From All Over: GenderNews
  • HRC to Support Transgender Issues
  • Toledo Passes Human Rights Ordinance
  • GenderPac Examines Recent Dept. of Justice Announcement
  • District Of Columbia Guilty In Death Of Transgender
  • UK Permits Change Of Legal Sex For Intersex Child

  • Posted
    December 18
    1998




    GenderNews Headlines

    GenderNews Index

    Other News Sources

    Community Notices

    IFGE Home

     

    HRC to Support Transgender Issues

    This December 8 press release from the HRC came to us via Via Gender Advocacy Internet News(GAIN), gain@gender.org We have emphasized the TG-relevant parts of the press release.

    HRC Board Of Directors Set Legislative Priorities For 1999

    Board Begins To Review Endorsement Process And Passes Resolution Of Support For Transgender Issues

    Washington, D.C. -- Planning for the 1999 legislative year in a more favorable political climate were among the topics discussed this past weekend at the quarterly meeting of the Human Rights Campaign's Board of Directors. At the two-day meeting, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act, and a number of health initiatives were established as top legislative priorities. Other issues addressed include reviewing the organization's criteria for candidate endorsements and passage of a resolution of support for transgender issues.

    In the wake of controversy that enveloped HRC's endorsement this year of Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, R-New York, as well as the 1996 endorsement of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., over Gov. William Weld, R-Mass., the Board began a review of its endorsement policies.

    "We adhered to established and publicized criteria in making our endorsement of Senator D'Amato. We believe it would have been highly unethical to change that criteria in the middle of an election cycle. Now that the election cycle is over, we have an obligation to address the level of discontent that this endorsement caused some of our membership," said Jeff Sachse, Co-Chair of HRC's Board of Directors. "While maintaining our firm commitment to bipartisanship, HRC will immediately begin a review at both the staff and board level of the endorsement process, with a specific focus on selection criteria."

    At the same meeting, the Board passed the following resolution expressing strong support for public and private initiatives that counter discrimination based on real or perceived gender identity:

    "The Human Rights Campaign strongly supports public and private initiatives to counter discrimination based on real or perceived gender identity. We acknowledge the extraordinary work of transgender organizations and leaders and view them as important friends and powerful allies. The Human Rights Campaign is committed to a mutually beneficial relationship with the transgender community. It is our hope that such a relationship will help inform and craft a shared vision of a world that honors and respects all people regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."

    "It is our hope that this resolution will be seen as a first step in reaffirming our strong support for remedies that will ban discrimination based on gender identity," said Candy Marcum, Board of Directors Co-Chair. "We hope to work closely with the transgender community in finding the right solutions."

    .     .     .

    NEWS from the
    Human Rights Campaign
    919 18th Street, NW, Suite 800
    Washington, DC 20006
    email: hrc@hrc.org, web site:http://www.hrc.org


     
     




    GenderNews Headlines

    GenderNews Index

    Other News Sources

    Community Notices

    IFGE Home

     

    Toledo Passes Human Rights Ordinance

    Copyright Gay People's Chronicle
    P.O. Box 5426, Cleveland, Ohio 44101
    216-631-8646 Fax 216-631-1052
    chronicle@chronohio.com
    http://www.cleveland.com/community/gay

    Toledo Passes GLBT Civil Rights Ordinance

    Measure is one of a few in the nation to include 'gender identity'

    by Dawn E. Leach
    December 11, 1998

    Toledo-City council members on December 8 unanimously passed one of the most comprehensive lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights laws in Ohio. The ordinance bans discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations, and also creates stiffer penalties for anti-gay hate crimes. Sexual orientation is defined for the purposes of the ordinance as "real or perceived heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or gender identity, by orientation or practice." Mayor Carleton Finkbeiner is expected to sign the measure.

    Openly gay council member Louis Escobar introduced the ordinance November 10, and nine of twelve members co-sponsored it. After a unanimous role-call vote December 8, council members congratulated Escobar and members of Gays and Lesbians United, which organized efforts to garner support for the measure.

    "I'm so excited," a breathless Dan Fields said moments after the vote. Fields is a member of GLU's human rights ordinance committee. Fields estimated that 140 people attended a December 7 hearing which the council's Law and Justice committee held to discuss the human rights ordinance. Committee members heard over two hours of testimony before sending the bill to the full council for final passage.

    Among those who testified in favor of the ordinance were State Rep. Jack Ford, Toledo police chief Mike Navarre, Toledo fire chief Mike Bell, attorneys Mark Prajsner and Cindy Voller, three clergy members, and four GLU members.

    GLU planned a victory party for the day after the vote so that everyone who worked for the measure could celebrate the fruits of their efforts. Toledo is now the eleventh city in Ohio to include sexual orientation in its civil rights ordinances. The others are Columbus, Cleveland, Youngstown, Yellow Springs, Athens, Oberlin, and the Cleveland suburbs of Lakewood, Westlake, North Olmsted and Cleveland Heights. Dayton and Cuyahoga County have measures covering city or county employees only.
     


    This item came to us via GAIN, which included the following notes --

    Received from Mary Ann Horton (mah@gender.org) Mary Ann notes:
    The GLU web site is at http://www.fripro.com/TOLEDOGLU.htm ,
    Full text of ordinance at http://www.ci.toledo.oh.us/council/ord1183.HTML.


     
     




    GenderNews Headlines

    GenderNews Index

    Other News Sources

    Community Notices

    IFGE Home

     

    GenderPac Examines Recent
    Dept. of Justice Announcement

    This analysis is provided by InYourFace on-line news. For prior press releases, check the GenderPAC website at: http://www.gpac.org.
    For background, read our previous story "DOJ To Use Gender Bias Laws To Pursue Some GLBT Cases".

    The U.S. Justice Department announced on 14 Nov 98 that DOJ will study the possibility of using existing civil rights laws to litigate cases of state and local government discrimination against people who do not comport to gender stereotypes; e.g., effeminate males, masculine females, transgendered people. In response to subscribers' questions, we offer this analysis to clarify the implications of DOJ's announcement for transgender people.

    Q: What is behind the movement at DOJ?
    A: Hard to say. Some commentators are suggesting that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 might bar discrimination based on gender stereotypes. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, the recent Supreme Court decision, is an example of a heterosexual man, a slight, soft-spoken man, who was verbally harassed by other men for not fitting the masculine physical stereotype. The precedent set in this case supports the notion of a similar application to cases involving discrimination against gay, lesbian, and transgender people.

    Q: What is a sex stereotype, a gender stereotype?
    A: Examples of gender stereotypes includes the ideas that women aren't aggressive, all men are exclusively attracted to women, and that everyone is born either male or female, with a matching sense of sexual identity.

    Q: Does this mean that DOJ is now protecting transpeople and other gender-different people on the job?
    A: No. First, in this area, DOJ only has jurisdiction in cases involving state and local government employees. Second, at this point DOJ is merely examining how its efforts might be better focused in light of how federal sex-discrimination law has developed.

    Q: I just lost my job at the Jorgenson Toolworks Company. Should I contact DOJ?
    A: No. Remember that DOJ only has jurisdiction in cases involving state and local government employees, not the private sector.

    Q: I just lost my job as the city clerk in RuPaul, Oklahoma because of my gender-expression. Should I contact DOJ?
    A: Perhaps. If there is evidence of gender-stereotyping (e.g., witnesses who heard stereotypical statements, or documents containing or reflecting them), you may want to contact DOJ. However, be aware that DOJ staff may refer you initially to the EEOC, because a referral from that agency is needed before DOJ can act in this area. Moreover, if DOJ staff decide to begin litigating, they will not necessarily take every case brought to their attention. It is more likely that staff will look for cases with the greatest value to set precedent.

    Q: Does this mean we no longer need gender protection in the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)?
    A: Not at all. First, in this area, DOJ's jurisdiction is limited to state and local governments, whereas ENDA is broader. Second, DOJ only enforces existing law. This development reflects DOJ's interest in better understanding the coverage provided by existing law. Enactment of ENDA, however, would change the law itself, settling these issues once and for all.

    Q: Is there a downside to all this?
    A: Yes, on three fronts. First, DOJ could be so besieged by anxious folks expecting DOJ to win back their jobs that DOJ backs away from this initiative, and it becomes more difficult for groups interested in gender rights to work with DOJ. Second, the courts could reject further application of gender-stereotyping theory, leaving us worse off that before. Third, DOJ activity in this area, and/or court decisions, could trigger a Congressional backlash.

    Q: How should we react to this?
    A: This is going to take awhile to work itself out, both in the field, at DOJ, and in the courts. In the meantime, we recommend that you continue to educate your Congress- member, either at Lobby Day or at home, and continue to seek local employment protection for public and private employees that explicitly includes gender expression.


     
     




    GenderNews Headlines

    GenderNews Index

    Other News Sources

    Community Notices

    IFGE Home

     

    District Of Columbia Guilty
    In Death Of Transgender

    Two items from InYourFace about the Tyra Hunter trial.

    Jury Finds Dictrict Of Columbia Guilty Of Negligence And Malpractice In Tyra Hunter's Death

    [Washington, D.C.: 11 Dec 98] The jury in the Tyra Hunter wrongful death trial awarded Tyra's mother, Margie Hunter, $2,873,000, finding the District of Comumbia guilty of negligence and malpractice in Tyra's death in August 1995. The jury of two men and six women reached the verdict after three days of deliberations.

    Tyra died at D.C. General Hospital after being in an auto accident. Ms. Hunter had alleged that a D.C. EMT had ceased treating Tyra at the accident scene when he discovered Tyra's male genitals. The EMT then backed away and made joking remarks about Tyra, leaving her unattended for 5-7 minutes. Ms. Hunter also alleged that a D.C. General doctor did not provide competent care in the emergency room. The jury found the city guilty of both allegations.

    The jury awarded: $100,000 for emotional harm suffered by Tyra as a result of the epithets uttered at the scene; $500,000 for damages attributable to the withdrawal of medical care at the accident scene; $1,500,000 for conscious pain and suffering endured by Tyra in the emergency room as the result of medical malpractice; $400,000 for damages attributable to Tyra's wrongful death; and $373,000 for damages attributable to the loss of Tyra's estate (what she would have retained in her estate after a lifetime of work, had she lived).

    There is no word yet on whether or not the defense will appeal. Said Dee Curry, Co-founder of Transgenders Against Discrimination and Defamation (TADD), "The District of Columbia must now take notice and assure that its employees will treat all of its citizens fairly and equally. There can be no dress code for human rights in this city."

    Trial Summary

    [Washington, D.C.: 13 Dec 98] Transgender woman Tyra Hunter died on 7 Aug 95 at D.C. General Hospital after having been in an auto accident. On Friday 11 Dec 98, a D.C. jury awarded $2.8 million in damages to Tyra's mother who had brought a wrongful death & survival action against the District of Columbia, the supervising Emergency Room physician, and an Emergency Medical Technician. Local trans-gender attorney Dana Priesing attended each session of the trial. This is her summary and analysis of the evidence underlying the verdict.

    "Tyra was knocked out by the crash, but by the time the firemen arrived, she was conscious but dazed, and developing airway trouble from teeth knocked into her mouth. Tyra looked female at first glance, but in their initial injury assessment, a fireman discovered Ty's male genitals, uttered the epithets ("This ain't no bitch. It's a nigger. He's got a dick and balls."), and ceased treating her. They failed to clear her airway for some period of time while they laughed at her as the crowd yelled at them to get to work. Other emergency personnel on scene approached some time later, after treating the other injured passenger. They found Tyra still lying on the grass, gagging and combative, apparently trying to escape the taunting firemen. Supervisor Roulhac then arrived and ordered Ty's airway cleared.

    "Tyra reached the ER at 4:10 p.m. She was received as a combative transgendered "John Doe" with breasts and male genitalia, makeup and female clothes. Mysteriously, she was given Narcan, which plaintiff's expert witness Dr. Baker termed a counter- narcotic. With an elevated pulse and below normal blood pressure, it was obvious that she was in hypovolemic shock (HVS). The blood was not coming from her head or limbs. ER personnel X-rayed her chest 20 minutes after she arrived. Those X-rays have disappeared.

    "The contemporaneous notes said 'patchy haziness left lung field,' 'heart pushed right.' A peritineal lavage suggested no blood in the abdomen. In view of the HVS and lack of blood elsewhere, Tyra's chest obviously needed further investigation. Yet from 4:45, for the next half hour, the ER personnel did substantially nothing. Blood had been ordered. It wasn't given. Lactated Ringers continued to drip, but they didn't open the tap to speed it up as her fluid volume fell. Somebody drew a little blood at 5:10 for a blood gas test, but these results also disappeared.

    "Tyra's pulse and blood pressure slowly fell, and she suffocated from lack of oxygen in her blood. Dr. Baker testified that the sensation would have been "sheer terror." A muscle relaxant paralyzed her, and an amnesia drug would have prevented her remembering (had she survived), but it wouldn't have prevented her from experiencing that terror, as she lay there for over half an hour without treatment. She died at 5:20 p.m. Only then did the ER staff insert a chest tube, releasing at least 1500 ccs of blood, as well as air, that had built up in her chest. They administered CPR (badly enough to mash her spleen), then opened her chest and performed heart massage.

    "The administration of the Narcan supports the inference that a stereotype (namely that Tyra was an anonymous, drug using, TG street person) affected the treatment she received. The ER staff, as evidenced by their actions, did not consider her life worth saving; the post-death CPR and heart massage were merely perfunctory, CYA measures, or a practice opportunity. To the jury's credit, they looked beyond the stereotype, discovered the human being, and recognized the injustice done to her."


     
     




    GenderNews Headlines

    GenderNews Index

    Other News Sources

    Community Notices

    IFGE Home

     

    UK Permits Change Of Legal Sex
    For Intersex Child

    The first of two reports about this story is from The Intersex Society of North America (ISNA), "A peer support, education, and advocacy group for intersexuals: individuals born with mixed sexual anatomy." Their web site is at http://www.isna.org/

    From ISNA News

    The UK has generally prohibited change of legal sex, whether for transexuals (adults who use surgical and hormonal interventions to alter the sex characteristics of their bodies) or for intersexuals (persons born with mixed sexual characteristics).

    A story in the London Evening Standard reports on a 10 year old child who was born male, but his abdomen, bladder, and penis were open in the middle. At age 17 months, surgeons decided to convert him into a girl. She has undergone dozens of surgeries to date.

    After an eight year legal battle, the mother has succeeded in having her child's legal sex changed from male to female.

    The practice of assigning children such as this one female has been called into question lately by intersex activists, sex researchers, and medical specialists in pediatric urology and pediatric endocrinology.
     


    This December 2 press release is from UKPFC-NEWS, of Press for Change, the UK's trans rights campaign. (More info at http://www.pfc.org.uk)

    "Joella Holliday can marry, but can't stay married,"
    warn transexual leaders

    Leaders of Press for Change, the UK's transsexual rights campaign, today welcomed the decision by the Office of National Statistics to alter the birth certificate of ten-year-old Joella Holliday, re-registering her as female ... but warned of problems ahead.

    PFC vice-president Christine Burns said today:
    "We are delighted that Joella will no longer have her life blighted by a document which claims that she is someone else, and congratulate her parents in their persistence in standing up for their daughter. No one should be forced to carry a legal identity which doesn't match the reality of their lives, and it's a credit to the registrars in the Office of National Statistics that they have finally faced reality in this case."

    Joella's case raises new questions for the status of transsexual and intersexed people in the UK, and Joella Holliday's situation may not be as neatly resolved as media reports have suggested.

    .     .     .

    Law lecturer and PFC vice-president Stephen Whittle said:
    "Sadly, newspaper reports that Joella will be allowed to marry are raising her hopes unfairly, and her new birth certificate will not remove her from legal limbo. In the 1970 case of April Ashley (Corbett v Corbett), Lord Justice Ormerod established a 'test' for sex determination in marriage cases. This which means that if Joella were to get divorced and her husband wanted to avoid his obligations, her marriage could be declared void".

    "Since the Ormerod judgement, the situation has been very clear: a valid marriage may be contracted only between a man and a woman, and sex is determined by chromosomes. Successive governments, including the current administration, have repeatedly made it clear that this remains the legal position. Since Joella has male chromosomes she will not able to legally marry a man -- though she may be able to legally marry another woman."

    "The ONS's decision means that chromosomal tests are apparently nolonger to be regarded as definitive in determinining sex as recorded on the birth certificate, which is welcome news for transsexual people. On the basis of this decision, we will encourage the UK's 5000 transsexual people to immediately reapply for corrected birth certificates. But until the law is properly overhauled, administrative tinkering will not rescue Joella from the legal nightmare she shares with thousands of other transsexual and intersexed citizens of the UK."

    .     .     .

    Stressing the parallels betwen Joella's case and that of transsexual women, PFC Vice-President Christine Burns added:
    "In law, there is no difference between Joella and a transsexual woman ... and in practice the only actual difference is that gender reassignment surgery was inflicted upon her by others, whereas transsexual people are in the position of trying to get surgery. She has XY chromosomes ... just like transsexual women ... and sufficient to invalidate her marriage under the 'test' devised by Justice Ormerod".

    "She will have an artificial vagina ... just like a transsexual woman ... a fact dismissed as an irrelevance by Justice Ormerod."

    "She has no internal reproductive organs that are female ... just like a transsexual woman ... and sufficient to annul her marriage under either the Ormerod test or the Matrimonial Causes Act".

    "In short, had Joella possessed anything resembling a penis and been able to keep it, there would be no doubt whatsoever as to the fact that on all three physical counts she was a boy ... just as transsexual women are characterised."

    .     .     .

    Stressing the inconsistency of medical and legal approaches to transsexual and intersexed people, Christine Burns continued:
    "What is truly bizarre, and raises serious ethical questions, is the question of what would then have happened if she had subsequently told people that she had the feminine gender identity which she is reported to have ... and which I don't doubt that she does have. She would then have been labelled a transsexual (and 'all that rubbish', to quote her specialist) ... and been denied the treatment which it was OK to inflict upon her!"

    "The ONS would also have refused to alter her birth certificate."

    "What we have, therefore, is not a difference of facts ... but a difference in the interpretation put on the facts. A specialist is entitled to decide a child's gender, with no real way of telling ... and no knowledge of the outcome which his decision is going to have ... and that decision can then be given legal effect". "Conversely, however, a young person or adult with the ability to say whether they are psychologically male or female is denied that same decision ... and no official credence is given to it".

    "The ONS has tied itself in knots now ... having abandoned the three physical criteria which it has insisted, for thirty years, to be the reasons for not allowing a transsexual person to be recognised officially as the person they are. We wait with interest for the government to now sort out the mess which they've created ... and I wait with particular interest to see how they respond to my application for a new birth certificate."

    .     .     .

    Background information:
    The UK remains one of only four out of 39 countries in the Council of Europe which fails to provide full legal recognition in their new gender for transsexual people: the others are Albania, Andorra, and Ireland. This failure causes countless problems for transsexual people in their everyday lives.

    Despite being issued with corrected passports and driving licenses reflecting their true gender, transsexual people remain legally in the gender assigned to them at birth. Apart from being unable to conduct a valid marriage, their tax and social security records retain the orginal gender, and insurance policies may be invalidated if they do not declare their legal status. If convicted of a crime, they risk being sent to a prison for the oppoosite sex, and any situation requiring the production of a birth certificate guarantees a breach of personal privacy.

    The government inists that a birth certificate is not an identity document, yet civil service and public sector employers insist that it accompanies job applications.


     
     
    Send news stories or comments to the editor at iphge@hotmail.com.
    GenderNews Headlines
    GenderNews Index
    List of Community Notices

    Back to IFGE Home

    Page prepared by Beth Lewis.