Washington has announced that it will recognise non-binary people on official documents, in a landmark move.
The groundbreaking step makes Washington the third state in the US to put ‘X’ alongside ‘M’ and ‘F’ on forms like driving licenses and birth certificates.
Those wishing to change their legal gender on official forms will also now not require a letter from their doctor.
Washingtonians under 18 can change their gender on birth documents, but will need consent from their guardian and doctor.
However, the law will not apply to people acquiring documents for the first time.
2017 Holiday Season – Why Everyone Is Buying These $24 Yoga Pants
Kate Hudson’s 2 Premium Leggings ($99 Value) Are Available For Only $24
Ad by Fabletics.com
Sarah Kate Ellis, President of GLAAD, said: “With LGBTQ people and especially trans and non-binary Americans under attack daily by the Trump Administration, as evidenced by Trump’s efforts to block trans Americans from serving in the military and rescinding of Title IX protections for trans students, designation ‘X’ is a powerful and reaffirming sign that our identities cannot and will not be erased,”.
She added: “It is vital that states catch up and acknowledge the reality of the non-binary community.”
Just two days after DC passed its law in June, Oregon’s law came into effect, making it the first US state to legally recognise non-binary people.
“This change in ID is a huge piece of validation for me,” J Gibbons, a non-binary, transgender Portland resident said at the time.
At a public hearing for the plan in Washington state, supporters are reported to have greatly outnumbered those in opposition.
During the meeting, which was standing room-only, young residents spoke up in defence of their rights.
One told those gathered: “As a kid growing up in the mid-west, it’s a dream for me to see a state like Washington taking a stand to legitimise non-binary identities, when a lot of the time we’re really invisible in a whole lot of places.”
Tobias Gurl also opened up to the room, saying: “I’m grateful to be living in a time when trans people are beginning to be treated with fairness, understanding, and compassion, and to be living and working in a state where we are receiving more recognition than ever before.”
Nic Sakurai, an agender DC resident, was the first American to ever receive a gender-neutral identification form.
They said: “I don’t feel that sense of gender as something that is part of my core innate experience.”
“I’m glad to finally have an ID that actually matches who I am.”
A federal appeals court has denied the Trump administration’s request to further delay enlistment of new transgender service members in the armed forces. The ruling comes in the American Civil Liberties Union’s case, Stone v. Trump.
The trial court prohibited the government from implementing President Trump’s unconstitutional ban on transgender people serving in the military on November 21. Two other federal district courts have entered similar injunctions, and the government has filed motions to stay those injunctions before three federal courts of appeals. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is the first court of appeals to rule on the stay requests.
Josh Block, senior staff attorney with the ACLU LGBT & HIV Project, had this reaction:
“We are happy that the court saw through the government’s smokescreen and rejected its request to further delay the policy allowing transgender people to enlist. The military has already developed comprehensive guidance to prepare for a January 1 start date, and the government failed to offer any credible reason why transgender people should be barred from enlisting if they can meet the same rigorous standards that apply to everyone else.”
The Trump administration is asking a federal judge to delay a requirement to begin accepting transgender recruits to the military on Jan. 1.
“Specifically, Defendants request that the Court stay the portion of its preliminary injunction requiring Defendants to begin accessing transgender individuals into the military on January 1, 2018, pending a decision by the D.C. Circuit on Defendants’ appeal,” the government wrote in a motion filed late Wednesday.
The administration and the plaintiffs have asked for a decision by noon Monday.
In October, Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia blocked President Trump’s ban on transgender troops while a lawsuit against it works its way through court.Last month, after a motion by the Trump administration, Kollar-Kotelly issued a follow-up ruling clarifying the earlier one that said the military must accept transgender recruits by Jan. 1, as it had planned to do prior to Trump’s ban.
In July Trump tweeted that he would ban transgender people from serving in the military in any capacity.
He made good on the tweets in August, signing a presidential memo that prohibits the military from enlisting transgender people and from using funds to pay for gender transition-related surgery. The memo also gave Defense Secretary James Mattis six months to determine what to do with currently serving transgender troops.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders sued in August on behalf of six unnamed service members and two recruits.
After Kollar-Kotelly’s rulings, the Pentagon said it was preparing to comply and accept transgender recruits by Jan. 1 even as the administration explores its legal options.
“While reviewing legal options with the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense is taking steps to be prepared to initiate accessions of transgender applicants for military service on January 1, 2018, per recent court orders,” Pentagon spokesman Army Maj. Dave Eastburn said in a statement to several news outlets this week.
But in Wednesday’s motion, the administration argued that it will be “seriously and irreparably harmed if forced” to implement the policy by Jan. 1.
“Given the complex and multidisciplinary nature of the medical standards that need to be issued and the tens of thousands of geographically dispersed individuals that need to be trained, the military will not be adequately prepared to begin processing transgender applicants for military service by January 1, 2018, and requiring the military to do so may negatively impact military readiness,” the motion said.
The motion also argued that the plaintiffs will not be negatively affected by a delay because the two recruits in the suit will not be eligible to join the military until May 2020 and spring 2021.
In a sworn statement included in the motion, Lernes Hebert, acting deputy assistant secretary of Defense for military personnel policy, added that accepting transgender recruits by the new year would “impose extraordinary burdens” on the Pentagon by needing to prepare 20,367 recruiters, 2,785 employees across 65 Military Entrance Processing Stations, 32 service medical waiver authorities and personnel at nine boot camps.
“Beyond the sheer number of components and personnel involved, the implementation of accessions criteria is itself a complex undertaking,” he wrote.
“In the case of the transgender accession standards, the standards themselves are complex, interdisciplinary standards necessitating evaluation across several systems of the body, to include behavioral and mental health (e.g. diagnosis of gender dysphoria or related comorbidities), surgical procedures (particularly thoracic and genital), and endocrinology (for the purposes of cross-sex hormone therapy). No other accession standard has been implemented that presents such a multifaceted review of an applicant’s medical history.”
Brad Carson, a former Pentagon official who worked on the Obama administration’s transgender military policy, refuted the Trump administration’s arguments.
“The Pentagon had already done most of the preparation and training in anticipation of the lifting of the accession ban before the presidential transition, so to claim that the military is not ready to lift the ban now seems a stretch,” he said in a statement released by the Palm Center.
Collecting information on these deaths is complicated by the fact that many trans people are misgendered in reports following their death.
There have been over 270 reported murders of trans and gender non-conforming people in the past year.
There has been a total of 2,609 reported cases in 71 countries worldwide since Transgender Day of Remembrance began in January 2008.
The names on this list are only of cases that have been reported and have attracted local media attention. The more accurate number is likely much higher, according to the Trans Murder Monitoring Project.
Argentina
Sofía Mailén Santillán
Mercedes, Argentina
1-Dec-16
Beaten to death
A. Villegas
Quilmes, Argentina
14-Jan-17
Shot in the head
Cindy Crawford Revlon
Buenos Aires, Argentina
1-Jun-17
Decapitated
DNA Gifts for Under $100.
Still got some names on your list? Shop the DNA store and help them learn fascinating facts about their ancestry, health, nutrition, & more.
Ad by Helix
Pamela Tabarez
Rosario, Argentina
25-Jul-17
Shot multiple times
Eyelen
Tucuman, Argentina
18-Aug-17
Beaten
Brazil
Juninho da Mangueira
Guarus, Brazil
21-Nov-16
Shot at least five times.
Paola Bracho
Manaus, Brazil
24-Nov-16
Suffocated
Michele Rios
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
26-Nov-16
Cause unclear
Patricia Araujo not reported
Sao Paulo, Brazil
27-Nov-16
Shot in the head and burned
Dandara
Natal, Brazil
28-Nov-16
Shot in the head
Name unknown
Joao Pessoa, Brazil
2-Dec-16
Asphyxiation
M. Dias Machado
Pontal do Parana, Brazil
3-Dec-16
Shot at least three times
Will Rhillary Silva
Viamao, Brazil
7-Dec-16
Shot
Name unknown
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
7-Dec-16
Shot
R. da Silva de Sá
Maceio, Brazil
10-Dec-16
Shot in the head
G. Aquino de Godoy
Curitiba, Brazil
14-Dec-16
Shot in the head
D. de Souza
Campos, Brazil
17-Dec-16
Shot in the neck and back
J. R. T. Gomes
Crato, Brazil
18-Dec-16
Stoned to death
Gabriel Gomes
Goiania, Brazil
21-Dec-16
Shot multiple times at the same incident as F. Braz
F. Braz
Goiania, Brazil
21-Dec-16
Shot multiple times at the same incident as Gabriel Gomes
Paula Raio Laser 50
Fortaleza, Brazil
23-Dec-16
Shot
Jake Helen
Contagem, Brazil
31-Dec-16
Shot five times
Flávia Victoria Lima
Sorocaba, Brazil
31-Dec-16
Cause unclear
L. C. Marinho
Nova Cruz, Brazil
4-Jan-17
Stabbed
W. H. Soares dos Santos 16
Teresina, Brazil
6-Jan-17
Shot
Mierala da Silva
Bauru, Brazil
13-Jan-17
Beaten
Moranguinho
Paranangua, Brazil
15-Jan-17
Shot
Agatha Lios
Brasilia, Brazil
18-Jan-17
Cause not reported
Sandra
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
19-Jan-17
shot
Lady Dyana
Manaus, Brazil
19-Jan-17
Stabbed
J. A. dos Santos
Itabaianinha, Brazil
26-Jan-17
Shot to death
Paola Oliveira
Russas, Brazil
30-Jan-17
Stoned to death
Name unknown
Recife, Brazil
3-Feb-17
Drowned; legs were tied down
Agatha Mont
Itapevi, Brazil
4-Feb-17
Suffocated
Name unknown
Guaruja, Brazil
8-Feb-17
Stoned to death
Dandara dos Santos
Fortaleza, Brazil
15-Feb-17
Beaten and stoned to death by a mob
Name unknown
Caçapava, Brazil
17-Feb-17
Shot to death
A. da Silva Maciel
Distrito de São Sebastião, Brazil
18-Feb-17
Shot
Mirella de Castro
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
19-Feb-17
Suffocated
Camila de Souza Magalhães
Sao Gonçalo, Brazil
25-Feb-17
Beaten
Emanuelle Muniz
Anapolis, Brazil
26-Feb-17
Stoned to death
Lorrane
São Luiz, Brazil
26-Feb-17
Shot to death
Z. Marrocos
Guarabira, Brazil
28-Feb-17
Stabbed to death
Michelly Garcia
Pelotas, Brazil
3-Mar-17
Shot
Name unknown
Goiania, Brazil
6-Mar-17
Shot
Rubi
Luziania, Brazil
6-Mar-17
Shot
Sandra
Laranjeiras do Sul, Brazil
8-Mar-17
Beaten
Jennifer Celia Henrique (Jenni)
Florianopolis, Brazil
10-Mar-17
Beaten
Name unknown
Cachoeirinha, Brazil
12-Mar-17
Burned to death
Lexia
Santa Fe do Sul, Brazil
13-Mar-17
Stabbed
Camila Albuquerque
Salvador, Brazil
15-Mar-17
Shot
Bruninha
Ourinhos, Brazil
16-Mar-17
Stabbed
Paola
Street Joao Candido do Camara, Brazil
22-Mar-17
Stabbed
Paulina
Recife, Brazil
23-Mar-17
Shot multiple times
Uilca or Wilka
Loteamento Luiz Gonzaga, Brazil.
26-Mar-17
Stabbed
Stephanie Montez, who was killed in October of this year
Name unknown
Acara, Brazil
2-Apr-17
Beaten
Name unknown
Campo Grande, Brazil
3-Apr-17
Not reported
R. Félix da Silva
Guarariba, Brazil
4-Apr-17
Shot to death
Bianka Gonçalves
Primavera do Leste, Brazil
7-Apr-17
Shot to death
Camila
Sao Jose do Campos, Brazil
10-Apr-17
Beaten
Vitoria Castro
Araguaina, Brazil
10-Apr-17
Beaten
Hérica Izidório
Fortaleza, Brazil
12-Apr-17
Beaten
Name unknown
Curitiba, Brazil
12-Apr-17
Beaten
Gaby
Feira de Santana, Brazil
12-Apr-17
Shot to death
Name unknown
Itabuna, Brazil
16-Apr-17
Shot to death
Samilly Guimarães
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
20-Apr-17
Shot to death
Marooni
Belem, Brazil
22-Apr-17
Stabbed
A. Ribeiro Marcossone
Curitiba, Brazil
23-Apr-17
Shot over 25 times
Eloá Silva
Joao Pessoa, Brazil
27-Apr-17
Shot multiple times
Name unknown
Barcarena, Brazil
29-Apr-17
Stabbed
Uilca
Vitoria de Santo Antao, Brazil
29-Apr-17
Shot to death
Layza Mello
Vilha Velha, Brazil
30-Apr-17
Shot to death
Name unknown
Belem, Brazil
30-Apr-17
Shot to death
Samaielly
Lauro de Freitas, Brazil
30-Apr-17
Shot to death
Sophia Castro
Contagem, Brazil
3-May-17
Cause unclear
C. A. Lima da Silva
Monhangape, Brazil
6-May-17
Shot to death
R. C. Silva Pereira
Barretos, Brazil
7-May-17
Deliberately struck by a vehicle
Thadeu Nascimento
Grande do Retiro, Brazil
7-May-17
Shot and beaten
Jennifer
Itaitinga, Brazil
9-May-17
Shot multiple times
Fernanda
Ponta Grossa, Brazil
10-May-17
Shot
Chaiane
Cachoeira do Sul, Brazil
13-May-17
Stabbed
Ketlin
Juazeiro do Norte, Brazil
13-May-17
Stabbed
Name unknown
Fortaleza, Brazil
13-May-17
Stabbed
Name unknown
Morro Agudo, Brazil
15-May-17
Beaten to death
Pâmela
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
21-May-17
Stabbed to death
Lalá
Feira de Santana, Brazil
25-May-17
Shot to death
Grace Kelly
Lauro de Freitas, Brazil
25-May-17
Suffocated
Joyce Jane Padilha
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
26-May-17
dismembered
Sheila Medeiros
Tres Pontas, Brazil
29-May-17
Cause not reported
Laryrssa Moura
Governador Valadares, Brazil
31-May-17
Shot in the back
Natasha
Castanhal, Brazil
5-Jun-17
Multiple gunshot wounds
A. Alves Nascimento
Criciúma, Brazil
5-Jun-17
Shot to death
Trans day of remembrance, 2006 (HECTOR MATA/AFP/Getty Images)
Natasha
Varginha, Brazil
6-Jun-17
Shot multiple times
Name unknown
Salvador, Brazil
10-Jun-17
Shot in the neck, belly, shoulder, and back.
Renata Vieira
Uberlândia, Brazil
14-Jun-17
Beaten to death
E. Shyne
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
15-Jun-17
Tortured
Julhão Petruk
Fortaleza, Brazil
15-Jun-17
Shot multiple times
Name unknown
Caraguatatuba, Brazil
16-Jun-17
Stabbed
Bárbara
Maceió, Brazil
18-Jun-17
Struck by a vehicle
Name unknown
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
19-Jun-17
Shot to death
Camily Victoria
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
22-Jun-17
Shot to death
Denise
Aracaju, Brazil
24-Jun-17
Shot to death
C. Barroso de Oliveira
Ananindeua, Brazil
24-Jun-17
Shot to death
Nicolly Santos
Vitória de Santo Antão, Brazil
24-Jun-17
Stabbed multiple times
Ney Oliveira
Apuarema, Brazil
25-Jun-17
Stabbed to death
Salomé Bracho
São Luís do Curu, Brazil
25-Jun-17
Shot to death
Tabata Brandão
Rondonópolis, Brazil
25-Jun-17
Shot to death
Carla
Maceió, Brazil
28-Jun-17
Stabbed to death
Lola
Sorriso, Brazil
2-Jul-17
Cause not reported
Rayane
Fortaleza, Brazil
2-Jul-17
Shot
Larissa
Fortaleza, Brazil
2-Jul-17
Multiple gunshot wounds
Vicky Spears
Diadema, Brazil
3-Jul-17
Shot
Anna Sophia
João Pessoa, Brazil
8-Jul-17
Shot in the head
Bruna dos Santos
Pelotas, Brazil
9-Jul-17
Beaten and shot
Derricka Banner, who was killed in September of this year
Cauã
Porto Alegre, Brazil
9-Jul-17
Shot
Thalia
Rio Verde, Brazil
14-Jul-17
Shot
Sophia
Campo Mourão, Brazil
17-Jul-17
Stabbed to death
Michele
Caxias, Brazil
17-Jul-17
Shot
Leona Albuquerque
Salvador, Brazil
17-Jul-17
Shot multiple times
Camila Guedes
Monte Mor, Brazil
20-Jul-17
Stabbed
Gil Pereia da Costa
Rio Branco, Brazil
20-Jul-17
Shot twice
Gabriela Sousa
Maracanaú, Brazil
21-Jul-17
Shot
E. A. da Silva
Maceio, Brazil
21-Jul-17
Shot
Name unknown
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
22-Jul-17
Stabbed to death
Natalia Pimentel
Várzea Grande, Brazil
25-Jul-17
run over multiple times
Aurinete
Patos do Piauí, Brazil
31-Jul-17
Stabbed
Name unknown
João Pessoa, Brazil
1-Aug-17
Shot in the head.
Mary Monttila
Palmeira dos Índios, Brazil
2-Aug-17
Stabbed
Charliane
Itabuna, Brazil
2-Aug-17
Shot
Bruna Laclose
Pinheiro Machado, Brazil
6-Aug-17
Stabbed
Paulinha
Palmares, Brazil
8-Aug-17
Stabbed
T. J. Gomes da Silva
João Pessoa, Brazil
12-Aug-17
Shot
Dianna
Limoeiro, Brazil
18-Aug-17
Shot
Evelin Ferrari
Caruaru, Brazil
22-Aug-17
Shot
Lilly
Cachoeira, Brazil
27-Aug-17
Shot to death
Daniele Jesus Lafon
Poços de Caldas, Brazil
2-Sep-17
Stabbed with a pair of scissors
Flávia
Santos, Brazil
3-Sep-17
Shot
Rai
Petrolândia, Brazil
3-Sep-17
Stoned to death
Ana Carolina Nascimento
Araraquara, Brazil
5-Sep-17
Beaten to death
Nicole
Sorriso, Brazil
5-Sep-17
Stabbed
Alessandra
São Paulo, Brazil
7-Sep-17
Shot
Bruna Monteiro
Taguatinga Sul, Brazil
8-Sep-17
Shot to death
Lorane
Camocim de São Felix, Brazil
9-Sep-17
Shot
Larissa Paiva
Serra, Brazil
14-Sep-17
Serra, Brazil
Safira
Salvador, Brazil
15-Sep-17
Shot to death
Name unknown
Camaçari, Brazil
16-Sep-17
Shot
Ana Coutti
Cabo Frio, Brazil
18-Sep-17
Multiple gunshot wounds
Kaleane
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
20-Sep-17
Shot in the head
Spencer
Campinas, Brazil
23-Sep-17
Beaten and stabbed
D.R.P.
Campinas, Brazil
24-Sep-17
Stabbed to death
Pâmela
Moreilândia, Brazil
25-Sep-17
Shot and beaten
Danhy Zn
Leme, Brazil
25-Sep-17
Not specified
Rayssa
Uberaba, Brazil
26-Sep-17
Shot twice
Lu Brasil
Altamira, Brazil
26-Sep-17
Cut and strangled
Renatha Lemos
Nova Mamoré, Brazil
30-Sep-17
Burned
Natália
Fortaleza, Brazil
30-Sep-17
Shot
Canada
Sisi Thibert
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
18-Sep-17
Stabbed to death
Chile
Vanessa Valenzuela
Viña del Mar, Region Valparaiso, Chile
28-Apr-17
Beaten with hammers and sticks by five people who yelled “kill the fag.”
Colombia
Alejandro Polanco Botero
Risaralda, Colombia
30-Nov-16
Shot four times in the head
Vikichy
Cali, Colombia
20-Jan-17
Stabbed in the chin and stomach
Silvana Fabian Pineda
La Dorada, Colombia
28-Jan-17
Multiple gunshot wounds
Angelo Ramos
Garzon, Colombia
9-Feb-17
Not reported
Name unknown
Chaparral, Colombia
16-Feb-17
Beaten to death
C. Camilo Valencia
Valle del Cauca, Colombia
19-Feb-17
Shot
Thursday, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Foundation, released Promising Practices for Serving Transgender & Non-Binary Foster & Adoptive Parents, a groundbreaking new guide designed to help foster care and adoption agencies recruit, certify and support qualified transgender and non-binary adults to become resource parents for young people who need safe, welcoming homes.
“With more than 100,000 young people awaiting adoption across the country, it is urgent for all prospective foster and adoptive parents, including trans and non-binary adults, to feel safe and welcomed in our nation’s foster care system,” said Mary Beth Maxwell, HRC’s Senior Vice President for Programs, Research, and Training. “Discrimination and disrespectful treatment too often create significant barriers for transgender and non-binary people wishing to become resource parents. All parents, no matter their gender identity, deserve the same opportunities to welcome youth into their families, and this detailed resource provides agencies with the information and tools they need to make that a reality.”
The guide offers information on inclusive policies, practices, terminology, and the current legal landscape for LGBTQ prospective parents. It also provides safe and affirming techniques for trans-inclusive data collection, recruitment, and training for agency staff and volunteers. It’s release coincides with National Adoption Month, which is marked every November.
“From Florida to California, foster care and adoption agencies have been reaching out to us, seeking more information on including and supporting both transgender and non-binary parents and youth,” said Alison Delpercio, Deputy Director of HRC’s Children, Youth and Families Program. “Through trainings, the implementation of inclusive policies, and the information contained in this guide, practitioners will gain a fuller perspective on the challenges facing transgender and non-binary adults and learn best practices on how to better welcome them.”
Delpercio continued, “Transgender and non-binary people are fully equipped to be loving and caring resource parents and many bring unique strengths to supporting children and youth with experiences in the foster care system. We just need to create the structures to support these parents.”
The guide also features the personal accounts of transgender and non-binary adoptive parents across the country. A transgender foster dad from California shares the fears he had before becoming a foster parent: “I was afraid of the process because I was certain I would have been humiliated for being transgender. In the past, I had to endure a lot of negative attitudes and verbal harassment simply for being transgender, and I was afraid of disclosing my gender history to my case manager for similar reasons. Since there were no other visible transgender and non-binary foster parents, I wasn’t sure what I was going to encounter.”
An estimated two million LGBTQ adults in the U.S. are interested in adoption, but the LGBTQ community often remains an untapped resource when it comes to finding families for children and youth in foster care. This guide will help agencies increase their pool of prospective foster and adoptive parents by ensuring they have the policies and practices in place to welcome and support LGBTQ resource families.
HRC’s All Children – All Families project promotes LGBTQ cultural competency among child welfare agencies through innovative resources, including an online agency self-assessment tool, comprehensive staff training, free technical assistance and more. Agencies across the country recognize the importance of this work and use ACAF resources to improve practice with LGBTQ youth and families.
In response to significant attacks on the rights of LGBTQ people, an unprecedented number of parents of transgender young people have come together to sign a declaration of rights seeking protections for their children and all transgender people from discrimination, violence and harassment. The declaration, signed by 1,400-plus parents and organized by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, the educational arm of the nation’s largest LGBTQ civil rights organization, comes as the nation marks Transgender Awareness Week, and one year after HRC launched its groundbreaking national Parents for Transgender Equality Council in the wake of Donald Trump’s election.
“What started as a council of 25 parents of transgender youth one year ago has grown into a movement of more than 1,400 parents demanding dignity and fairness for their children,” said HRC President Chad Griffin. “These courageous parents represent tens of thousands more across the nation and the challenges facing their families must be addressed by our policymakers and public officials. From building welcoming schools to ending violence against transgender women of color, our work will not be complete until every child in America and around the globe is afforded the opportunity, safety and respect that everyone deserves.”
The 1,400 signatories represent all fifty states and Washington, DC, demonstrating the breadth and diversity of the community of parents of transgender young people. Among the goals articulated by the brave and dedicated parents are the need for nationwide, comprehensive protections from discrimination, inclusive school policies, criminal justice reforms, and access to affirming health care.
The declaration reads, in part: “Despite our progress, we see our children growing up in a world where equality for all is not yet guaranteed. We seek universal respect, dignity, and the promise of safety for our children, and for all transgender people.”
“Our children are not political pawns,” said Peter Tchoryk, parent of a transgender youth and a member of HRC’s Parents for Transgender Equality Council. “They are young people simply hoping to learn and live productive lives. But because politicians like Donald Trump and Mike Pence have chosen to target them for discrimination, our families have been called to defend ourselves from their vicious attacks. Our country has been here before. This declaration demonstrates that our families exist in communities across the country and that we won’t relent until our children are safe from discrimination, harassment and violence.”
HRC’s Parents for Transgender Equality was launched in November of 2016 to amplify the voices of parents of transgender youth. Increasingly, the political attacks facing transgender people target the youngest in the community. Earlier this year, when the Trump-Pence Administration rescinded lifesaving guidance promoting the protection of transgender students, HRC’s Parents for Transgender Equality council sent a letter to the administration from more than a thousand parents demanding that the Obama-era guidance be preserved.
Throughout Transgender Awareness Week, HRC will discuss many of the urgent and important issues facing the transgender community — including support for youth and families, workplace equality, military service, and combatting violence against members of the transgender community. The week concludes on Monday, November 20, with Transgender Day of Remembrance, a time when the community comes together at vigils across the country to honor those lost in the past year.
A second transgender candidate has won a spot on the Minneapolis City Council.
Phillipe Cunningham narrowly won a northwestern Minneapolis ward by defeating longtime incumbent and council president Barb Johnson. His victory wasn’t announced until Wednesday afternoon, due to the instant-runoff voting system Minneapolis uses.
Cunningham is a 29-year-old transgender man. His victory follows one by Andrea Jenkins, a transgender woman who easily won a seat on the City Council Tuesday night.
It adds to a banner night for transgender people in public office. Danica Roem became the nation’s first openly transgender state lawmaker by winning a Virginia Statehouse seat.
Victory Fund, a group that advocated for LGBT candidates, said Jenkins was the nation’s first openly transgender woman elected to a major city’s governing board.
Transgender candidates across the nation won historic races Tuesday night – including Danica Roem, who will become the first openly trans person to win and serve in a state legislature. Four trans candidates won their state and local elections, with one more possible as results trickle in, almost doubling the number of trans elected officials in the country and solidifying 2017 as the year of the trans candidate.
“Hostile political forces at every level of government are targeting the trans community with legislation and policies that deny their equality,” said Aisha C. Moodie-Mills, President & CEO of Victory Fund. “Tonight was about fighting back – an unprecedented number of brilliant trans candidates asking for the votes of tens of thousands of Americans, and getting them. They are victorious because they focused on the local issues that matter most to their constituents – better schools, improved transportation and civil rights for all people. But it is also an undeniably historic night for the LGBTQ movement and for trans equality, having moved the needle on what is possible for a trans leader who aspires to run for office and make positive change. Now we have more trans voices in the halls of power, and 2017 will be remembered as the year of the trans candidate.”
Victory Fund invested heavily in its trans endorsed candidates this cycle, bundling hundreds of thousands of dollars in down-ballot races to dramatically increase the number of trans elected officials in the country. It sent staff to get out the vote for Danica Roem, Andrea Jenkins and Phillipe Cunningham, and provided regular campaign strategy sessions to help them target constituents and get out the vote.
Danica Roem, Virginia House of Delegates, District 13: Danica will become the first out trans person to win and serve in a state legislature, and will be the only out trans state legislator in the nation once she takes office. Victory Fund raised more than $200 thousand to help her defeat three primary opponents, and then 25-year incumbent Bob Marshall, who proudly describes himself as “chief homophobe” of the Virginia state legislature. Victory Fund also organized dozens of volunteers to help get out the vote on election day and in the days leading up to it.
Andrea Jenkins, Minneapolis City Council, Ward 8: Andrea is the first openly trans woman ever elected to the city council of a major U.S. city, and will be the only openly trans person of color currently serving in elected office anywhere in the nation. Andrea was featured at Victory Fund’s national event in May and thousands of dollars were bundled on her behalf.
Lisa Middleton, Palm Springs City Council (CA): Lisa is the first openly trans person to win a legislative seat in the state of California, and Victory Fund held a fundraiser on her behalf. Lisa is a former Victory Institute Empowerment Fellow and a graduate of Victory Institute’s Candidate & Campaign Training – a four-day intensive training simulation aimed at building the skills necessary to run for office.
Tyler Titus, Erie School Board (PA): Tyler is the first openly trans person ever elected in Pennsylvania. Victory Fund provided national exposure to Tyler’s race, securing articles in the Daily Beast and other publications.
Additionally, results are still coming in for Phillipe Cunningham, who ran for Minneapolis City Council’s ward 4 seat. If he wins, Phillipe will join Andrea Jenkins as the only out trans people to be elected to the city council of a major U.S. city.
Currently just six openly trans people are elected officials nationwide.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR) and GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) filed a response today in the Equality California case Stockman v. Trump challenging Trump’s transgender military ban in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Today’s court filing is the first in Stockman since Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s ruling last week in NCLR and GLAD’s other case Doe v. Trump, finding Trump’s ban to be unconstitutional and issuing a nationwide injunction against the ban.
“California has the highest number of service members and LGBT people of any state in the country. Trump’s ban is a baseless, malicious attack on our own,” said Equality California Executive Director Rick Zbur. “We’re in this fight, and we’ll keep fighting until this ban poses zero threat to our community and our military.”
“Last week, we secured a nationwide injunction that halts Trump’s ban,” said NCLR Legal Director Shannon Minter. “Right now, every transgender service member is protected, and qualified transgender Americans who wish to enlist can do so as of January 1, 2018. But we know this battle is not over—every federal court that declares this ban unconstitutional moves us closer to a permanent end to this nightmare for our dedicated and courageous service members.”
“Trump’s not playing with toy soldiers – these are real people whose lives are at stake. Thousands of transgender Americans are currently serving in our armed forces, and these highly trained, dedicated, and courageous service members have been experiencing real harms since Trump’s impulsive Twitter announcement, ” said GLAD Transgender Rights Project Director Jennifer Levi. “Last week’s clear and powerful ruling from Judge Kollar-Kotelly confirmed what we already know: Trump’s ban contradicts military leaders and expert research, and is based on nothing more than bias against the transgender community. We won’t stop fighting until we are assured every qualified transgender American who wishes to serve our country can do so on equal terms with all other service members.”
Today’s filing is strengthened by reasoning included in Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s recent ruling, and on these key arguments:
In Stockman, the Trump administration makes the same arguments that Judge Kollar-Kotelly found to “wither under scrutiny” and relies on Interim Guidance characterized by Judge Kollar-Kotelly as a “red herring.”
Under Trump’s ban, Stockman plaintiffs suffer actual, imminent, concrete harms:
Plaintiffs are targeted for forced separation solely because they are transgender and will suffer the loss of tenure, career prospects, and medical care,
Plaintiffs are able and ready to accede into service but are categorically excluded simply because they are transgender Americans, and
Plaintiffs suffer from the injustice of a discriminatory classification that demeans their abilities and fitness to serve as transgender people.
In addition to Equality California, plaintiffs in Stockman v. Trump, filed September 5, 2017, include three unnamed and four named plaintiffs. The named plaintiffs include Nicolas Talbott from Lisbon, Ohio, a 23-year old who wants to enlist but is unable to do so because of the ban, and Aiden Stockman from Yucca Valley, California, a 20-year old who wants to join the Air Force and took the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) test in high school. Aiden currently works at a local grocery store and sees the Air Force as a promising career as well as a way to serve his country, but has been prevented from moving forward because of the ban. Tamasyn Reeves, 29, started the process to enlist in the military but has been unable to serve because of the ban. Jaquice Tate, 27, is an active-duty member of the Army, serving as a Sergeant, E-5 Rank. Unnamed plaintiffs who do not wish to disclose their names include John Doe 1, a 28-year old currently serving as a Non-Commissioned Officer E-5 Staff Sergeant in the Air Force. John Doe 2 is a 20-year old currently serving as an E-4 Specialist (SPC) Operator-Maintainer in the Army. Jane Doe is currently serving as a Staff Sergeant, E-5 Rank, in the Air Force, a Risk Management Framework Program Manager at a strategically important overseas base.
Former top military leaders who were instrumental in the meticulous year-long process of assessing and adopting a policy of open service for transgender service members have lent their voices in legal cases against the ban, including retired Admiral and former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen, former Secretary of the Army Eric Fanning, former Secretary of the Navy Raymond Edwin Mabus, Jr., and former Secretary of the Air Force Deborah Lee James. All of these leaders have expressed their strong concern about the negative effects of Trump’s ban on military readiness, national security, and morale.
A hearing in Stockman v. Trump is scheduled for November 20 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Equality California, NCLR, and GLAD will continue to fight Trump’s ban in court until it no longer poses any threat to transgender Americans currently serving or who dream of serving our country.
In addition to NCLR and GLAD, plaintiffs in Stockman v. Trump are also represented by Latham & Watkins LLP.
Historically, when children with atypical sex characteristics were born in the United States, the people around them—parents and doctors—made their best guess and assigned the child a sex. Parents then reared them per social gender norms. Sometimes these people—intersex people—experienced harassment and discrimination as a result of their atypical traits. But many lived well-adjusted lives as adults. During the 1960s, however, based largely on the unproven recommendations of a single prominent psychologist, medical norms in the US changed dramatically. Doctors began recommending surgical solutions to the supposed “problem” of intersex traits—internal sex organs, genitalia, or gonads that do not match typical definitions of male and female. This medical paradigm remains the status quo nearly everywhere in the world today.
Defaulting to surgery resulted in stigmatization, confusion, and fear. In some cases, doctors advised parents to conceal the diagnosis and treatment from the child, instilling feelings of shame in parents and children both. And as a result, many in an entire generation of intersex people did not learn about their conditions until they saw their medical files as adults—sometimes as late as in their 50s.
Over time and with support and pressure from advocates, some medical norms have evolved. Today, intersex children and their families often consult a team of specialists, and not just a surgeon. The medical community has changed its approach to intersex cases—which doctors often categorize as “Differences of Sex Development” or “DSD”—by establishing “DSD teams.” These teams convene multiple healthcare specialists, including mental health providers, to advise on and treat intersex patients. Disclosure of a child’s intersex traits to the child is widely recommended. During this evolution in care, cosmetic surgeries on intersex children’s genitals have become highly controversial within the medical community. However, while the establishment of “DSD teams” has been perhaps the most significant evolution in care and has changed practices considerably, it has not addressed the fundamental human rights issues at stake.
Medical professional associations should enact standards of care for intersex children that rule out medically unnecessary surgery before patients are old enough to consent.
Most medical practitioners now acknowledge that in some cases parents may prefer to leave their child’s body intact as a way of preserving the person’s health, sexual function, fertility options, autonomy, and dignity. Consensus among specialists in intersex health has evolved to acknowledge data gaps and controversies—namely that there has never been sufficient research to show either that these surgeries benefit patients or that there is any harm from growing up with atypical genitals. A growing number of doctors are opposed to doing unnecessary early surgery under such conditions. Practitioners also increasingly recognize the suffering of intersex patients who underwent the operations without their consent.
However, despite these promising developments in care for intersex people, the field remains fraught with uneven, inadequate, and piecemeal standards of care—and with broad disagreements among practitioners that implicate the human rights of their intersex patients. While there are certain surgical interventions on intersex children that are undisputedly medically necessary, such as the creation of a urinary opening where one does not exist, some surgeons in the US continue to perform medically unnecessary “normalizing” surgeries on children, often before they are one year of age. These operations include clitoral reduction surgeries—procedures that reduce the size of the clitoris for cosmetic reasons. Such surgery carries the risk of chronic pain, nerve damage, and scarring. Other operations include gonadectomies, or the removal of gonads, which result in the child being sterile and forced onto lifelong hormone replacement therapy.
Healthcare providers are an important source of information and comfort amidst confusion. “Clinicians and parents alike refer to the period after the birth of an infant for whom gender assignment is unclear as a ‘nightmare,’” wrote Katrina Karkazis, a medical ethicist at Stanford University. “Not only does a child with ‘no sex’ occupy a legal and social limbo, but surprise, fear, and confusion often rupture the parents’ anticipated joy at the birth of their child.”
An endocrinologist told Human Rights Watch: “I understand the impulse for a parent to create something that looks normal—or at least normal according to a surgeon—at birth before the kid knows anything about it. I follow the logic pattern, but you have to run it against risks.” He said: “It’s important to be clear that a certain percentage of the time, something does go wrong and you have to do a re-op, and there’s a loss of sensitivity. So then the do-no-harm becomes: don’t do anything. What problem were you solving with surgery anyway?”
In July 2017, three former US surgeons-general, including one who was a pediatric endocrinologist, wrote that they believed “there is insufficient evidence that growing up with atypical genitalia leads to psychosocial distress,” and “while there is little evidence that cosmetic infant genitoplasty is necessary to reduce psychological damage, evidence does show that the surgery itself can cause severe and irreversible physical harm and emotional distress.” They said: “These surgeries violate an individual’s right to personal autonomy over their own future.” The three doctors concluded:
[B]abies are being born who rely on adults to make decisions in their best interest, and this should mean one thing: When an individual is born with atypical genitalia that pose no physical risk, treatment should focus not on surgical intervention but on psychosocial and educational support for the family and child.
For more than 50 years, the medical community in the United States has often defaulted to treating intersex children by conducting irreversible and unnecessary surgeries. Even after two decades of controversy and debate, there remains no research showing that early, medically unnecessary surgery is helpful to the intersex child. Nonetheless, to date, none of the clinics we surveyed have firmly instituted a moratorium on such operations. The evidence is overwhelming that these procedures carry risk of catastrophic harm. And while increasing numbers of doctors believe it is wrong to conduct these procedures, recent data demonstrate that many clinics continue to do so. Alice Dreger, a bioethicist who has written two books on intersex issues and served on a National Institutes of Health multi-site research project before resigning in protest in 2015, wrote of her two decades of engagement on the intersex surgery controversy: “While many clinicians have privately shared my outrage about these activities, in public, the great majority have remained essentially silent.”
International human rights bodies have recognized the practice as implicating and potentially violating a range of fundamental rights, including the rights to health, autonomy, integrity, and freedom from torture. At present, many of the doctors who advise or conduct surgeries on intersex infants and young children cite a lack of data on the outcomes for children who do not undergo surgery. “We just don’t know the consequences of not doing it,” a gynecologist told Human Rights Watch regarding medically unnecessary surgery. Others continue to call for data collection regarding the impact of the intact intersex body on families and society—as if intersex people are a threat to the social order. For example, a 2015 article co-authored by 30 DSD healthcare providers reflecting on genital surgeries published in the Journal of Pediatric Urology stated:
There is general acknowledgement among experts that timing, the choice of the individual and irreversibility of surgical procedures are sources of concerns. There is, however, little evidence provided regarding the impact of non-treated DSD during childhood for the individual development, the parents, society….
Human Rights Watch and interACT believe this approach has it exactly backwards: the experience of those who have undergone the surgery and principles of medical ethics suggest that unless and until there is outcome data establishing that the medical benefits of specific surgical procedures on infants and young children outweigh the potential harms, they should not be used.
Doctors have said they are seeking guidance on the issue so that they can avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. For example, in 2017, Dr. Ilene Wong, a urologist in Pennsylvania, acknowledged the harm in which she took part when she conducted surgery on an intersex child without her consent. She wrote: “Eight years ago, I did irrevocable damage to the first intersex person I ever met.” She said:
While some would argue that surgical practice has improved in the past decades, the fact remains that few attempts have been made to assess the long-term outcomes of these interventions. The psychological damage caused by intervention is just as staggering, as evidenced by generations of intersex adults dealing with post-traumatic stress disorder, problems with intimacy and severe depression. Some were even surgically assigned a gender at birth, only to grow up identifying with the opposite gender.
Others have offered similar testimony. Dr. Deanna Adkins, the Director of the Duke University Center for Child and Adolescent Gender Care, made an expert declaration to oppose North Carolina’s HB2, a sweeping statewide law repealing non-discrimination ordinances protecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people and barring transgender people from shared facilities. In her statement, referring to intersex children, Dr. Adkins argued:
It is harmful to make sex assignments based on characteristics other than gender identity. For example, in cases where surgery was done prior to the ability of the child to understand and express their gender identity, there has been significant distress in these individuals who then have to endure further surgeries to reverse the earlier treatments. It has become standard practice to wait until the gender identity is clear to make permanent surgical changes in these patients unless the changes are required to maintain the life or health of the child.
An endocrinologist on a DSD team told Human Rights Watch: “That’s an adage in medicine—above all do no harm.” He added: “I don’t think you’re going to find anybody that runs a DSD clinic that would argue with the fact that outcomes are better when you delay intervention in general.” A DSD specialist Human Rights Watch interviewed argued that “there’s probably rare if any situations where surgery is absolutely necessary.” She said doctors needed “clear guidelines, clear practice standards”—what she called “general principles of care and make it very clear that the emerging data is in favor of not intervening.”
Such guidelines have begun to emerge. In 2016, the American Medical Association Board of Trustees issued a report recognizing that “DSD communities and a growing number of health care professionals have condemned…genital ‘normalizing,’ arguing that except in the rare cases in which DSD presents as life-threatening anomalies, genital modification should be postponed until the patient can meaningfully participate in decision making.” The board recommended adoption of a resolution that, “except when life-threatening circumstances require emergency intervention, [doctors should] defer medical or surgical intervention until the child is able to participate in decision making.”
Accordingly, Human Rights Watch and interACT are urging the AMA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and other medical bodies, in line with the oath to “Do No Harm,” to support a moratorium on all surgical procedures that seek to alter the gonads, genitals, or internal sex organs of children with atypical sex characteristics too young to participate in the decision, when those procedures both carry a meaningful risk of harm and can be safely deferred.
