The Sylvia Rivera Law Project is objecting after a Manhattan Civil Court judge denied name changes to four transgendered women who sought the new names as part of transitioning to their female sex. “He called us up and said I’m denying this because I don’t want to adjudicate gender,” said Pooja Gehi, a staff attorney at the Project, which represents three of the four women.

The denials, which occurred in July, came after Jose A. Padilla, the judge, “insisted on a requirement for medical documentation related to sex reassignment surgeries,” according to a press statement from the Project, which represents transgendered people and is named for the late transgendered activist.

The state law that governs name changes limits judicial review of any application for a name change to concerns related to criminal acts, such as whether the person is seeking to avoid debt or to participate in identity theft. “According to the statute, it’s limited to fraud or misrepresentation or the interference with another person’s rights,” Gehi said.

Generally, name changes are easy to obtain and denials are rare. Padilla cited a 1992 case from a Queens court that also denied a name change to a transgendered person. Gehi said that case was “outdated” and “not really relevant.”

There are no higher court decisions, either favorable or unfavorable, in New York state that the Project can point to, but it has asked Padilla, who did not respond to a Gay City News request for comment, to reconsider in a recent brief. They have not yet received a response. “We wrote a brief explaining why his decision was inappropriate, but we haven’t heard back,” Gehi said.

While it is generally easier to get a name change compared to changing the gender identification on a driver’s license or a passport, it can be just as important. “It’s basically a part of contributing to their safety, their being able to interact in the world with their preferred name and with a name that matches their gender,” Gehi said. “It’s a big step for comfort.”

Pauline Park, chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy, a leading transgender group, was not surprised to learn of the denials. “One, it’s becoming increasingly easy and two, it’s very arbitrary,” she said. “I have heard anecdotal evidence of people either being denied or having a hard time.”

Whether a person successfully obtains a name change in New York City can depend on which borough they live in and which judge reviews the
application, Park said.

Changing one’s “legal sex designation” is “a much more elaborate procedure,” Park explained, so the news that even name changes are being denied pointed up just how difficult the entire process can be for transgendered people. “It is the easiest,” Park said. “If someone is encountering a problem with name change then clearly that suggests there may be even greater difficulties when trying to get a change of legal sex designation…
It is a very difficult situation. I think we are still in the early stages in dealing with these issues.”

This article originally appeared in the 14-20 September 2006  issue (Volume 5, Number 37) of Gay City News.

The post Advocates Protest Name Change Denial (GCN, 9.14.06) appeared first on Pauline Park.

Birth Certificate Policy Must Reflect Reality of Trans Lives
By Pauline Park and Michael Silverman
Gay City News
16 November 2006

Most people don’t think about their birth certificates. But for transgendered people, changing the sex designation on their birth certificates from M to F or F to M can be a crucial step in getting a job, traveling, and even accessing public restrooms. When a transgendered person’s gender presentation differs from the legal sex designation (the gender marker of M or F) on his or her personal ID, that can result in job discrimination or the denial of social services or even access to public accommodations such as restrooms and government and corporate office buildings.

On October 30, the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene held a public hearing on a proposal to allow transgendered people who meet certain stringent requirements to change the sex listed on their birth certificates. When we testified on behalf of our own organizations and the members of the Transgender Health Initiative of New York, we expressed support for the city’s efforts to allow transgendered people to change their birth certificates. But we also expressed our deep concern with certain aspects of the proposed policy.

Our primary concern is this: the proposed requirements for obtaining an amended birth certificate are so onerous and burdensome that most transgendered people will not qualify. The new policy requires a transgendered person to provide an affidavit from a doctor and a mental health professional. Each of these individuals must attest to the treatments that a transgendered person has undergone toward gender transition. While that may sound like a minor requirement, it is not.

Many people lack access to even basic health care, let alone the expensive medical and mental health treatments the policy would require. Poor people and people of color are far less likely to be able to access health care than middle-class white people. Transgendered people are overwhelmingly poor and unemployed or under-employed. Many are people of color. How will these transgendered people access the expensive medical and mental health
care required by the city’s proposed policy?

Middle-class white transgendered New Yorkers will benefit from the proposed policy, which is a good thing. But we believe that the policy should be changed so that all transgendered people will be able to benefit from an amended birth certificate, regardless of race or class.

We also find problematic the requirement that an applicant demonstrate that he or she has undergone medical treatment for gender transition. Throughout history-and before the development of hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery-there have been people we would call transgendered who lived in the gender opposite their birth sex. Many transgendered people live full and complete lives without any medical intervention whatsoever. Some choose not to have surgery or take hormones for personal reasons. For others, such medical treatments are medically contraindicated and would harm their health. By making medical intervention a requirement for an amended birth certificate, the city encourages medical treatment that individuals may not want or that may endanger their health.

The policy also requires that an applicant demonstrate that he or she has undergone psychological counseling. There’s no doubt that such counseling may be of benefit to some, but requiring it suggests that a transgendered person is unable to actualize his or her identity without mental health counseling, or that transgender identity itself is a mental illness. No gay person is required to demonstrate that he or she has undergone psychological counseling before coming out. No transgendered person should have to do so either.

We have sent three letters to the Department urgently requesting a meeting to discuss the proposed policy, but we have received no response. We urge the Department to meet with us in order to discuss its proposed policy and our recommendations. We stand ready to work with Department officials to draft a more inclusive policy that will help all transgendered New Yorkers obtain amended birth certificates if they need them to live full and productive lives.

Pauline Park is chair of the New York Association for Gender Rights Advocacy (NYAGRA). Michael Silverman is executive director and general counsel of the Transgender Legal Defense & Education Fund (TLDEF).

This article originally appeared as an op-ed in the 16 November 2006 issue of Gay City News.

The post Birth Certificate Policy Must Reflect Reality of Trans Lives appeared first on Pauline Park.