Why Support The Gender Recognition Bill?

Stephen Whittle, Vice-President of Press For Change

4^th November 2003

I hope some of you might find the following explanation helpful as to why the Gender Recognition Bill is worth supporting.

1. The GR Bill is a fairly secure bill in that, barring any disasters, it will probably go through parliament.
2. However it is not totally secure, and one very important aspect of the process will be that the bill does not have too much attention brought to it. Why not?
   1. It could end up being ’talked out’ and not be passed due to a shortage of time
   2. It could be given a very hard time by some members of the House of Lords, and be so ’amended’ by them that it becomes unworkable and has to go back to the drawing board.
   3. It could suffer from MP’s abstaining in a vote because a constituent has complained vehemently about it.
3. If either of those happened, the GR Bill will not been seen again for some considerable time - probably not in my lifetime. More than likely, after the next election, we will see a couple of clauses added to some piece of proposed family law, and those clauses will simply afford amended birth certificates and a right to marry - both of which will be premised on genital surgery.
4. Why do I say this - long experience of the political system?  Think back only one year to the proposals for adoption by gay partners and how that failed.
5. There is a grave misunderstanding about the register. It is not a register as you might imagine.
6. It is simply a mechanism whereby it will be ensured that if anyone tried to look up your old name and period of birth they will NOT reach a birth certificate. They will only be able to obtain a birth certificate - the new one - if they have your new name and period of birth. It is NOT a book as such, just as the adoption register is NOT a book as such. It is a MECHANISM - and a very good one at that.
7. If they wish to get us, they have all our details anyway on our tax records, driving licence records, passport records, medical records etc. No deleting of the old birth certificate would alter that fact.
8. The government has stated all along, and will continue to do so, that the original birth registration is a historical record of the details that were given at that time . and no matter what we might wish for, we must be pragmatic and realise that to get any change in that principle would require at least 3 or 4 more case to the European Court of Human rights i.e. 20 years at current rate of 5 years per case.
9. It is also important to realise that PFC is still fighting for the amendments that might be possible - on pre-existing marriage, tightening up disclosure rules etc and we are currently working to get possible short amendments drafted that would be simple and un-opposable.
10. Without the Bill, 100% of trans people (and their families) in this country are 100% uncertain about their rights.
11. As such if partners die, or separate, if employers insist on birth certificates, if pension providers refuse survivor pensions, we will ALL have to go to court to press for our rights as embodied in the Goodwin and I decisions. As someone who has personally been to court on 3 occasions over such rights, I would not wish to recommend that to anyone.
12. If we had to do so, there is little legal aid to support those court applications, so not only will we have to find the cash to fight our cause, but our widows, or widowers, and our children could be foregoing their rights because they simply could not afford to fight for them on their pensions.
13. The GR Bill is not perfect, but it is the best of any such legislation in the world.
14. It does not require sterility (Germany, Japan, Finland, Denmark, Holland etc)
15. It does not require genital surgery (Sweden, Japan, Turkey, Belgium, France etc)
16. It does not require childlessness - yes childlessness - Japan in 2003!
17. It does require that an individual is unmarried but apart from Germany and some US states, so do all the rest.
18. It ensures that future marriages are indeed valid (unlike the USA, Canada and Australia - yes it is still a dodgy legal position there despite the recent decision in Re Kevin)
19. It will meet 99% of the needs of 95% of trans people who wish to live permanently in their new gender role.
20. We will still have a few cases to go before courts in the future, but the principles embodied in Goodwin will have been extended way beyond what the European Court of Human Rights insisted on. As such those principles are a statement of parliament’s intention of what it wishes to achieve rather than a re-statement of the bottom line. That will give any court much more power of interpretation than otherwise.
21. Goodwin and I simply required that people be issued with birth certificate showing their new name and gender i.e. they could take the format of Jane formally known as John, female formally male.
22. Goodwin and I said that governments could decided on what basis they would afford legal marriage and that could include specific surgical requirements.
23. As such, I cannot help but say that those who oppose this Bill have greatly misunderstood what this Bill will achieve.
24. I believe in free speech, but everybody needs to ensure it is informed free speech; otherwise it becomes mere empty rhetoric and yet it could cost many people a great deal.
25. We already have our enemies lined up; the Evangelical Alliance most notably. It is imperative that we acknowledge how ’state of the art’ this bill is and stand together to bring it into law, preferably with a few minor amendments such as those issues of pre-existing marriage.