| |
Georgetown Law
Journal
November, 2003
Westlaw ©2003 cite as 92 GEO L.J. 129 reprinted with permission
of the author
Note
*129 WHO DECIDES?
GENITAL-NORMALIZING SURGERY ON INTERSEXED INFANTS
Alyssa Connell Lareau [FNa1]
page 20
[FN106]. In
re Romero, 790 P.2d 819, 821 (Colo. 1990) (internal citations omitted).
[FN107]. Beh & Diamond, supra note 73, at 40.
[FN108]. Jurgensen, supra note 7, at K12.
[FN109]. Cf. Henry Finlay, International Commentaries: Legal Recognition
of Transsexuals in Australia, 12 J. CONTEMP. HEALTH L. & POL'Y
503, 517 (1996) (arguing that as the "simplistic biblical dichotomy
between the sexes" gives way, legislatures must adjust law
accordingly); Phyllis Randolph Frye, Essay, The International Bill
of Gender Rights vs. The Cider House Rules: Transgenders Struggle
with the Courts over What Clothing They Are Allowed To Wear on the
Job. Which Restroom They Are Allowed To Use on the Job, Their Right
To Marry, and the Very Definition of Their Sex, 7 WM. & MARY
J. WOMEN & L. 133, 147, 169 (2000) (noting the steadfast refusal
of courts, even in the face of conflicting scientific evidence,
to recognize more than two sexes); Phyllis Randolph Frye & Alyson
Dodi Meiselman, Same-Sex Marriages Have Existed Legally in the United
States for a Long Time Now, 64 ALA. L. REV. 1031, 1053- 54 (2001)
(noting that a Texas Court of Appeals "legal sex test, which
defined chromosomes to be the only immutable characteristic, ignores
everyone whose chromosomal make-up is not XX or XY"); Natalie
Brown Michalek, Note, Littleton v. Prange: How Voiding Transsexual
Marriage Affects the Fundamental Right of Marriage, 52 BAYLOR L.
REV. 727, 736 (2000) (noting difficulties for intersexed individuals
to get any recognition because first "the law must foray into
the murky realm of medicine, ethics, and religion to determine which
attributes take precedence in determining sex").
[FN110]. See Blizzard, supra note 12, at 618-19 (noting that pediatric
urologists are polarized in respect to performing early surgery
or delayed surgery). This polarization can be seen by comparing
the comments of Dr. Kenneth Glassburg, a pediatric urologist who
advocates surgery ("I think the individual who is not operated
on will have problems in society as we know it today") with
the comments of Dr. Bruce Wilson, a pediatric endocrinologist who
opposes surgery ("To hear a group of people saying, 'I don't
have normal sexual response.' 'I have painful sex because of the
scar tissue,' 'I feel completely asexual because of what was done
to me"' compels opposition to the surgery). ABC News, supra
note 65.
[FN111]. See Daaboul & Frader, supra note 39, at 1580.
[FN112]. See Beh & Diamond, supra note 73, at 62 (concluding
that "the informed consent doctrine has more potential to change
collective practices"); Patricia L. Martin, Moving Toward an
International Standard in Informed Consent: The Impact of Intersexuality
and the Internet on the Standard of Care, 9 DUKE J. GENDER L. &
POL'Y 135, 168 (2002) (concluding that "[i]nformed consent
is an essential element of medical treatment of the intersexed");
Glenn M. Burton, General Discussion of Legal Issues Affecting Sexual
Assignment of Intersex Infants Born with Ambigious [sic] Genitalia,
at http:// www.isna.org/library/burton2002.doc (last visited Nov.
10, 2003) (advocating "more expansive informed consent").
[FN113]. See, e.g., Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772, 780 (D.C.
Cir. 1972) (stating that patients must have the "opportunity
to evaluate knowledgeably the options available and the risks attendant
upon each"); Cobbs v. Grant, 502 P.2d 1, 10 (Cal. 1972) ("[A]n
integral part of the physician's overall obligation to the patient
... is a duty of reasonable disclosure of the available choices
with respect to proposed therapy and of the dangers inherently and
potentially involved in each."); see also Kishka-Kamari Ford,
Note, "First, Do No Harm"--The Fiction of Legal Parental
Consent to Genital-Normalizing Surgery on Intersexed Infants, 19
YALE L. & POL'Y REV. 469, 474 (2001).
<<
previous 20/22
next >>
|
