Averil Power (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

We need to have a system that can examine the individual needs and best interests of the child and consider what is best for them. Instead the Minister of State is bringing in a blanket ban on all children. He is saying that in no circumstances whatsoever can this be granted, no matter how sure the parents are, how sure the young person is or how satisfied the court is that this is the best thing for that young person. As far as he is concerned there is a blanket ban on any person under the age of 16 making such an application. I do not understand how he could possibly consider that fits with the best interests principle. I do not see how it fits with the constitutional amendment we voted in to provide that the rights and the best interest of the child first are paramount in all decisions that affect them. This manifestly falls foul of that. I do not understand what the Minister of State is afraid of because the system we have set out is so restrictive that there is no question a person under the age of 16 could get a gender recognition certificate unless they, their parents and the court - a triple lock system involving three different people - were satisfied it was in the person's best interests. If, God forbid, in a small minority of cases it turns out not to have been the right decision, this is not irreversible. As we have made clear many times, we are not talking about medical treatment or a surgical procedure. Those are entirely separate matters. We are talking about a piece of paper granting recognition by the State and if, say in 1% of cases, a person gets it wrong and changes their mind, they can rip up the piece of paper.

The Minister of State would deny such recognition to a person and leave them in a situation where they are still vulnerable - as has been pointed out, these people go through their daily existence in a way that is uncomfortable, lonely, stressful and makes them depressed and suicidal - because he cannot accept that a court could make this decision for a person and put in place a process for them. I do not understand that. It is wrong. It is patronising. We are failing the people who are most vulnerable in all of this. Transgender people in general have been very badly let down by this State and left in such vulnerable situations through not being able to get recognition. The people who are most vulnerable in all of that are the young people. We have already discussed the statistics on depression, mental health and suicide. The Minister of State has an opportunity here to do something to address that and I find it very upsetting that he will not do that. The system we have set out is restrictive enough and, in requiring a court order, it has enough safeguards to ensure that a certificate would only be granted where people can be satisfied that it is in the best interests of the child.

Of all the aspects of the Bill, I find this very upsetting. I have met these young people, I have listened to them and I have heard from their parents. This is not a decision that somebody makes on a whim that they have not thought through. If a parent is going to sign off on this and go into a court and argue on behalf of the young person that they have a right to a gender recognition certificate, that parent will have been on such a journey with their child, probably over an extended period, before they will satisfy themselves that this is the right thing, and then they will advocate on behalf of their child. The Minister of State's response and the attitude of the Government to this Bill is based on the assumption that we have to protect people because they do not know what is right for themselves and we have to stop them making the wrong decision. That is very patronising and offensive and it will leave a huge group of people under the age of 16 without any support whatsoever under this legislation. That is wrong.