Leave to Intervene in Cases of Gender Identity Disorder; Normative Causation; Financial Harms and Involuntary Treatment; and the Right to Be Protected From Suicide

Abstract

Treatmentof GenderDysphoria in Children,Leaveto Intervene: Re Jamie [2012] FamCAFC 8TheFullCourtoftheAustralianFamilyCourtdealtwithan application to intervene in a case of transsexualismtreatment for children in Re Jamie [2012] FamCAFC 8.Jamie was born a nonidentical twin and was geneticallymale. However, when Jamie was two and a half yearsold, she began to identify as a female. By the time shestarted school, she lived exclusively as a female, woregirl’sclothes,wenttothegirl’stoilet,andwastreatedbyher teachers and classmates as a girl. Jamie was diag-nosed as having childhood gender identity disorder andher treatment team recommended that she, initially, begiven puberty suppressing hormones and, secondly,oestrogen treatment. The matter went to trial beforeDessau J, who concluded that the treatment was a spe-cial treatment that had to be approved by the court andwhich could not be consented to by the parents.Further, her Honour decided that she would onlyconsent to the first stage of treatment and not tothe oestrogen therapy, given that Jamie was veryyoung and that the second stage of therapy couldcommence at a later time when Jamie may be ableto make her own medical decisions. The matterhas been appealed by Jamie’s parents to the FullFamily Court, on the basis, amongst other things,that the treatment was not a “special medical pro-cedure” andcouldbeconsentedtobyparents.In Re Jamie concerns an application by a publicauthority to intervene in the matter. The publicauthority’s identity was not disclosed, but itwished to intervene in the matter given the publicinterest concerning the question of whether treat-ment for gender identity disorder was a “specialmedical procedure.” Importantly, an intervenerbecomes a party to the proceedings with all therights, duties, and liabilities of a party (at [35]).