StopIGM.org

>>> FRANÇAIS: « Mutilations Génitales Intersexes: L’ONU réprimande la France »   

NGO Reports to CRC documenting crimes against intersex children in France and Ireland

Press Release by StopIGM.org 28.01.2016:

During its 71st Session, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) expertly questioned Ireland over non-consensual, medically unnecessary, irreversible, cometic genital surgeries and other harmful treatments of intersex children (in the vernacular also known as hermaphrodites), aimed at “correcting” their “atypical” reproductive anatomies.  
>>> Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland (PDF)

The Irish delegation repeatedly denied the practice taking place in Ireland, despite ample evidence linking IGM practices to several Irish university children’s clinics and treatment guidelines by the HSE. In the end Minister Dr. James Reilly, referring to his own practical experience as a medical doctor, inadvertendly confirmed such treatments “very often” being carried out on “very young babies”.   >>> Session Transcript

IGM survivors and intersex human rights defenders expect the Committee to issue very strong binding recommendations to the Irish government, to be published tomorrow Friday afternoon on the Committee’s Session Homepage.

An extensive thematic report to the Committee on the practice in Ireland filed by Irish IGM survivor and intersex human rights defender Gavan Coleman in collaboration with the international intersex NGO StopIGM.org, proved IGM practices being advocated and perpetrated all across Ireland, including by the Health Service Executive (HSE), the National Children’s Research Centre at Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital in Dublin, and the Cork University Children’s Hospital in Wilton. In a private meeting with the Committee’s Co-Rapporteurs for Ireland, Coleman and StopIGM.org also testified to the severe physical and psychological pain and suffering caused by Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland.

In addition to Ireland, during its 71st Session in Geneva the CRC also expertly investigated IGM in France, a state party infamous for impertinently advocating and perpetrating IGM practices internationally, and thus expected to be issued a particularly stern reprimand.  
>>> Intersex Genital Mutilations in France (PDF)   >>> Session Transcript 
 

Background: IGM and Human Rights

Typical forms of IGM practices include “masculinising” and “feminising”, “corrective” genital surgery, castration and other sterilising procedures, imposition of  hormones, forced genital exams, vaginal dilations and medical display, withholding crucial information from patients an parents, human experimentation, and denial of needed health care.

IGM Practices cause known lifelong severe physical and psychological pain and suffering, including loss or impairment of  sexual sensation, painful scarring, painful intercourse, incontinence, urethral strictures, impairment or loss of  reproductive capabilities, lifelong dependency of artificial hormones, significantly elevated rates of self-harming behaviour and suicidal tendencies, lifelong mental suffering and trauma, increased sexual anxieties, less sexual activity.

Since 1950, IGM has been practised systematically and on an industrial scale allover the “developed world”, with all typical IGM forms still practised today. Parents and children are misinformed, kept in the dark, sworn to secrecy, kept isolated and denied appropriate support.

For more than 20 years, survivors have criticised IGM practces as harmful and traumatising, as a fundamental human rights violation, as a form of genital mutilation and child sexual abuse, as torture or ill-treatment, and called for legislation to end it and to ensure remedies.

In the past twelve months, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) has repeatedly criticised unnecessary intersex treatments as a Harmful Practice and thus comparable to Female Genital Mutilation, and has so far reprimanded Switzerland and Chile for failing to protect intersex children’s right to bodily integrity and to ensure equal access to remedies and justice for victims.

Similarly, since 2011 the UN Committee against Torture (CAT) recognised IGM practices as constituting at least Inhuman Treatment in violation of the Convention against Torture, and so far reprimanded Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Denmark and Hong Kong. Other UN bodies to condemn IGM include the Human Rights Committee (HRCttee), WHO, UNICEF and the Special Rapporteur on Torture.

States as contracting parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention against Torture and other applicable Covenants including CCPR and CRPD can no longer feign ignorance of the illegal nature of IGM practices, but now must take all appropriate measures including legislation to eliminate them, and to guarantee access to effective redress and justice for all IGM survivors!

The international intersex human rights NGO StopIGM.org demands the prohibition of forced genital surgeries on children and adolescents with Variations of Sex Anatomy and “Human Rights for Hermaphrodites too!”

Persons concerned shall later decide themselves, if they want surgeries or not, and if yes, which.

Kind regards

Daniela “Nella” Truffer, Markus Bauer
Founding members human rights NGO Zwischengeschlecht.org / StopIGM.org

Mobile +41 (0) 76 398 06 50
Mobile +41 (0) 78 829 12 60

presse_at_zwischengeschlecht.info

http://StopIGM.org

Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.60 MB)

   >>> Transcript of Intersex Q&A Session Ireland
   >>> UN Media Release on the Session with Ireland, mentions intersex  

Intersex Genital Mutilations in France: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.41 MB)

   >>> Transcript of Intersex Q&A Session France   
   >>> UN Media Release on the Session with France, mentions intersex

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• Historic 56th Session of Committee against Torture reprimands 4 Governments over IGM 
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

IGM on a Global Scale: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

>>> English  

Rapports au CRC démontrent les crimes contre enfants intersex en France et en Irlande

Comuniqué de Presse par StopIGM.org 29.01.2016:

Pendant sa 71ième Session, le Comité de l’ONU des Droits de l’Enfant (CRC) a questionné habilement la France sur les opérations génitales non consenties, médicalement pas nécessaires et irréversibles, et d’autres traitements préjudiciaires sur des enfants intersex (en langage courant connus comme hermaphrodites), opérations visée à “corriger” leurs anatomies reproductives “atypiques”.   >>> Intersex Genital Mutilations in France (PDF)

La délégation française n’a pas nié que MGI est pratiquée en France, et a annoncé d’aller faire quelque chose concernant ce “sujet extrêmement récent” – particulièrement encore plus des années de “débats” infinis, et même plus de “réflection collective” sur le “sexe neutre” et d’autres “questions psychologiques, médicales” – tandis qu’en même temps les mutilations quotidiennes sont permis de continuer librement dans les hôpitaux pour enfants français.  >>> Transcription

Les survivants et défenseurs des droits humain intersex attendent, que le Comité va publier des recommendations exécutoires très fermes au gouvernement français, dues cet après-midi sur le >>> site de la 71ième Session du Comité.

Un rapport thématique (PDF) présenté au Comité par Vincent Guillot, survivant de MGI et défenseur des droits humains intersex, en collaboration avec l’ONG internationale intersex StopIGM.org, prouve que MGI est préconisé et commis partout en France, par example par l’Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), le Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lyon, et les Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud.

Dans une réunion avec les Co-Rapporteurs du Comité pour la France, Vincent Guillot et StopIGM.org ont témoigné des douleurs et souffrances physiques ou mentales aiguës tout au long de la vie, infligés par les Mutilations Génitales Intersex en France.

Pendant sa 71ième Session à Genève, le Comité a aussi habilement questionné l’Irlande sur MGI. Des survivants attendent que l’Irlande va être réprimandée également.   >>> Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland (PDF)   >>> Transcript
 

Informations Générales: MGI et Droits Humains

Les formes typiques de pratiques MGI comprennent des opérations génitales “masculinisantes” et “féminisantes”, des castrations et d’autres procedures stérilisantes, l’imposition d’hormones, des examens génitaux forcés, des dilatations vaginales et l’exhibition médicale, le refu des informations essentielles aux patients et aux parents, l’expérimentation humaine, et le déni de soins médicaux.

Il est connu que les pratiques MGI causent des douleurs et souffrances physiques ou mentales aiguës tout au long de la vie, y compris la perte ou détérioration des sensations sexuelles, des cicatrices douloureuses, le rapport sexuel douloureux, de l’incontinence, des sténoses urétrales, la perte ou détérioration de la fertilité, une dépendance à vie d’hormones artificiels, des taux élevés de manière signifiante de comportement d’automutilation et tendances suicidaires, souffrance mentale et traumatisme à vie, anxiétés sexuelles élevées, et moins d’activité sexuelle.

Depuis 1950, MGI a été pratiqué systématiquement et à l’échelle industrielle dans tout le “monde développé”, et toutes formes de MGI sont encore pratiquées aujourd’hui. Parents et enfants sont désinformés et tenus dans l’ignorance, tenus au secret, isolés et refusés un soutien approprié.

Depuis plus de 20 ans, des survivants ont critiqué les pratiques MGI comme préjudiciables et traumatisantes, comme une violation fondamentale des droits humains, comme une forme de mutilation génitale et d’abus sexuel de l’enfant, comme de la torture ou maltraitance, et ont demandé une législation pour éliminer ces pratiques et garantir des recours.

Dans les derniers douze mois, le Comité de l’ONU des Droits de l’Enfant (CRC) a à plusieurs reprises critiqué ces traitements inutiles des personnes intersex comme une Pratique Préjudiciable et par conséquent comparable aux Mutilations Génitales Féminines, et a pour l’instant réprimandé la Suisse et le Chili pour ne pas avoir protégé le droit des enfants intersex à l’intégrité physique et de ne pas avoir garanti un accès égal aux recours et à la justice pour les victimes.

De la même façon, le Comité de l’ONU contre la Torture (CAT) a reconnu depuis 2011 que les pratiques MGI constituent au moins un Traitement Inhumain en violation de la Convention contre la Torture, et a pour l’instant réprimandé l’Allemagne, la Suisse, l’Autriche, le Denmark et Hong Kong. D’autres organes de l’ONU qui condamnent MGI sont par example le Comité des droits de l’Homme (HRCttee), l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (WHO), UNICEF et le Rapporteur Spécial sur la Torture.

Les Etats parties qui ont ratifié la Convention des Droits de l’Enfant, la Convention contre la Torture et d’autres pactes applicables, y compris CCPR et CRPD ne peuvent plus feindre l’ignorance de la nature illégale des pratiques MGI, mais doivent désormais prendre toutes mesures appropriées, y compris des dispositions législatives pour éliminer ces pratiques, et pour garantir l’accès à un recours efficace et à la justice pour tous les survivants de MGI!

Le groupe des droits humains international StopIGM.org exige l’interdiction des opérations génitales forcées sur des enfants et adolescents avec des variantes du sexe biologique et “Droits Humains pour les Hermaphrodites aussi!”

Les personnes concernées doivent pouvoir décider eux-mêmes plus tard, s’il veulent des opérations ou pas, et si oui, lesquelles.

Meilleures salutations

Daniela “Nella” Truffer, Markus Bauer
Membres fondateurs de l’ONG internationale StopIGM.org

Mobile +41 (0) 76 398 06 50
Mobile +41 (0) 78 829 12 60

presse_at_zwischengeschlecht.info

http://StopIGM.org

Intersex Genital Mutilations in France: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.41 MB)

   >>> Transcriptions des Questions et Réponses (Session France)  
   >>> Communiqué de Presse ONU sur la Session avec la France, mentionne Intersex

Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.60 MB)

   >>> Transcript of Intersex Q&A Session Ireland
   >>> UN Media Release on the Session with Ireland, mentions intersex 

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• Historic 56th Session of Committee against Torture reprimands 4 Governments over IGM 
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

IGM on a Global Scale: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

MISE À JOUR: La publication des Observations Finales est reportée vers jeudi!
>>> English  

Témoignages sur MGI, 71ème Session du Comité de l’ONU des Droits de l’Enfant:
Daniela Truffer (StopIGM.org), Vincent Guillot (France), Gavan Coleman (Irlande),
Markus Bauer (StopIGM.org, photo) au Palais des Nations, Genève 12.01.2016

C’est le tour de la France (suivi par l’Irlande) pour l’examen sur les pratiques IGM à la 71ème Session du Comité de l’ONU des Droits de l’Enfant (CRC).
StopIGM.org rapporte live des audiences à Genève le Mercredi 12 Janvier 15-18h CET + Jeudi 13 Janvier 10-13h CET (videos disponibles via treatybodywebcast.org), y compris des Transcriptions Inofficielles des Questions et Réponses sur l’Intersexuation:

Session 1: Mercredi 13 Janvier 2016

Mercredi 15:28h Le membre du Comité Jorge Cardona Llorens, un des deux Co-Rapporteurs du Comité pour la France (qui avait déjà questionné le Chile sur les pratiques IGM l’année dernier), questionne la Délégation Française sur l’Intersex et les practiques IGM! HOURRA!!

«La France a été à l’avant-garde de la lutte contre certaines pratiques nuisibles comme les mutilations génitales féminines et nous devons vous en féliciter, sans oublier bien sûre de ne pas baisser les bras et de prévoir les moyens de continuer la lutte. Mais c’est justement en raison de cette posture ferme que j’avoue que je suis perplexe parce que l’on pourrait désigner comme une politique publique d’encouragement des intervention chirurgiques [sur] des enfants intersex dans les premiers mois de la vie, alors que telles interventions n’ont aucune finalité médicale, elle n’ont qu’un but esthétique, social, mais elles touchent gravement l’intégrité physique des enfants, garçons ou filles mutilés, [elles] empêchent leur développement émotionnel et sexuel, violent leur droit à l’identité. Pouvez-vous nous dire si vous avez prévue des mesures pour modifier ces protocols et faire respecter l’intégrité des enfants intersex? Merci.»

17:36h Jorge Cardona Llorens vient de rappeler la Délégation Française que la réponse sur les Mutilations Génitales Intersex est toujours due.

Après la session: Ce blog a appris que la délégation française n’a pas oublié la question, mais va d’abord consulter Paris ce soir. Les Réponses de la France viendront pendant la deuxième session de demain.

Session 2: Jeudi 14 Janvier 2016

Jeudi 10:00h: La Session avec les réponses sur les Mutilations Génitales Intersex de la Délégation Française est ouverte et est transmise live. 

Jeudi 10:13h: Madame la Ministre Laurence Rossignol, Chef de Délégation, Secrétaire d’État chargée de la Famille, de l’Enfance, des Personnes âgées, et de l’Autonomie, auprès de la ministre des Affaires sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des femmes, répond à la question concernant les enfants intersex et le “respect de leur intégrité physique”. Elle dit que c’est un sujet extrêmement récent et que l’état partie n’a pas encore exploré les questions psychologiques et médicales, et pas encore décidé lequel ministère devrait prendre les rênes. Elle détourne des Mutilations Genitales Intersex au jugement concernant un sexe neutre d’une personne adulte, et généralement joue la montre – de fait jusqu’à la prochaine révision de la France, environ 2022:

«Merci. Il s’agit d’un sujet extrêmement récent puisque nous avons été saisie que ce soit le ministère de la santé ou le ministère de la justice de manière très pressante sur cette difficulté des enfants pour lesquels il y a une ambiguïté sexuelle visible c’est-à-dire une difficulté à définir au vue des organes génitaux quel est le sexe de naissance. C’est un sujet qui nécessite à la fois de prendre à la tâche des personnes intéressées, des gens qui sont eux-même intersex, dont le rôle est déterminante, mais également des médecins et puis aussi des associations porteuses de la définition commune de l’intérêt de l’enfant. Donc ma réponse est une réponse qui peut-être ne satisfera pas totalement ceux qui ont posé la question. Nous n’avons pas encore exploré la totalité des questions psychologiques, médicales, que pose ce nouveau sujet, mais nous avons plusieurs parlamentaires français qui sont déjà extrêmement engagé sur ce sujet et souhaitent contribuer à une réflection collective. Par ailleurs un jugement d’un tribunal en France a reconnu récemment le sexe neutre et il a semblé à juste titre à la chancellerie que cette jurisprudence méritait un débat plus haut dans la magistrature et une réflection collective. Donc voilà, c’est un sujet sur lequel nous pensons que lors de la prochaine audition de la France nous aurons pû travailler et surtout recueillir la parole des personnes intéressées.»

Jeudi 10:14h: Le Co-Rapporteur pour la France Jorge Cardona Llorens répond tout de suite et dit, qu’il faut pas faire un sexe neutre pour les enfants, parce que c’est un stigmate. Il dit qu’il faut abroger les protocols médicaux et que les parents ne sont pas bien informés, “c’est un fait”:

«Merci beaucoup, Monsieur le Président, bonjour à tous. Alors, j’entends bien ce qui nous est signalé mais j’ai cru comprendre qu’il existait – enfin j’aimerais donc savoir ce qui l’en est de ces trois centres d’enregistrement, qui peuvent enregistrer les naissances des enfants intersex. Il existe semble-t-il un memorandum d’accord qui est sensé dicter un petit peu le comportement aux parents et les trois premiers mois de la vie de l’enfant. Mais enfin ce protocol semble, disons répondre à une vision un petit peu particulière et le problème c’est que ces enfants ont un sexe qui est encore mal connu, donc le fait de en déclarer la neutralité c’est stigmatiser l’enfant dès le départ. Et dans ce contexte je crois qu’il est essentiel d’instaurer des mécanismes un peu plus flexibles à cet égard. Aussi je vous suggérais d’abroger ces protocoles d’intervention et avant tout d’informer comme il se doit les parents de ces enfants, parce qu’il manque cruellement l’information, c’est un fait.»

Jeudi 10:14h: Madame la Ministre Laurence Rossignol, Chef de Délégation, Secrétaire d’État chargée de la Famille, de l’Enfance, des Personnes âgées, et de l’Autonomie, auprès de la ministre des Affaires sociales, de la Santé et des Droits des femmes, répète que exactement de telles questions devront d’abord être le sujet d’un long “débat et reflection” avant qu’on pourra faire quelque chose:

«[inaudible] est exactement révélatrice de termes du débat et de la réflection qu’il nous faut avoir autour de ces sujet.»

Après la session: Vincent Guillot raconte d’avoir été abordé par un fonctionnaire de la délégation concernant la réponse en retard à une lettre envoyée au ministère il y a plusieurs mois, avec assurance d’une réponse prompte.

Mes 2 cents: Encore plus des années de “débats” infinis avec des médecins, et même plus de “réflection collective” sur un procès en cours concernant l’état civil d’une personne adulte comme violon d’Ingres pour des parlementaires et magistrats “extrêmement engagés”, qui sont encore et toujours en train d’évaluer lequel ministère serait en fait responsable de ce sujet éternellement “nouveau” – tandis qu’en même temps les mutilations quotidiennes sont permis de continuer librement dans les hôpitaux pour enfants français – quelle surprise!
Heureusement, le comité ne semble pas se faire avoir par ces tactiques pour gagner du temps et manoevres de diversion. On attend alors de nouveau des “Observations Finales” particulièrement fortes – pour la France due le 29 janvier. A suivre …

>>> Communiqué de Presse ONU sur la Session avec la France, mentionne Intersex 
>>> 2016: UN-CRC to investigate IGM Practices in France + Ireland

Intersex Genital Mutilations in France: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.41 MB)     >>> Background

Voir aussi:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• Historic 56th Session of Committee against Torture reprimands 4 Governments over IGM 
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors! 

IGM on a Global Scale: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by holding the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights in Geneva 26.–27.10.2015
>>> Download PDF (831kb)  

>>> Français (mise à jour) 

Bearing witness to IGM, 71st Session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child:
Daniela Truffer (StopIGM.org), Vincent Guillot (France), Gavan Coleman (Ireland),
Markus Bauer (StopIGM.org, photo) at Palais des Nations, Geneva 12.01.2016

France is the first country coming up for review of IGM practices at the 71st session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (to be followed by Ireland).

StopIGM.org reports live from the hearings in Geneva on Wednesday 13 January 15-18h CET + Thursday 14 January 10-13h CET (videos now available via treatybodywebcast.org), including Unofficial Translations (from French) of Intersex Q&As:

Session 1: Wednesday 13 January 2016

Wed 15:00h: The Session with Q&As on Intersex Genital Mutilations with the French Delegationis open and the live transmission is on.

Wed 15:28h Committee Member Jorge Cardona Llorens, one of the Country Co-Rapporteurs of the Committee for France (who already questioned Chile over IGM practices last year), asks the French Delegation questions on Intersex and IGM practices! YAY!!

«France has been at the vanguard in combatting certain harmful practices like female genital mutilation, and we must congratulate you for that, surely with keeping in mind not to throw in the towel but to ensure you have the means to continue the struggle. However, it is just because of this firm stand that I have to confess to be perplexed about circumstances that on could describe as encouraging surgical interventions on intersex children during the first months of their lives, despite that such interventions are medically unnecessary, but are done for cosmetic and social reasons, and seriously impinge on the bodily integrity of the children, mutilated boys and girls, they prevent their emotional and sexual development, and violate their right to identity. Could you tell me if you’re planning measures to modify these protocols and to ensure that the integrity of intersex children is respected?»

17:36h Jorge Cardona Llorens just reminded the French delegation that the answer on Intersex Genital Mutilations is still due.

After the session: This blog has learned that the French Delegation have not forgotten the question, but first will consult with Paris tonight. The Answer of France is expected for the second session tomorrow morning.

Session 2: Thursday 14 January 2016

Thu 10:00h: The Session with the French Delegation’s answers on Intersex Genital Mutilations is open and the live transmission is on.  

Thu 10:13h: Madame la Ministre Laurence Rossignol, Head of the Delegation, Minister of State for the Family, Elderly People and Adult Care, attached to the Minister of Social Affairs, Health and Women’s Rights, answers the question regarding intersex children and “the respect of their physical integrity”. She says that it’s an extremely recent topic and that the State Party hasn’t yet explored the “psychological and medical questions” and nor decided which Ministry should take the lead. She diverts from IGM to the recent judgement in France concerning a neutral civil registration, and is generally playing for time – actually until the next CRC review of France, circa 2022:

«Thank you. This is a extremely recent issue, so we’re still assessing whether the Ministry of Health or the Ministry of Justice should urgently tackle this difficulty of children which present a visibly ambiguous sex, that is a difficulty to determine the sex at birth according to the genitals. It’s an issue for which all persons concerned need to be involved, the intersex persons themselves, which should take a leading role, but also the doctors and associations responsible for the definition of the interests of the child. Hence, my answer answer may perhaps not entirely satisfy the persons who asked the questions. We have not yet fully explored the the psychological and medical questions that are put forward by this new issue, but there are several French members of parliament who are already extremely committed to this issue and who would like to contribute to a collective reflection. In addition, a judgement of a French court has recently recognised a neutral sex, and it understandably appears to the chancellery that this judgement deserves a debate in the highest judicial authorities and a collective reflection. Therefore, this is an issue regarding which we think that at the time of the next review of France we will have worked on that and particularly heard the voice of the persons concerned.»

Thu 10:14h: The Co-Rapporteur for France Jorge Cardona Llorens follows up at once and says there shouldn’t be a neutral civil status entry for intersex children, as this is a stigmatisation from the start. He suggests that the medical protocols have to be abrogated and reiterates that the parents aren’t properly informed, “that’s a fact”.

«Thank you very much, Chair, and good morning everybody. Well, I’m clearly hearing your announcements […]. Finally, this protocol [for registering births of intersex children] seems to address a let’s say a bit a peculiar vision, and the problem is that these children have a sex that is not yet clearly known, therefore to declare their sex to be neutral means to stigmatise the child from the start. And in this context I believe it’s mperative to introduce mechanisms that are a bit more flexible in this regard. Additionally, I suggest to abrogate the protocols calling for interventions, and foremost to properly inform the parents of these children, because information is painfully lacking, that’s a fact.»

Thu 10:14h: Madame la Ministre Laurence Rossignol, Head of the Delegation, Minister of State for the Family, Elderly People and Adult Care, attached to the Minister of Social Affairs, Health and Women’s Rights, reiterated that exactly such questions would first have to be made the subject of lengthy “debate and reflection” before anything could be done:

«[inaudible] is precisely indicative of the terms of the debate and reflection we must have on this issue.»

After the session: Vincent Guillot reports having beeen approached by a delegation official in person and via email regarding the overdue answer to a letter sent to the ministry months ago, with assurances that an answer should be expected soon.

My 2 cents: Yet more years of endless “debates” with doctors, and even more “collective reflection” on an ongoing lawsuit concerning civil registration of an adult person as a pet project for “extremely committed” politicians and magistrates still evaluating which Ministry would actually be responsible for the eternally “new” issue – while at the same time the daily mutilations in French children’s clinics are permitted to continue unhindered – how typical is that?!
Fortunately, the Committee doesn’t seem to fall for such stalling and diversionary tactics. So we’re once more expecting particularly strong “Concluding Observations” – for France due on 29 January. To be continued …

>>> UN-CRC sternly reprimands France and Ireland for IGM Practices! 

>>> CRC 2015 Thematic Intersex NGO Report for France
>>> English UN Media Release on the Session, mentions intersex

Intersex Genital Mutilations in France: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.41 MB)

See also:
• January 2016: UN-CRC to investigate IGM Practices in France + Ireland
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• Historic 56th Session of Committee against Torture reprimands 4 Governments over IGM 
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors! 

IGM on a Global Scale: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Bearing witness to IGM, 71st Session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child:
Vincent Guillot (France), Daniela Truffer (StopIGM.org), Gavan Coleman (Ireland),
Markus Bauer (StopIGM.org, photo) at Palais des Nations, Geneva 13.01.2016

Ireland was the second country coming up for review of IGM practices at the 71st session of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (after France).

StopIGM.org reports live from the hearings in Geneva on Thursday 14 January 10-13h CET + Thursday 14 January 15-18h CET (videos now available via treatybodywebcast.org), including complete Unofficial Transcripts of Intersex Q&As:

Session 1: Thursday 14 January 2016, 10h

Thu 10:05h: The Session with Q&As on Intersex Genital Mutilations with the Irish Delegation is open, live transmission is on!

Thur 10:39h: Committee Member Gehad Madi, one of the Country Co-Rapporteurs of the Committee for Ireland, brings up Intersex Genital Mutilations and lack of measures to ensure physical and mental integrity, autonomy and self-determination for intersex children in Ireland! YAY!!

«We are also noting that there are discriminations against intersex children, including reports of Intersex Genital Mutilation, and the lack of appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures to insure the right of intersex children to physical and mental integrity, autonomy and self-determination.»

Thu 10:45h: Committee Member and Country Co-Rapporteur for Ireland, José Angel Rodríguez Reyes now asks questions about intersex and IGM, framing the medical treatment of intersex children as violence against children, and inquires about Ireland’s position. YAY!!

«I would also like to address the topic of intersex children. I’m addressing this point under this heading [violence against children] because, whilst this could be considered from a health standpoint, it would also be worth considering it from the point of view of violence against such children. And in particular I would like to know whether you exercise any form of oversight on the basis of the legislation over publicly operated sector health facilities with a view to ensuring that there’s a prohibition of irreversible surgical interventions of non-consensual treatment imposed on intersex children. In short: are you ensuring, do you have oversight to avoid the use of such practices? Do you indeed consider that this is a problem that needs to be addressed?»

Thu 10:57h: Committee member Wanderlin Nogueira Neto asked an intersex follow-up question regarding compensation for IGM survivors. YAY!!

«Very good morning to you all. I would like to wish an especially warm welcome to the Irish Delegation and also my greetings to our chair, Miss Aldoseri. I would like to ask a follow-up question to Mister Rodriguez’ question about intersex children. So my question is as follows: I would like to know, if there is a possibility to provide compensation to those children who have been subject to surgery without their prior and expressed consent. That’s my question, thank you.»

Thu 12:10h: A member of the Irish delegation says he’s going to answer questions on transgender and intersex, gives answers on transgender, then says he’ll come back to intersex later – how typical is that?! 

Session 2: Thursday 14 January 2016, 15h

Thu 15:14h: Irish Delegation moderator Elizabeth Canavan (Department of Health Children and Youth Affairs) announces answers on intersex:

«There was a number of matters that were raised in relation to intersex children so I’d ask my colleague from the department of health to take that topic, thanks Colm.»

Thu 15:15h: Irish Delegation member Colm Desmond (Department of Health, Principal Officer Mental Health Unit (!!)), answering on intersex, went the route of denial, downplaying intersex as “very, very rare,” and claiming in Ireland only medically necessary treatments were undertaken with the consent of the parents, so the issue of compensation would not normally arise – totally evading the actual questions, while at the same time admitting to IGM still taking place in Ireland – twice!

«Hello. Thank you. A number of issues in relation to the department of health and forcely in relation to intersex children, were choices made at birth. These situations highlighted by the committee members are very, very rare and the decisions taken in relation to choices are very often, I understand, determined by a physical or renal need rather than a gender assignment need. It usually is taken by a consultant dealing with that on the basis of very detailed case management, as would be the normal case with very sensitive birth or natal conditions, natal situations involving an intersex case. We would not see that the issue of compensation would normally arise, but the normal medical negligence provisions around compensation of course apply in Ireland.»

Thu 15:15h: When Committee member and Country Co-Rapporteur for Ireland, José Angel Rodríguez Reyes immediately replied …

«I’m sorry, I didn’t understand the answer.»

 

Thu 15:16h: … Irish Delegation member Colm Desmond (Department of Health, Principal Officer Mental Health Unit (!!)), kindly extended his non-answers on intersex:

«The answer is where the issue of intersex situations has been highlighted, our view is that this is an extremely rare situation that arises, and where an intervention is needed it may often be for reasons around renal or physical needs in the case of the individual child. And that decision is usually taken following very careful consultation between the consultants in that particular case, and all of the necessary expertise would be brought to bear on decisions around intersex in case conferences. On that basis we consider this is a very rare issue but we do acknowledge that these decisions are taken on a medical basis in these rare cases. In relation to the issue of compensation we are not aware of a specific compensation process, but normal medical negligence compensation processes apply in Ireland and it would apply in any case of an alleged medical negligence.»

Thu 15:45h: Committee member and Country Co-Rapporteur for Ireland, José Angel Rodríguez Reyes thus followed-up again regarding intersex and informed consent:

«Now, in terms of intersex children I have heard that a consultation may take place, but I wonder whether that implies consent on the part of the child, who may, given the circumstances, be subject to an operation. Thank you.»

Thu 15:46h: This time the Head of the Irish Delegation, Minister Dr. James Reilly (Children and Youth Affairs, medical doctor by profession) intervened, reiterated the blanket denial plus downplaying intersex as “extremely rare” and claiming interventions would only be done to “sort serious anatomical and physiological difficulties” – while at the same time openly admitting to IGM also in Ireland mostly being practiced on “very young babies” – according to his own personal “experience”:

«If you forgive me to intervene, because my previous job was minister for health, and I am also a doctor by profession. Can I just say in relation to intersex: this is very rare, that it’s a clinical decision to intervene, that consent from parents has to be obtained, that’s very, very clear. I think if you relate to the consent of the child you’ll obviously have to be talking about older children. And to my knowledge these operations do not take place later in life, unless there is some really compelling anatomical functional issue that has to be addressed. Now, I can stand be corrected on that, but that’s my experience in practice. And I can absolutely state that these matters should – don’t occur without the consent of the parents. So, very often we are talking about very young babies here, very very young children, who have a serious anatomical, physiological difficulty to be sorted out, and that’s the basis on which these procedures might be carried out. But I want to emphasis again, that it’s extremely rare.»

My 2 cents: Yet another flat-out Gov denial – while at the same time freely admitting that IGM practices still take place – how telling is that?!
Fortunately, the Committee once more proved to be well-informed, and determined to get to the bottom of the serious human rights violations against intersex children. So I’m quite confident that these non-answers will again lead to particularly strong “Concluding Observations” – for Ireland due on 29 January. To be continued …

>>> UN-CRC sternly reprimands Ireland and France for IGM Practices! 

>>> 2016: UN-CRC to investigate IGM Practices in France + Ireland
>>> English UN Media Release on the Session with Ireland, mentions intersex

Intersex Genital Mutilations in Ireland: CRC NGO Report 
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Most Common Forms • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>>  Download (PDF 3.60 MB)

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• Historic 56th Session of Committee against Torture reprimands 4 Governments over IGM 
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors! 

IGM on a Global Scale: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM is a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Peace, solidarity and strength to the person(s) having used the

>>> search string ‘I feel violated from hypospadias surgery’.

You are not alone in your search for justice!

And an invitation to everybody checking the interesting results this search produces …

>>> “My childhood was filled with pain, surgery, skin grafts, and isolation”
>>> VIDEO: ‘Unnecessary & Harmful’: Tiger Devore on ‘Hypospadias Repair’ (Pt. 1)

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

Intersex Genital Mutilations • 17 Most Common Forms
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Historical Overview • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>> Download PDF (3.65 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Circular No. 18 of the Ministry (Photo: Camilo Godoy Peña)    >>> PDF    >>> english transl.

Christmas present for the Intersex Movement from Santiago!

The Subsecretariat for Public Health of the Chilean Ministry for Health published a Circular No. 18 “Instruction on Certain Aspects of Health Care of Intersex Children” dated 22 December and signed by the Secretary for Support Networks (Dr. Gisela Alarcón) and the Secretary for Public Health (Dr. Jaime Burrows).

Therein, the Ministry expresses “deep concern” over non-consensual “tratments” on intersex children and adolescents, and refers to statements by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

According to Camilo Godoy Peña, the circular specifically stipulates:

1. The suspension of “unnecessary ‘normalising’ treatments on intersex children, including irreversible genital surgeries, until they are old enough to decide themselves about their own bodies.”

2. Establishing working groups in health care institutions, consisting of endocrinologists, gynaecologists, psychologists and ethicists, tasked to formulate a treatment plan for each intersex person, which has to be transmitted to the Central Committee of the Ministry of Health for approval.

3. The appointment of a person in charge in every halth care institution responsible for the documentation an registration with the Ministry of all cases.

Thus, this should prevent IGM practices as well as ensure solid data collection and monitoring of all cases.

My 2 Cents: Good news from Chile! Even though the entire document doesn’t seem publicly available yet is now available: >>> PDF    >>> english transl., and we’ll have to await if really all forms of IGM practices will be covered by this new regulation, and if future perpetrators won’t find loopholes to just ignore it – also according to a solidary paediatric surgeon only the fear of tangible punishments including suspension / adaption of the statutes of limitations will effectively prevent further mutilations. Nonetheless, Circular No. 18 is a historic development regarding the urgent and vital protection of intersex children in Chile – a move also warmly recommeded to other Ministries of Health around the globe! For this, to Camilo Godoy Peña, Andres Rivera Duarte and everybody else who contributed, a heartfelt thank you from this blog!

>>> UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) reprimands Chile over IGM
>>> Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) condems IGM practices

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

Intersex Genital Mutilations • 17 Most Common Forms
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Historical Overview • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>> Download PDF (3.65 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM as a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Photo: Nonviolent Intersex Protest + Open Letter on Human Rights Day, Berne 10.12.2015

Christmas present for the Intersex Movement from the Swiss Capital of Berne! On Human Rights Day, we distributed an Open Letter (PDF, in German) and a flyer with additional info outside parliament, which we both also handed in or mailed to all members of the Swiss government, the presidents of both chambers of parliament, all parties and their youth organisations, and which we also emailed to every member of both houses.

The Open Letter reminded of the lack of follow-up on the 2012 recommendations by the Swiss National Ethics Commission NEK-CNE and the recent rebukes of Switzerland by the UN Committee of the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the UN Committee against Torture (CAT), and amongst other things called for legislation against Intersex Genital Mutilations including scrapping or prolonging the statutes of limitations, free access to psychosocial support including peer support for all persons concerned and their families, and public acknowledgement of the suffering inflicted on survivors.

Just before Chrismas we received a first answer by the Secretariat of the Legal Committees (PDF –> p. 3, in German) dated 22 December, informing us that the Open Letter has been considered as a petition and forwarded to the Legal Committees of both Houses of Parliament, where it will be discussed in public proceedings, which “according to experience will take some time.” Therefore, a legal prohibition of IGM practices is now on the agenda in both houses!

Zwischengeschlecht.org / StopIGM.org warmly welcomes this move – and intends to use this time for further upping the pressure. Already we’re in contact with members of parliament, and currently also the UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) is investigating IGM practices in Switzerland. And in the near future Switzerland will be coming up for more state reviews e.g. by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). To be continued … 

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

Intersex Genital Mutilations • 17 Most Common Forms
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Historical Overview • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>> Download PDF (3.65 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM as a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Action + Letter on Intersex Awareness Day in Chile, Santiago 26.10.2015:
Camilo Godoy Peña outside Government Palace with placard “No to IGM”

In December, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), an autonomous body of the Organization of American States (OAS), published an extensive >>> Report “Violence against LGBTI Persons” (PDF 7 MB, spanish) – with an english version to follow –, which contains a seperate Chapter E “Medical Violence against Intersex Persons” (p. 126-133) and clearly and unmistakably criticises IGM practices.

For this from this blog a heartfelt “Thank you!” to everybody involved!

The report is based on testimonies to and reports on IGM practices amongst others from Argentine, Brasil, Canada, Columbia, Costa Rica, Chile, El Salvador, Mexico, Uruguay and the USA, and refers amongst others to the Thematic Intersex NGO Report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) by Zwischengeschlecht.org/StopIGM.org from 2014 und and the CRC reprimanding Chile in October 2015.

IACHR also published a >>> Press Release No. 143/15 on the Report which again contains clear statements on intersex:

For example, violence against intersex persons is based on prejudice toward body diversity and specifically toward those whose bodies differ from what is considered male or female. The violence suffered by intersex persons for the most part is different from that suffered by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans (LGBT) persons. […]

Meanwhile, the violence that affects intersex persons is very different. Intersex children are often forced to undergo surgical operations and procedures that, for the most part, are not medically necessary, for the sole purpose of changing their genitals to look more like those of a boy or a girl. These surgeries, which are irreversible in nature, tend to be done without their consent—on newborn babies or very young children—and can cause enormous harm to intersex persons, including chronic pain, loss of genital sensitivity, sterilization, trauma, and reduced ability or inability to feel sexual pleasure.

IACHR Criticises Lack of Data Collection and Monitoring

From January 2013 to February 2014, the Commission also collected data on violence against LGBTI persons and published the resulting statistics in December 2014. In a >>> Press Release and an >>> Annex (PDF), the Commission explicitly critisised the lack of data collection on medical violence against intersex people, and concluded that root causes include that this form of violence is State approved and mostly ignored by media and organisations, with shame and fear of survivors compounding the invisibility:

Achievements Thanks to Initiatives and Testimonies by Persons Concerned

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights investigated human rights violations against intersex people latest since 2013. Crucial were once more initiatives and moving testimonies by survivors of IGM practices and their allies:

IACHR Intersex Hearing, Washington 15.03.2013 (left to right): Natasha Jiménez (Mulabi, Costa Rica), Paula Sandrine Machado (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil), Pidgeon Pagonis (Advocates for Informed Choice, USA), Mauro Cabral (initiator of the hearing, Consórcio Latino Americano de Trabalho sobre Intersexualidade, Argentina).
>>> Video (multilingual)   >>> Report AIC (en)   >>> Report HRBrief (en)   >>> Photos

In addition, IACHR commissioned a >>> Thematic Report by Anne Tamar-Mattis of Advocates for Informed Choice (PDF, english).

Hopefully, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and survivors of IGM practices will internationally continue upping the pressure – until Intersex Genital Mutilations will finally be history, historical reappraisal and coming to terms with the past will take place internationally, victims will be adequately compensated, and future perpetrators will feel the full force of the law!

See also:
• UN Committee for the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2015: IGM = Harmful Practice
• UN Committee against Torture (CAT) 2015: IGM = Inhuman Treatment or Torture
• UN Human Rights Committee (HRCttee) to examine IGM Practices
• UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) condems IGM
• CAT 2011: Germany must investigate IGM practices and compensate survivors!  

Intersex Genital Mutilations • 17 Most Common Forms
Human Rights Violations Of Children With Variations Of Sex Anatomy
IGM – Historical Overview • What is Intersex? • How Common are IGMs?
>>> Download PDF (3.65 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM as a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

>>> Español          >>> English          >>> Deutsch  

Photo: Manif Intersex non violente + Lettres Ouvertes la Journée des Droits Humains, Palais Fédéral, Berne 10.12.2015

Super Article de Antoinette Schwab dans l’actuelle édition de “Horizons. Le magazine suisse de la recherche scientifique”, publié par le “Fonds national suisse de la recherche scientifique (FNS)” et les “Académies suisses des sciences” – Merci!
(Malheureusement, tous les autres articles du “Point fort Intersexualité” dans cette édition sont que des exemples typiques de l’appropriation des intersexes, et de l’habituel “parler de nous, mais pas avec nous” – Honte à vous!)

Silence sur ordonnance

La médecine a longtemps opéré les enfants nés avec des variantes du sexe biologique sans jamais les informer. La situation n’évolue que lentement. Par Antoinette Schwab

Des enfants qui viennent au monde avec un sexe ambigu, il y en a toujours eu. On les a appelés hermaphrodites, puis intersexes. Ce dernier terme est toutefois trompeur parce qu’il semble faire référence à la sexualité: «L’intersexualité concerne le corps et, suivant les cas, certaines maladies, mais pas l’orientation sexuelle», souligne Jürg Streuli, médecin à Zurich et éthicien de la médecine. Depuis quelques années, on utilise donc l’abréviation DSD pour «disorders» ou «differences of sex development» (variantes ou troubles désordres ou differences du développementsexuel).

Des interventions nuisibles

A partir des années 1950, on s’est couramment mis à assigner aussi vite que possible un sexe à ces enfants et à procéder à une adaptation chirurgicale correspondante. Cette pratique remonte à John Money, spécialiste américain des comportements sexuels. Auparavant, des personnes avec un DSD étaient déjà opérées, mais c’est lui qui a fourni les fondements théoriques pour que cela se fasse de manière systématique. John Money était convaincu qu’il était possible de tout modeler, pour autant que l’environnement se comporte en conséquence. Pour faciliter ce processus, il fallait, disait-il, que l’apparence des organes génitaux corresponde au sexe attribué. Et donc que les corrections génitales soient réalisées dès que possible après la naissance. Dès lors, chaque enfant né avec un DSD était traité comme une urgence, même s’il n’en était pas une au sens médical. Des opérations inutiles et cosmétiques ont ainsi été conduites sur des enfants qui, si elles avaient été désirées, auraient aussi pu être réalisées plus tard. Lorsqu’elles se livrent en interview ou dans leurs biographies, certaines personnes qui ont vécu ces interventions parlent de torture, de mutilation génitale, de maltraitance.

Le poids du silence

Pour elles, le silence imposé a été aussi terrible que les opérations. Les dossiers médicaux portaient la mention «Ne pas communiquer le diagnostic au patient», là aussi une idée de John Money. L’enfant, selon lui, ne devait pas avoir le moindre doute sur son sexe. Une situation paradoxale: d’un côté, il subissait des interventions chirurgicales sur ses organes génitaux. Un raccourcissement ou une amputation du clitoris – ou s’agissait-il d’un pénis? Un vagin reconstruit qu’il fallait sans cesse distendre; autrefois, au moyen d’une barre de métal, remplacée par du plastique par la suite. Souvent aussi, on procédait à l’ablation des testicules et des ovaires au nom d’un possible risque de cancer. De l’autre côté, médecins, étudiants et infirmiers scrutaient l’entrejambe de ces enfants sans que ces derniers sachent pourquoi. La plupart des personnes qui s’expriment aujourd’hui ont appris leur diagnostic par hasard. Les histoires sur les forums Internet se ressemblent souvent: les douleurs, les médicaments qu’il fallait avaler sans qu’on sache pourquoi. La honte et le sentiment d’avoir une maladie monstrueuse. Certains ont appris leur diagnostic quand ce dernier a été étalé en public: les premiers tests de vérification du sexe dans le monde du sport ont identifié des femmes athlètes avec des chromosomes masculins qui n’en savaient rien. Les instituts qui évaluaient ces tests étaient souvent ceux qui avaient conseillé de dissimuler le diagnostic aux enfants avec un DSD.

Stopper les opérations

Comme ces personnes ont été maintenues dans l’ignorance durant des décennies, la résistance aux pratiques chirurgicales d’assignation sexuelle est apparue tardivement: au début des années 1990, des individus concernés ont commencé à s’opposer au traitement standard. Cette résistance s’est renforcée lorsqu’on a appris, en 1997, que l’un des cas d’école de John Money, auquel les médecins du monde entier continuaient de se référer, s’était avéré un échec: le garçon John, opéré pour devenir la fille Joan à l’âge de 2 ans, avait à nouveau changé de sexe à 14 ans et vivait sous le nom de David. Il s’est suicidé en 2004 à l’âge de 38 ans.

«L’intersexualité concerne le corps et non pas l’orientation sexuelle.»
Jürg Streuli

La Suissesse Daniela Truffer a elle aussi découvert son histoire à l’âge de 35 ans par son dossier médical. Née en 1965 avec des chromosomes masculins et des organes génitaux ambigus, elle avait été opérée en fille. Une mauvaise décision, avait noté plus tard un médecin dans son dossier. Pour elle, il est trop tard: «Mon état physique originel est irrémédiablement perdu, on m’a volé ma dignité», écrit-elle sur son blog. Constatant sur Internet que d’autres avaient vécu la même chose, elle a créé en 2007 l’organisation Zwischengeschlecht.org. Elle se bat pour que les opérations cessent et pour l’intégrité physique et psychique des enfants avec un DSD. Elle est convaincue qu’aujourd’hui encore, on opère toujours une grande partie d’entre eux, sans que ni eux ni leurs parents ne soient complètement informés.

«La société doit reconnaître les souffrances que les pratiques antérieures ont infligées à des personnes présentant un tableau clinique de «disorder of sex development» (DSD).»
Commission nationale d’éthique

Le groupe, qui conseille d’autres activistes à l’étranger, a déjà obtenu certaines choses. L’Hôpital des enfants de Zurich, qui jouait un rôle pionnier dans les années 1950 en matière de traitement de DSD, a entamé en 2014 les démarches pour une recherche historique sur le traitement de personnes avec un DSD. C’est la première étude de ce genre au monde.

Reconnaître la souffrance

Le Conseil fédéral a chargé la Commission nationale d’éthique pour la médecine humaine de se pencher sur le sujet. Elle a recommandé en 2012 que les décisions en matière de traitements pour l’assignation du sexe soient différées jusqu’à ce que la personne qui les subira soit capable de discernement. Les parents ne devraient donc pas prendre de décision lourde de conséquences, même si, dans leur confusion ou désespoir après la naissance, ils souhaitent souvent une solution rapide. «La société doit reconnaître les souffrances que les pratiques antérieures ont infligées à des personnes présentant un tableau clinique de DSD», stipule la première des 14 recommandations de la commission.

Aujourd’hui, les cliniques font preuve de plus de retenue. Certaines opérations qui ne sont pas indispensables sont repoussées à plus tard. Enfants et parents sont mieux informés, et à l’Hôpital des enfants de Zurich, par exemple, les décisions sont prises par une équipe regroupant médecins, éthiciens et psychologues. En revanche, il n’existe pas de vue d’ensemble pour savoir ce qui est opéré et où. Et les recommandations de la Commission nationale d’éthique n’ont pas valeur d’obligations. Le Conseil fédéral entend répondre à cette prise de position d’ici fin 2015.

L’ONU se penche aussi sur le sujet. En un an, trois de ses comités se sont exprimés sur la situation en Suisse. Le Comité des droits de l’enfant s’est montré très préoccupé par les interventions chirurgicales, parlant de «pratiques préjudiciables». Le Comité des droits de l’homme demande des chiffres. Quant au Comité contre la torture, il constate qu’à ce jour il n’y a eu ni sanctions ni réparations et propose que toutes les mesures nécessaires soient prises pour garantir à l’avenir l’intégrité et l’autodétermination des personnes concernées.

Antoinette Schwab est journaliste scientifique libre à Berne.

[ Pages françaises sur Zwischengeschlecht.org ]

Intersex.ch (groupe de soutien, en allemand)

NGO Report to the 5th Periodic Report of France on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)

>>>  Download (PDF 3.41 MB)

Compiled by:
Vincent Guillot + Zwischengeschlecht.org
Endorsed by:
OII Francophonie

IGM as a Harmful Practice: 2015 UN-CRC Briefing
• IGM: A Survivor’s Perspective • Intersex Movement History
• What are Variations of Sex Anatomy?  • What are IGM Practices?
• IGM and Human Rights  • Conclusion: IGM as a Harmful Practice
>>> Download PDF (3.14 MB)     >>> Table of Contents

Eliminating IGM practices by making the perpetrators accountable via well-established applicable human rights frameworks, including Inhuman Treatment and Harmful Practices – Presentation @ UN expert meeting on Intersex Human Rights in Geneva 26.–27.10.2015
>>> Download PDF (831kb)