David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I gave way to the Minister of State who very kindly responded to some of the amendments. I am speaking on amendments Nos. 12 and 19, which were tabled by Sinn Féin. They deal with two separate issues. I am not sure why they were grouped because one refers to under-16s.

The purpose of amendment No. 12 is to delete the requirement for a medical input into the Bill. The proposed medical practitioner requirement is in our view unfair, arbitrary and unworkable. Senator Norris was the last to speak on this issue before progress was reported and he made all the arguments I would have made as to why this is unnecessary, intrusive and unfair. Section 9(1)(g) deprives individuals of the right to self-determination and places insurmountable obstacles in the way of legal gender recognition. The inclusion of the medical evaluation condition, which was not mentioned in the heads of the Bill, is a worrying development and may be interpreted as requiring that transgender persons submit to unwanted and unnecessary health care treatments. It is our very clear view that legal recognition must be de-coupled from medical issues. I will not go over the ground already covered by Senator Norris and others on that issue because the points have been well made.

Amendment No. 21 is on a separate issue but the amendments have been grouped for a specific reason. This one deals with the issue for under-16s, which we have already discussed. The rationale for this amendment is to make the process accessible to those under 16. We had a lengthy debate on this issue. I will not go over all of it again.

The criteria in our view are insufficient and do not take into account the transgender child’s needs. The reduction from 18 years to 16 years of the minimum age requirement in the Government’s Bill is a welcome development. The Bill, however, retains the blanket exclusion preventing children under the age of 16 obtaining legal recognition. This represents a failure on the part of the State to acknowledge the existence of trans and intersex young people and the extremely high levels of prejudice they may encounter because of their gender. As children, large aspects of our education, sports and activities are gendered. It is important that trans and intersex young people are able to participate fully in school life and activities. The Gender Recognition Bill 2014 should make provision for children and young people by removing the criterion relating to minimum age that prevents them obtaining legal recognition of their preferred gender. Our preference would be that persons of 16 could apply in their own right and under-16s go through the process outlined in the amendment, with some changes to the process the Government is putting in place for those aged between 16 and 18.

I am absolutely opposed to the inclusion of the medical practitioner because I find it offensive that the person has to be a primary treating endocrinologist or psychiatrist. It should not be included and our amendments seek to remove those elements of the Bill.