Judge rules on sex change
(5 z, Press Association) AUCKLAND. ’ A man who underwent a successful sex change was not legally a woman, a Supreme Court judge has ruled in a test case. ' The man, described by Mr Justice McMullin, as “Mr X,” (applied for an order “determining and declaring the sex of the applicant” on the ’ground that his certificate and ibirth records described him as a man. but because of surgery and other factors he now claimed to be a female. I In his 10-page reserved [judgment, his Honour said [he knew of no legal procedure in this country ’whereby an applicant could obtain a declaration as to sex. It would appear that 10 American states now provided for a change of the 1 designation originally listed on a birth certificate, he said. “Only a legislative enactment in this country can pro-
■ vide the means whereby the applicant can secure a declaration of the kind he seeks.” 'he said. “His only hope of securing legal recognition of the factual change which he has undergone, so far as that has been medically possible, is to persuade Parliament to legislate for his case and the case of others in a similar situation.” , His Honour said that if (legislation giving the courts a power to recognise a change in sex were enacted, it would rarely be invoked. It was for Parliament to say whether genuine transexuals, such as Mr X, should be given the opportunity to obtain legal recognition of a state which reflected their inborn psychological make-, up and the medical and. surgical changes undergone to, make that state more certain. He prohibited publication of .Mr X’s name, aged,, address and parts of the judgment leading to identification. Evidence was given by reputable medical prac-
titioners that Mr X could be regarded as. a female in all respects, except his genetic sex and his lack of uterus and ovaries. His Honour defined a transsexual as a person of one- [ sex who had an extremely, powerful urge to become a member of the opposite sex: to the fullest extent possible. A transexual was to be distinguished from a transvestite: “This is intermittent in character and is not accompanied by a corresponding urge to live or pass as a member of the opposite sex at all times." In 1973. the RegistrarGeneral of Births declined to, change the details of Mr X’s' birth to show his sex as being that of a female. His Honour said there were a number of reasons: which underlaid the applica-' tion. For some time the applicant had encountered a num--ber of social difficulties because he was a transexual, and it could be expected that his transexualism would' create further difficulties.
[ If Mr X wished to marry •he might be unable to obtain ,a marriage licence. The Martriage Act required a declaration that there was no lawIful impediment to the intended marriage. The fact that the candidates for martriage were of the same sex might well be a lawful impediment. The post-operative transexual might be the subject of criminal proceedings. Certain provisions of the Police Offences Act relating to vagrancy might be invoked. Problems could also arise in the field of estate planning, where a gift was made out >to "sons or daughters." among whose number he -could expect to be counted. “There are various social! difficulties. The applicant feels restricted as to the places, which he would like to attend .for social reasons. He has. found great difficulty m obtaining employment and. indeed. the Department of Labour has been unable to; find a position for him,” his Honour added.
Judge rules on sex change
Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33825, 23 April 1975, Page 7
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Press. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 New Zealand licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Christchurch City Libraries.