Tag Archives: transgender

UK announces indefinite ban on puberty blockers for children under 18

The UK government on Wednesday placed an indefinite ban on puberty blockers for children under 18 years of age following the advice of a requested consultation by medical experts. An emergency prohibition on puberty blockers is currently in place and will expire on December 31. The emergency ban will be replaced with The Medicines (Gonadotrophin-Releasing Hormone Analogues) (Restrictions on Private Sales and Supplies) Order 2024, which is due to come into force on January 1, 2025.

In March, the NHS restricted the prescription of puberty blockers to minors. In May, the UK government placed an emergency ban on access to puberty blockers by minors through private prescriptions, which was extended three times. The ban was based on the advice provided in Dr. Hilary Cass’ recommendations. A claim was soon brought to the UK High Court by transgender activist group TransActual, who alleged that the ban was unlawful. However, the claim failed on all grounds and the ban continued.

The targeted consultation by the independent Commission on Human Medicines built upon the findings of the Cass Review, and made the following conclusion:

This review found puberty blockers to have no statistically significant impact on gender incongruence and/or gender dysphoria, mental health, body image and psychosocial functioning in children and adolescents. [The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence] found the quality of evidence for all these outcomes to be low and noted that GnRH analogues may reduce the expected increase in lumbar or femoral bone density during puberty.

The consultation also noted the Cass Review findings in April 2024, which found that:

…the use of puberty blockers in these circumstances blocks the normal rise in hormones that should occur into teenage years, and which is essential for psychosexual and other physical developmental processes such as brain and cognitive development and bone health. It also has implications for fertility, and the use of puberty blockers may also reduce psychological functioning.

The report clarified that young people who are already taking puberty-blocking medications or were prescribed those medications six months prior to June 2024 can continue to do so once their prescriber is UK-registered. Dr. Cass recommends that if puberty blockers are prescribed, they are only done “following a multi-disciplinary assessment within a research protocol”.

In terms of providing care to the LGBTQIA+ community, the government outlined a holistic approach to supporting patients affected by this ban, with eight regional mental health centers being established.

TransActual criticized Dr. Cass’s findings in October 2024, expressing concern that trans people were “specifically excluded from the review process”, and that Dr. Cass was not “as neutral as previously claimed.” The group requested transparency from the government as to how the Cass Review was commissioned, that the ban be suspended and that it instead support the British Medical Association’s “ongoing review of the [Cass] Review’s methodology and conclusions.”

The new legislation is set to be reviewed in 2027, and NHS England will be commencing further research trials into puberty blockers next year.

The post UK announces indefinite ban on puberty blockers for children under 18 appeared first on JURIST – News.

UN expert urges Poland to address discrimination and violence against LGBT community

Leave a reply

UN expert urges Poland to address discrimination and violence against LGBT community

A group of UN experts urged Poland to address entrenched discrimination and violence against the LGBT community through swift legislative and social reforms on Friday. The expert’s statement follows a comprehensive country visit, between November 18 and 29, that revealed both promising progress and persistent challenges.

The UN expert’s report highlights the enduring effects of discriminatory practices, such as the symbolic but impactful “LGBT-ideology free zones” established by over 100 local councils between 2015 and 2023. Although these resolutions lacked legal status, their existence underscored systemic prejudice and exacerbated the mental health challenges faced by the LGBT community. Activism and international pressure eventually led to the abandonment of these zones, but residual effects linger.

Significant gaps remain in areas such as education, employment, and healthcare. Schools lack adequate anti-discrimination training, leaving teachers ill-equipped to combat homophobia and transphobia. In workplaces, fear of discrimination prompts many LGBT individuals to hide their identities, while transgender people face additional barriers in accessing housing and healthcare. Recent legislative proposals aim to address these issues, but implementation remains uneven.

The report also draws attention to the challenges faced by same-sex couples, whose unions are neither recognised nor protected in Poland. Two recent European Court of Human Rights rulings, Przybyszewska and others v. Poland and Formela and others v. Poland, have found a breach of the right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, underscoring the need for legal recognition of same-sex unions, further pressuring the Polish government to act.

The UN Human Rights Council has mandated the UN Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity to offer advice to States on how to remedy violence and discrimination since 2016. The visit was prompted by Poland’s recent steps to address human rights abuses, including a groundbreaking apology from the Ministry of Justice in December 2023 for the past harm caused to LGBT individuals by state actors and media. The apology marked a turning point, fostering improved access to government officials for civil society groups and signaling the possibility of legislative reform.

Encouragingly, a draft civil union bill and expanded hate crime protections are under consideration, signaling a shift toward a more inclusive legal framework. Municipal initiatives, such as Krakow’s growing Equality March, reflect changing societal attitudes, though officials acknowledge that political action has lagged behind public sentiment.

Despite these positive developments, Poland continues to rank last among European Union countries in LGBT legal protections, as highlighted in ILGA-Europe’s annual report. While amendments to the Polish Criminal Code now include sexual orientation in hate crime and speech provisions, gender identity remains excluded. Various cases of hate crime and speech, discrimination and isolation remain pertinent in Poland against the LGBT community.

As Poland grapples with its evolving role within the European Union, the UN expert emphasised the need for sustained commitment to human rights. “This moment represents an opportunity shaped by political circumstance,” the expert remarked, urging Poland to align its policies with EU standards and secure a more equitable future for all citizens.

The post UN expert urges Poland to address discrimination and violence against LGBT community appeared first on JURIST – News.

Ohio governor signs bill restricting transgender students’ access to school restrooms

Leave a reply

Ohio governor signs bill restricting transgender students’ access to school restrooms

Ohio Governor Mike DeWine on Wednesday signed a bill into law that restricts transgender students from using bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

Senate Bill (SB) 104 requires public school buildings and facilities to “designate each [communal] student restroom, locker room, changing room, or shower room” to be for “the exclusive use by students of the male biological sex only or by students of the female biological sex only.” Biological sex is defined in the bill to exclude an individual’s expression of gender identity other than what is on their official birth record. The bill also prevents schools from establishing gender-neutral restrooms.

The bathroom policy, known as the Protect All Students Act, was originally introduced as House Bill (HB) 183 before it was added to SB 104. HB 183 was sponsored by State Representatives Adam Bird and Beth Lear. Representative Bird explained that the “bottom line of this legislation is to protect students” and that he doesn’t “see that as a controversial issue.”

The ACLU of Ohio, however, “strongly urge[d] Governor DeWine to veto this bill and protect the rights of privacy of LGTBQ+ Ohioans statewide.” ACLU of Ohio Policy Director Jocelyn Rosnick commented that “SB 104 will create unsafe environments for trans and gender non-conforming individuals of all ages.”

Other states have moved to pass similar legislation. In October, for instance, the Odessa City Council in Texas approved a restriction for restroom use to biological sex. On Thursday, Speaker of the US House of Representatives Mike Johnson also restricted the use of gendered restrooms in the House to biological sex. The decision was based on HB Resolution 1579, which prohibits members and other employees of the House from “using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.”

In January 2023, the ACLU filed a motion as an intervener in a federal lawsuit concerning an Ohio school district’s allowance of transgender students to use bathrooms that align with their gender identity. The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard oral arguments in late October, and the lawsuit is still ongoing.

The Senate passed SB 104 in mid-November by a 24-7 vote, sending the bill to the governor for approval. With his signature, the bill will now become law in 90 days.

The post Ohio governor signs bill restricting transgender students’ access to school restrooms appeared first on JURIST – News.

ECtHR: W.W. v Poland 11 July 2024 – Refusal to allow transgender person to continue hormone therapy in prison: violation of Art. 8 ECHR

Leave a reply

ECtHR: W.W. v Poland 11 July 2024 – Refusal to allow transgender person to continue hormone therapy in prison: violation of Art. 8 ECHR

Legal summary

July 2024

W.W. v. Poland – 31842/20

Judgment 11.7.2024 [Section I]

Article 8

Article 8-1

Respect for private life

Refusal to allow transgender person to continue hormone therapy in prison: violation

Facts – The applicant is a transgender woman who at the time of lodging the application was legally recognised as a male. Her request for legal recognition was granted in 2023. Between 2013 and 2024 she served several terms of imprisonment in male prisons. In June 2018 the applicant was hospitalised after performing a bilateral orchiectomy on herself. Upon the request of the governor of the prison where she was then detained, she was examined by a medical expert who recommended that she pursue hormone replacement therapy associated with gender reassignment. The prison governor allowed the applicant to undergo such treatment.

In May 2020 the applicant was transferred to Siedlce Prison. Her request to that prison’s governor for permission to be sent the necessary medication to continue her treatment was left without examination pending a further opinion of an endocrinologist. The applicant submitted such an opinion which prescribed her hormone therapy. The applicant ran out of medication on 18 July 2020 and her hormone treatment was interrupted as of that date.

On 30 July 2020, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, the Court indicated to the respondent Government to “administer the applicant … with the hormones prescribed by her endocrinologist … in doses prescribed, at her own expense, until otherwise decided by an endocrinologist”.

The applicant received the medication on 31 July 2020.

Law – Article 8:

(a) Interference or positive obligation – The applicant had undergone hormone replacement therapy associated with gender reassignment for nearly one and half years in two previous prisons and had been refused such therapy only when she had been transferred to Siedlce Prison. Thus, she had not complained of inaction on the part of the domestic authorities, but rather of the fact that the Siedlce Prison authorities had prevented her from continuing the treatment which she had initially been allowed to undergo. Therefore, the Court approached the case as one involving an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her private life.

(b) Compliance with Article 8 § 2 – The interference at issue had been “in accordance with the law” and had pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the applicant’s health. The remaining question was thus whether it had been “necessary in a democratic society”.

The prison authorities’ decision, which had concerned access to hormone treatment, had touched upon the applicant’s freedom to define her gender identity, one of the most basic essentials of self-determination. In that regard, the Court also noted the impact of that decision on the applicant’s right to sexual self-determination; it had repeatedly held that given the numerous and painful interventions involved in gender reassignment and the level of commitment and conviction required to achieve a change in social gender role, it could not be suggested that there was anything arbitrary or capricious in the decision taken by a person to undergo such a procedure.

The applicant had been diagnosed with gender dysphoria after she had performed genital self‑mutilation and had been prescribed hormone replacement treatment, which, according to the medical reports, had had beneficial effects on her physical and mental health. The doctors who had prescribed the hormone replacement therapy had considered it to be necessary.

Therefore, the domestic authorities had had strong elements before them indicating that hormone therapy had been an appropriate medical treatment for the applicant’s state of health. That therapy had been provided to her in previous prisons and had had a beneficial effect on her. At Sieldlce Prison the treatment had been interrupted before she could be consulted. The burden that had been placed on the applicant to prove the necessity of the prescribed medical treatment by undergoing an additional consultation with an endocrinologist appeared disproportionate in the circumstances. In any event, the endocrinologist’s opinion she had submitted to the prison authorities confirming the necessity of the hormonal therapy had not resulted in her request being granted.

The Government had not referred to any detrimental effects which the therapy might have had on the applicant’s physical and mental health, nor had they maintained that allowing her to continue the therapy would have caused any technical and financial difficulties for the prison authorities. Indeed, the applicant had borne the cost of the medications herself, thus imposing no additional costs on the State. Although her hormone treatment had been interrupted only for a relatively short period, between 18 July and 31 July 2020, the applicant had submitted that since the beginning of July 2020 she had been taking half of the prescribed dose of medication. Most importantly, she had eventually received the medication, not because of a sudden change of approach on the authorities’ part, but as a consequence of the Court’s indication of interim measures under Rule 39.

Accordingly, the authorities had failed to strike a fair balance between the competing interests at stake, including the protection of the applicant’s health and her interest to continue the hormone therapy associated with gender reassignment. In so concluding, the Court bore in mind the applicant’s particular vulnerability as an imprisoned transgender person undergoing a gender reassignment procedure, which had required enhanced protection from the authorities. The Government’s preliminary objection relating to the applicant’s victim status, which had been joined to the merits, was therefore dismissed.

Conclusion: violation (six votes to one).

Taking into account that the applicant had received the necessary medical treatment since 31 July 2020, the Court decided, unanimously, to lift the interim measure indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

Article 41: EUR 8,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

Source: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=002-14358

Russia approves laws that ban transgender adoption and restrict LGBTQ+ visibility

Leave a reply

Russia approves laws that ban transgender adoption and restrict LGBTQ+ visibility

Russia’s upper house of parliament approved two laws on Wednesday that will prohibit the visibility of LGBTQ+ people in media and ban citizens of countries that allow gender transitioning from adopting Russian children.

The first law amends Article 6.21 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation to prohibit “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations and (or) preferences or gender reassignment.” While Article 29(1) of the Constitution of Russia guarantees freedom of speech and press, the law will amend Articles 10.6 and 15.1 of Federal Law No. 149, to prohibit the promotion of not having children on the internet, in media and advertising.

The law will impose fines of up to 400,000 rubles for individuals, fines of up to 800,000 rubles for officials and up to 5M rubles for legal entities on violators. Foreigners will face similar sanctions as Russian citizens but can be deported from Russia or arrested for up to 15 days.

The law on the adoption of Russian children will effectively restrict the adoption of Russian children to the roughly dozen countries that ban gender transitioning.

The approval of these laws marks continuing suppression of LGBTQ+ rights. Previously, the Russian Supreme Court ruled the LGBTQ+ movement was “extremist”. Russia also banned gender affirming surgery in 2023.

After its official publication, the laws will take effect in ten days.

Russia faces a low birth rate, aging population and a decline in population has been heightened by the invasion of Ukraine. The measures are intended to increase the country’s birth rate and restrict the cultural influence of the West.

The post Russia approves laws that ban transgender adoption and restrict LGBTQ+ visibility appeared first on JURIST – News.

US House of Speaker restricts use of bathrooms to biological sex

Leave a reply

US House of Speaker restricts use of bathrooms to biological sex

The Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, restricted the use of gendered bathrooms in the House to biological members of each sex on Wednesday. The measure has triggered anger among legislators and advocates and has once again brought the issues of transgender rights and their inclusion in society to the agenda of national discussion.

This decision is based on House Resolution 1579, which states that single-sex facilities such as toilets, cubicles, and changing rooms can be used only by people of the biological sex they were assigned at birth. The bill was sponsored by Nancy Mace and was endorsed by the House Rules Committee. Supporters have framed the speaker’s policy as a necessary measure to protect the safety and dignity of individuals in single-sex spaces, particularly women. House Resolution 1579 explicitly cites concerns that allowing individuals who are biologically male to use facilities designated for women could compromise the privacy and security of female House members, officers, and employees. Proponents argue that this policy provides clarity and consistency, ensuring facility use within the Capitol aligns with traditional norms and expectations.

The enforcement mechanism outlined in the resolution places the Sergeant-at-Arms in charge of implementing the policy, reflecting an effort to ensure accountability and uniform application. Supporters, including the resolution’s sponsor, Representative Nancy Mace, contend that the measure is a workplace consideration to foster a respectful environment within the Capitol. By addressing these concerns, policy advocates assert that it represents a practical response to broader societal debates over privacy and safety in public spaces.

This policy stands in stark contrast to the ongoing efforts to address the epidemic of violence against transgender individuals. It was announced on the same day as Transgender Day of Remembrance, a solemn occasion created to honour the lives of transgender individuals lost to violence, as highlighted in a resolution introduced by Representative Pramila Jayapal. The resolution emphasizes the alarming rates of violence and discrimination faced by transgender individuals, particularly transgender women of colour. It underscores the need for inclusive policies that protect their safety and dignity. By implementing restrictive measures on such a significant day, the policy appears to disregard the critical struggles and vulnerabilities of the transgender community, further marginalizing an already targeted population.

The policy will likely face public and potentially public scrutiny in court as lawmakers and advocacy groups weigh its implications. For now, the decision places the Capitol building at the center of a national conversation about civil rights, equity, and the balance between privacy and inclusion.

The contrast between this policy and Transgender Day of Remembrance highlights the ongoing challenges in the fight for transgender rights. It shows that achieving true inclusion in government spaces and beyond is still a work in progress, and there’s to go before we can say the struggle is over.

The post US House of Speaker restricts use of bathrooms to biological sex appeared first on JURIST – News.

EU states must recognize gender changes obtained in other bloc countries, says top court

Leave a reply

European Union states must recognize gender changes obtained in other bloc countries, says top court

See: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/european-union/article/2024/10/04/eu-states-must-recognize-gender-changes-obtained-in-other-bloc-countries-says-top-court_6728196_156.html

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 4 October 2024.
M.-A.A. v Direcţia de Evidenţă a Persoanelor Cluj and Others.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Judecătoria Sectorului 6 Bucureşti.
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the Union – Articles 20 and 21 TFEU – Articles 7 and 45 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States – Union citizen who has lawfully acquired, during the exercise of that right and his residence in another Member State, a change of his first name and gender identity – Obligation on the part of that Member State to recognise and enter in the birth certificate that change of first name and gender identity – National legislation which does not permit such recognition and entry, obliging the party concerned to bring new judicial proceedings for a change of gender identity in the Member State of origin – Effect of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union.
Case C-4/23.

Articles 20 and 21(1) TFEU, read in the light of Articles 7 and 45 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State that does not permit recognition and entry in the birth certificate of a national of that Member State of a change of first name and gender identity lawfully acquired in another Member State, when exercising the right to free movement and residence, with the consequence that that person is obliged to initiate, before a court, new proceedings for a change of gender identity in the first Member State, which disregard the change that was previously lawfully acquired in that other Member State.

See: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:62023CJ0004

USA: Texas city approves transgender bathroom ban

Leave a reply

Texas city approves transgender bathroom ban

The city council of Odessa, Texas voted this week to approve a ban on transgender individuals’ use of bathrooms on city property that do not correspond with their sex assigned at birth.

Tuesday’s 5-2 vote amends a 1989 ordinance that made it “unlawful for any person to knowingly and intentionally enter any public restroom designated for the exclusive use of the sex opposite to his or her own…” The new amendments will expand the language to allow prosecution of transgender people for using bathrooms that align with their personal gender identification. Penalties include trespassing charges, fines, and liability for damages, including court costs and legal fees.

Restrooms in city libraries, parks, airports, and other government facilities are subject to the ban under the new language which includes, urinals, toilets, showers, and changing areas in the definition of restroom.

The Texas chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union condemned the new ordinance, calling it “shameful” while a spokesperson from PFLAG, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group, called the legislation “unnecessary” and “a complete waste of the city’s time, money, and resources.”

Texas Values president Jonathan Saenz who advocated for the bill insisted that the ordinance was needed align the language of the ordinance with “our current culture” while denouncing changes toward “long held beliefs” on gender and sex.

The bill includes exceptions for minors under the age of 12 accompanying an adult into a restroom for normal use, law enforcement, emergency medical aid, and custodial maintenance or repair.

Transgender rights have faced increasing restrictions in the Lone Star state with the Texas Supreme Court recently upholding a ban on gender affirming care for transgender youth. There are now fears that the Odessa bill could presage a statewide ban on the transgender people’s use of restrooms that align with their gender identity.

The post Texas city approves transgender bathroom ban appeared first on JURIST – News.

Russia adopts bill banning adoption for countries that allow gender reassignment

Leave a reply

Russia adopts bill banning adoption for countries that allow gender reassignment

Members of Russia’s State Duma, the country’s legislative authority consisting of 450 members, adopted a bill Wednesday which will ban the adoption of children from the Russian Federation by citizens in countries where gender reassignment is permitted, emphasizing the need to uphold “traditional values.” The bill was approved by an absolute majority of the State Duma members in the first reading, and will now become law.

Chairman of the State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, who proposed the bill, discussed the rationale behind the bill:

This decision is aimed at protecting childhood and traditional values. The absolute majority of State Duma deputies supported the adoption of this initiative. It is necessary to protect our children from the threats they may face when they are adopted or under guardianship by citizens of foreign countries where gender reassignment is legal.

This adoption ban comes just a year after Russian lawmakers passed a law banning gender-affirming surgeries for transgender people in the country. The bill prohibited transgender individuals from receiving hormone therapy, making changes of gender on official Russian documentation, and barred any who have already transitioned from adopting children. It also annulled transgender individuals’ marriages.

Russia has previously been restrictive with adoptions. In 2012, a federal law was passed to prohibit the adoption of Russian children by US citizens and in 2023. Russian media outlet RBC (РБК) reported in June that a decrease in adoption from foreigners of 89 per cent was registered in 2023, with only six children adopted by foreign nationals, due to the restrictive nature of such legislation. According to the presidential commissioner for children’s rights report, it is expected that the adoption of Russian children by foreigners will completely cease because of diplomatic tension heightened by current events.

The post Russia adopts bill banning adoption for countries that allow gender reassignment appeared first on JURIST – News.

Turkey’s top court rules in favor of LGBT activist in landmark hate speech case

Leave a reply

Turkey’s top court rules in favor of LGBT activist in landmark hate speech case

Turkey’s Constitutional Court has ruled in favor of a LGBT activist, declaring that a lower court’s refusal to block homophobic content targeting her was a violation of her rights, the Stockholm Center for Freedom reported.

Efruz Kaya, a civil society employee represented by the Media and Law Studies Association (MLSA), had requested an access ban on homophobic news reports published after she appeared in a video for “Trans Day of Remembrance” week in November 2019. Her requests were denied by a penal court of peace, prompting her to appeal to the top court.

The decision is the first of its kind from the Constitutional Court regarding the failure to prevent hate speech against LGBT individuals.

The ruling acknowledges that the rejection of Kaya’s request for an access ban infringed on her rights protected under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which ensures respect for private and family life.

The court also concluded that her right to an effective remedy was violated, meaning she was not provided with an adequate legal resolution or recourse to address the harm she suffered.

In November 2019 Kaya participated in a “Trans Day of Remembrance” video. On November 21 and 22 the Yeni Akit, Doğru Haber and İlke news outlets published articles targeting Kaya’s sexual identity. Her request for the removal of these articles was rejected, and subsequent appeals by MLSA lawyers were also dismissed.

The top court approved Kaya’s request to block access to news reports containing derogatory terms such as “LGBT pervert” and “homosexual deviant.” Additionally, the court awarded Kaya TL 10,000 ($310) in non-pecuniary damages.

Homosexuality is not illegal in Turkey, but homophobia is widespread. While there are no official figures, Turkey has slid down the LGBT rights index published by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA). Last year, it was ranked 47th out of the 49 countries ILGA lists in its Eurasia region.

The increase in hateful rhetoric against LGBT communities in Turkey coincided with President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s electoral alliances in recent years with ultranationalist and ultraconservative political factions.

More: https://turkishminute.com/2024/06/04/turkey-top-court-ruled-in-favor-of-lgbt-activist-in-landmark-hate-speech-case/