2008 Woodie Awards
N.Y. gender law not realistic
Issue date: 11/13/06 Section: Forum
- Page 1 of 2 next >
On Oct. 30th, the New York City Board of Health held a public hearing on a recent proposal to amend article 207.05 of the New York City Health code -- detailing the acquisition of birth certificates. The "notice of intention to change" proposes that transgender individuals be allowed to request a new birth certificate in which they can choose their sex -- without any proof of sex reassignment surgery.
Under the likely amendment, applicants would be required to have their name changed and have lived under the sought gender for two or more years. With a signed affidavit from a mental health professional and doctor asserting permanence of the change, applicants would be granted a new birth certificate. No operation necessary.
Since 1971, New York City has allowed transgender individuals the ability to request new birth certificates that instead omit sex all together. Given proof of sex reassignment surgery and an agreement to a post-op physical to determine permanence, new documentation was granted.
Today, the push for change comes as advocates claim the 1971 policy excludes individuals who cannot afford surgery and fails to give applicants what they really want -- legal documentation stating them as female instead of male, or male instead of female.
While the proposal can seem like a move in the right direction for a generally underrepresented and heavily discriminated minority, its implications for the future won't necessarily be as progressive as hoped.
First, allowing applicants to change the sex displayed on their birth certificate, a document that states biological statistics at the time of birth, is inherently flawed. True, some transgender individuals might have lived their entire life as a man or woman, but without a sex reassignment surgery (and even with), their biological sex remains the same as it was at birth. Gender is a fluid social construct and can, thus, be changed, but sex -- a biological statistic -- cannot be.
Under the likely amendment, applicants would be required to have their name changed and have lived under the sought gender for two or more years. With a signed affidavit from a mental health professional and doctor asserting permanence of the change, applicants would be granted a new birth certificate. No operation necessary.
Since 1971, New York City has allowed transgender individuals the ability to request new birth certificates that instead omit sex all together. Given proof of sex reassignment surgery and an agreement to a post-op physical to determine permanence, new documentation was granted.
Today, the push for change comes as advocates claim the 1971 policy excludes individuals who cannot afford surgery and fails to give applicants what they really want -- legal documentation stating them as female instead of male, or male instead of female.
While the proposal can seem like a move in the right direction for a generally underrepresented and heavily discriminated minority, its implications for the future won't necessarily be as progressive as hoped.
First, allowing applicants to change the sex displayed on their birth certificate, a document that states biological statistics at the time of birth, is inherently flawed. True, some transgender individuals might have lived their entire life as a man or woman, but without a sex reassignment surgery (and even with), their biological sex remains the same as it was at birth. Gender is a fluid social construct and can, thus, be changed, but sex -- a biological statistic -- cannot be.
RSS Feed
Be the first to comment on this story