theatre where Larkin Community College performed a play of its own called "Girl With no Name". While it was about homelessness, what they said struck me as relevant to this debate.

This is what happens and still happens, unfortunately, for many who are LGBT. A great deal of progress has been made but it must continue in the right direction because we are all aware of the negative effect of bullying. Research shows the greater the support and the feeling of inclusion and equality for LGBT people, the less they are likely to be affected by stress. The Bill must play a part in this. The first positive associated with the Bill is it will recognise the gender identity of transgender and intersex people but it must go further to honour the right of everyone to be recognised by his or her gender of choice.

It should go further by honouring the right of everyone to have his or her gender of choice recognised. That is a principle in international human rights law. We all have an entitlement to live as who we are, and be respected as the person we choose to be.

Under the Yogyakarta principles, "gender identity" is defined as "each person's deeply felt internal and individual experience of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth". This Bill has certain drawbacks in that regard, and that is why amendments are being called for. One drawback relates to children under the age of 16, who are being denied the legal right to their gender identity even if they have parental support for that identity. I suggest this will lead to further stress, distress and marginalisation. There is a scarcity of information on the debate about gender identity. I have seen a piece of qualitative research which found that some 94% of transgender adults identified their gender before the age of 18, some 48% of them identified their gender before the age of five and some 44% of them identified their gender between the ages of five and 14. Just 2% of them identified their gender between the ages of 13 and 18 and another 2% of them did so after the age of 18. There was no response from 4% of those identified.

This Bill will put in place strict requirements for 16 and 17 year olds who might want to go through this process. I think it will encourage them to wait until they are 18 before doing so. They will be left in a kind of no man's land in the meantime. Those between the ages of 16 and 18 will have to get a court order, the authorisation of two doctors and parental consent, all of which could take a long time. I am aware from my experience of those between the ages of 16 and 18, and of younger teenagers, that they know their own minds, are very articulate and are very conscious of their identities. The Ombudsman for Children's opinion is that a 16 or 17 year old should be able to decide on his or her identity and that those under that age should be able to do so with parental permission.

I suggest that people in the public service, the education system, medical circles, the Garda Síochána and youth services need an element of training to assist them to be aware of the needs of transgender and intersex people. I think transgender and intersex people should be able to change their birth certificates without having to face onerous procedures. There are transgender people who have the identity of a male and the body of a female, but do not want surgery. The implications of the medical criteria for them and others are particularly disturbing. I refer, for example, to the requirement for multiple separate medical opinions. This measure seems to be predicated on the idea that all transgender or intersex people require some degree of surgery in order to fulfil their status. We know that is not true. The medical practitioner who will be required to discuss the medical evaluation under this Bill is narrowly defined as "an endocrinologist [of whom we have very few] or psychiatrist".

The criticism of this measure is that it links medical treatment with legal recognition. The Bill does not differentiate between the medical transition, which some but not all may want, and the legal transition whereby the person could and should have his or her true civil status recognised. Transgender Equality Network Ireland has argued that medical interventions and legal rights need to be uncoupled if the human rights of transgender and intersex people are to be respected. There seems to be an unwillingness to accept and respect the decision-making capacity of transgender people. It seems that self-determination and self-declaration are being undermined. I wonder whether those who drew up this Bill examined the legislation in countries like Australia and New Zealand, where they have a third option on birth certificates. Countries like Malta, Denmark and Argentina seem to be very progressive on the whole area of self-identification. It should be a question of modelling the Bill on more progressive legislation.

I think everybody in this House supports this legislation. I certainly support it because it is far superior to what was in place before now, which was really nothing. However, there are people who feel that this Bill, welcome and all as it is, is based on some outdated practices and could consequently lead to more marginalisation and discrimination. Ironically, this is coming at a time when the Government, through the marriage equality proposal and the Children and Family Relationships Bill 2014, is being more liberal and inclusive. Equal rights have to be at the core of the legislation. I will conclude by quoting from Senator van Turnhout's speech on this Bill in the other House. She stated:

I am thinking of the six year old child who has clearly articulated his preferred gender and which has been fully embraced by his parents, friends, extended family and community. Is this young child, a boy, really going to be forced to go through a girls' school wearing a girl's uniform and using the wrong name and pronouns to gain access to the education available in his locality?

That is what will happen unless we get all the aspects of this Bill right.

See this speech in context