One of the things I know for sure is that not every child that has had an ambiguous gender condition with medical care and surgery/ies as an infant and toddler is angry and distraught about it.
I spent time reading every single article on the now- defunct (transformed) Intersex Society Of North America advocacy website. I generally agree with roughly ½ of what they have on their website-- the info that is designed to be educational about what "intersex" birth conditions are. I dont agree at all with 1/2 of what they advocate.
My overall impression is that this is a society of profoundly angry and frustrated individuals who are more interested in expressing their anger over social issues, and what kinds of medical intervention happened decades ago, than in advocating for the current care of these infants, kids, and young adults NOW. Maybe that's why the folded in 2008?
No one in health care, for decades upon decades (probably 30-40 years), has advocated that intersex birth conditions should be kept secret from patients as older kids and adults, medical records falsified, etc. That's pure baloney.
I am reminded of a video my spouse and I were made to watch during our adoption classes. The video was about VERY angry adoptees who were now adults, and furious with the circumstances of their very legal and ethical adoptions, the lack of control they had over their early lives, and the situations that lead to them being available for adoption. These people in the videos were consumed with the unfairness of the circumstances of their lives because they were not in biologically nuclear families (and all were adopted by loving families who were honest and tried to keep the adopted person connected to their personal histories as well as birth cultures.) If this was all a prospective adoptive parent was shown or taught, it would lead one to think *every* adopted person as an adult was dysfunctionally angry, frustrated, and obsessive about their adoptionsand we all know that this is far from the truth.
I liken this intersex advocacy somewhat to the debate on routine male infant circumcision. Some cultures do it, others dont, some pay for it, others dont, some think there is medical advantage to the procedure, others think its unnecessary and cosmetic. Some families would be devastated if their male infants did NOT have foreskin circumcision; others are devastated if a male child in their family IS circumcised. The ISNA (and subsequent Accord group) wants to present all of the surgical care of intersexed infants as if all of the care is ruthlessly cosmetic and frivolous/ electiveunless there is something serious, such as what they describe as impaired drainage of urine-- in which case they begrudgingly "allow" surgical intervention. That is, IMO, a very extremist position to take, and IMO, not at all representative of the majority of individuals who were born with an intersex condition, and are emotionally and socially healthy as older kids and adults.
Parents of infants have to make decisions every day all over the world about how to deal with all kinds of birth defects and birth deformities (and yes, I know some people take a basic offense at the terms defect and deformity.) The overwhelming majority of the time, parents and surrogate parents make the absolute best decisions they can for the infants/ toddlers (and teams of doctors for kids in foster care, guardians ad litems, etc). Kids are born with all kinds of differences that are far more noticeable sociallycraniofacial deformities, limb deformities, etc. For the most part, genital deformities are hidden from social interaction unless the person chooses to share. Choosing a gender to raise a child in preliminarily is done by virtually every single parent on earthand parents of intersex kids require assistance from the medical community due to the medical issues with the childs intersex condition.
Should a child with "lobster claw" syndrome not be treated until adulthood, so that the child can "choose" whether to surgically intervene? Should a child with cleft lip and palate be made to "wait" until adulthood to decide if their deformity should be treated-- to decide if they can talk more normally? Swallow? Should we make those kids go deaf from ear infections until they are old enough to decide if they wanted to keep their hearing? Should a child with clubfoot, or extra vestigial limbs be made to wait to adulthood to make decisions about their care, to decide if they want to try to be able to walk? Because these are valid questions, IMO, if we "decide" that kids with major intersex conditions should "wait" to have any intervention until they are "old enough" to decide.
There was nothing malicious or negligent or abusive about the care this child received in 2005. The parents need to get over their own issues about the care this child received, and get back to the business of raising this child to be whoever she or he turns out to be. If the child is a "she", great! If the child is a "he", that's ALSO great! The child has a "genital disability" that is separate from GENDER identity. The 2 are not one and the same, just as in transgendered people.
What doctors did for this child 10 years ago was not a needless or frivolous genital mutilation. Good grief.
This lawsuit, IMO, is not groundbreaking or brave or even a little bit appropriate. The parents, IMO, are making this situation into a MUCH more embarrassing and high profile ordeal for this 10 year old child that is necessary. IMO, they are not advocating for the childIMO they are exploiting the childs situation for attention and notoriety. They are not shielding and protecting THIS child from public attention.
I strongly condemn these parents for what theyre doing, and especially bringing this to such a public platformits not at all a good or noble, or conscientious thing, IMO. The child has a hard enough situation to deal with as she/ he enters adolescence and adulthoodthe parents are making it much, much worse, IMO.
