scotland

Featured Trans* Jersey

GRC not fit for purpose

GRC-application-formTwo significant reports dropped into the Trans* Jersey inbox this week. Both highlight the need for a complete review of the gender recognition process in the UK by which a trans individual “becomes” their recognised gender in the eyes of the law. This is significant for us in Jersey as we have “outsourced” our gender recognition process to any other jurisdiction whose legal system/courts we recognise including and, most usually, the UK.

What is the gender recognition process?

At present, a Jersey trans individual who requires a gender recognition certificate (“GRC”) travels the following route through the UK system:

  • Live as their recognised gender for two years;
  • Collect proof that they have been living as their recognised gender for two years, e.g. letter from gender therapist, letter from GP, passport/driving licence showing recognised gender, invoices from utility companies showing title in line with recognised gender, pay slips from employer showing title in line with recognised gender, etc;
  • Apply to the Gender Recognition Panel (“GRP”) in the UK (although this could be any other jurisdiction that Jersey recognises) including the documentary proof gathered as evidence and a fee of £140;
  • Wait for the GRP to decide on whether they will issue a GRC. There is no automatic requirement to appear before the panel. The GRP’s judgement is made based on the documents submitted. However, if the documents are not satisfactory, the GRP can call for further evidence that might include an appearance before them;
  • Once the GRP rule that a GRC can be issued, the GRC must be passed through the Royal Court in Jersey and Jersey will then also issue a GRC.

At this point, the trans individual is their recognised gender legally in Jersey.

The above assumes a trans individual who does not have a spouse. If the trans individual applying for a GRC is married or in a civil partnership, things get more complex. The GRC legislation in England and Wales requires the trans individual to divorce/dissolve the marriage/partnership before a GRC will be granted and, if the spouse disagrees with that, they get to veto the trans spouse’s GRC application.Scottish law does not include this so called “spousal veto”.

Jersey’s same-sex marriage law will be following the Scottish model in allowing someone in a marriage/civil partnership who wishes to transition to do so seamlessly without the requirement to divorce/dissolve the partnership. However, this is then inconsistent with “outsourcing” Jersey’s GRC procedure to a jurisdiction (the UK) that has legislation that includes the spousal veto. This is a problem that the States of Jersey will need to address before 2017 when equal marriage legislation is due to come into force.

So, why bother with a GRC at all?

Some trans people don’t. Changing their gender on their passports is enough to do what they need to do in life. For others, not having their gender legally recognised could be problematic. For example, if the trans person wishes to marry as their recognised gender and not as the gender they were assigned at birth.

Some trans people may also wish to amend all records that show them to be trans and to protect any records that divulge their status from public scrutiny. This may be for reasons of personal safety. A GRC affords those people a greater level of protection in this regard than, say, the data protection or discrimination law. The amendment of records extends to birth certificates. Having a GRC is the only way to amend your birth certificate.

What needs to happen?

The two reports are consistent in their assessment of the GRC process as no longer fit for purpose.

The main criticisms of the system are:

  • it is long-winded and difficult to navigate;
  • in practice, it requires evidence of medical treatment before the GRP will grant a GRC, despite this supposedly not being a requirement;
  • applying to a panel, who may or may not be qualified in gender matters, for recognition of one’s gender identity is inappropriate and humiliating;
  • the financial cost of the application is greater than the fee of £140 as gathering the evidence required also incurs costs;
  • it does not allow for someone to identify as neither man nor woman;
  • the requirement for someone to have lived for two years as their recognised gender before being eligible is arbitrary and unreasonable;
  • the minimum age limit of 18 is out of line with other legislation that acknowledges young people can make life changing decisions from 16 onwards;
  • the link between having one’s gender recognised legally and the protection of a trans person’s personal data created by the gender recognition legislation leads to people being inappropriately asked for GRCs before transactions that should not require sight of a GRC will be carried out by employers, government departments, etc.

In short, both reports draw the same conclusion that gender identity should not be based on a diagnosis of gender dysphoria but should be self-determined by the person concerned.

The States of Jersey have an golden opportunity now in their work on the same-sex marriage law to do the right thing by the trans community and make the process by which a trans person “becomes” their recognised gender in the eyes of the law simple, affordable, inclusive and self-reporting. Trans* Jersey will be working towards this in 2016.

You can read the full reports here:

UK Trans Info’s report: “Gender Recognition: Where Next?”

House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee: “Transgender Equality”

Trans* Jersey

Equal Marriage update

Trans* Jersey met with Chief Minister Ian Gorst on 29 July 2014. In attendance were Senator Paul Routier, Ruth Johnson (Assistant Director, Social Policy), Martin Gavet, Ellie Jones and Pippa McCarthie from Liberate, Emma Poulliquen and Sara Garwood from the LGBTQ liaison team of the States of Jersey Police, Vicki Twohig and Mark Capern from the Youth Service, Christian May from change.je, Dr Elena Mora and Toni Roberts from Jersey Community Relations and Montfort Tadier from the Human Rights Group.

Martin Gavet opened the meeting by presenting a video produced by Liberate (below).

Vic Tanner Davy of Trans* Jersey followed this with a presentation discussing two possible options for same-sex marriage that would provide LGBT islanders with equality. You can download the Powerpoint presentation here.

The presentation started by asking the question, “they’ve got Civil Partnerships, why do they want marriage?”, which is something that has been heard more than once since the debate started. For the trans community, having a single means for two people to marry is really important as it means that divorce is no longer a requirement when someone transitions within a marriage or civil partnership. Having two “streams” (marriage for heterosexual couples and civil partnerships for homosexual couples) does not work.

The term GRC (gender recognition certificate) was explained to the meeting and its significance for trans people. It was pointed out that the state cannot ask a trans person to choose between their right to be married and their right to their GRC.

The presentation suggested two possible solutions: adopting the Scottish model (the Marriage & Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014) or the Union Civile being proposed by Guernsey’s Chief Minister, Jonathan Le Tocq.

The Scottish same-sex marriage law is an improvement on the England & Wales law because it enables couples who are converting from a civil ceremony to a marriage to have a ceremony (in England & Wales you simply get a conversion certificate); it provides a route for gender recognition and converting a civil partnership into a marriage all in one process; it also contains no “spousal veto” clause; and it includes adultery as grounds for divorce (the England & Wales law ignores the possibilities of dissolution by adultery and of non-consummation of a same-sex marriage).

The meeting was informed that this was because the lawmakers could not decide how to define same-sex adultery (or non-consummation) so, rather than change the legal definition of adultery as penetrative sex, they left it out. As both Vic Tanner Davy and Ruth Johnson pointed out, if you can prosecute homosexual rape, you can define what legally constitutes homosexual sex. The meeting was in general agreement that if opposite-sex marriages can be dissolved through adultery or non-consummation so should same-sex marriages because the emotional consequences are just as devastating.

The presentation moved on to look at the proposed Union Civile in more detail. A handout explaining how the law might work and its implications can be downloaded here.

The meeting discussed the implications of the Union Civile for the Anglican church in particular. Both Liberate and Trans* Jersey are sensitive to fact that they would be the religious group most affected by the Union Civile and that its proposal could be seen by some as a first step towards disestablishing the Church of England. Having spoken to church leaders, Liberate and Trans* Jersey know that the Union Civile, although the ideal solution for many, will be a very difficult motion to put through the States.

This is why two solutions were proposed. Although the Scottish model still retains two laws for marriage, it does provide all the non-negotiable elements that we are asking for. The question then becomes, is it wise to pick a battle with the Anglican church, via the Union Civile, that possibly does not need to be had?

Ruth Johnson responded to the presentations and opened the meeting up to further discussion. She informed the meeting that the States are intending to move quickly on this because there is no good reason not to. There will be a public consultation from mid-August to mid-September that will ask the public to comment on a number of options for same-sex marriage. In addition to the two options favoured by Trans* Jersey and Liberate, there will be one that allows for two marriage “streams”, but this time divided between civil marriage and religious marriage, and one that offers civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples as well as marriages to same-sex couples.

The States are endeavouring to encompass a number of matrimonial loose ends in the consultation process, not just same-sex marriage. They also want to know whether opposite-sex couples would like civil partnerships and whether humanists and non-religious groups would like to carry out marriages.

The meeting discussed a number of issues arising from the presentation and from Ruth’s outline. There was no suggestion from those at the meeting that what the States of Jersey are proposing to publicly consult on is in any way inappropriate, although a copy of the consultation document was not available and would not be available until after the Chief Minister had met with religious leaders on 1 August 2014. It was felt by all that Ruth Johnson, in particular, had done an impressive job of understanding the issues and researching the various marriage laws to come up with a number of options.

Following the public consultation, it is anticipated that the Chief Minister will bring a report before the States at the end of September/beginning of October. Liberate and Trans* Jersey both expressed the hope that an educational presentation to States members would be possible as part of the process of bringing draft legislation before the States Chamber in order that the issues for LGBT people could be explained to members and they would have a chance to ask questions. The Chief Minister confirmed that was part of the plan.

The meeting was friendly and open with those present feeling very encouraged by what the States of Jersey are proposing to do regarding enabling every islander to have equality when it comes to marriage.

Trans* Jersey

Equal marriage support

Trans* Jersey supports Deputy Sam Mezec’s call for the States of Jersey to pass legislation to legalise same-sex marriage. Trans* Jersey goes further and would support a move for the island to model its law on Scotland’s equal marriage legislation.

We support equal marriage because, as the law currently stands in Jersey, a transman or transwoman in a marriage or civil partnership and wishing to legally transition (by acquiring a gender recognition certificate (“GRC”)) must first obtain a divorce from their spouse. Divorce and re-marriage (via a civil partnership or marriage, depending on which way you are going!) carries with it not just costs but implications for the continuation of legal documents, such as wills, and pension provisions.

This is the only known example where the law requires someone to forgo one right (the right to remain married to their partner) in order to access another (the right to private life afforded by the Gender Recognition Act). This anomaly has led to some transsexual people in the UK deciding not to acquire a GRC, as they argue their marriage vows were for life and they object to the idea that their partner (by remaining with them and true to those vows) would be unfairly treated by dissolving the original bond.

When Scotland was considering equal marriage legislation, James Morton of the Equality Network and Scottish Transgender Alliance released this video explaining why equal marriage matters to trans and intersex people. Trans* Jersey agrees with the points he made.

When England introduced the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, they got it wrong. They included what has come to be called the Spousal Veto, a clause that allows spouses of transgender people to effectively stop them from legally transitioning (i.e. acquiring a GRC). Sarah Brown, the LibDem politician and trans* activist, explains why this is a problem here.

When Scotland passed its legislation, the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014, they got it right. They removed the need for transgender people to dissolve their marriage before be able to acquire a GRC; they have enabled people to have gender-neutral marriage ceremonies; and they secured the removal of the spousal veto.

An explanation from the Equality Network on what Scotland’s recently passed equal marriage bill will mean for trans and intersex people.

The Equality Network is a Scottish lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality charity: http://www.equality-network.org