A STATEMENT BY CONCERNED TRANSSEXUALS

The Scottish Government is about to introduce a bill to radically change the GRA - Gender Recognition Act.

This law was made in the UK 18 years ago for transsexuals.

The undersigned are diagnosed transsexual by multiple doctors. Numbers and/or names are from holders of Gender Recognition Certificates (GRCs) or equivalent documentation assessed via doctors. Those signed are covered by this act in the UK.

Holding a GRC allows legal documents to be modified that facilitate life after treatment. In some cases for 50 years as one to one changes via doctors pre-date the GRA.

Transgender seen today is identity rooted through gender stereotypes not medically diagnosed from years of therapy and, if deemed necessary, permanent alteration of sex organs to facilitate assimilation into society perceived as the opposite sex.

This is major surgery and never attempted without extensive psychotherapy, nor on children and only after other options are exhausted.

A two year waiting period allows time for reflection as permanent changes should never be made hastily. If that period is reduced as proposed mistakes and regret will increase.

Birth certificates can only be modified once the GRC process is complete and if agreed by a doctor who assesses the need of each case as gatekeeper.

In the Hansard transcript when passing the GRA two decades ago doctors advised Westminster that 5000 transsexuals - approx one quarter of whom are born female and three quarters born male - had been diagnosed within the UK population across over 40 years of medical treatment.

Almost exactly 5000 did apply and there were 5871 GRC holders as of the 2021 count. From just over 67 million UK citizens. Proving this condition is thankfully rare as doctors have long understood via years of research. It also shows this is a very stable diagnosis given the percentage is now much as was in 2004 given subsequent population rise.

This stability is unlike those who identify as transgender which very visibly has multiplied over the same period with notably different features - for example more born females now identify as male.

Yet opportunity has existed for every person declaring a transgender identity to follow existing rules, undergo medical assessment and apply for a GRC. Most chose not to do so as numbers reveal but will - IF medical assessment is replaced by self declaration of a new identity on line.

We argue this shows transgender is NOT a medical diagnosis as with transsexual and therefore not what the GRA was intended to cover. Indeed transgender often term medical assessment ‘humiliating.

These changes put at risk that vital element of legal protection.And transsexuals with a GRC believe assessment is essential. Not obstructive.

We feel self ID is self-ish and puts image ahead of safeguards offered to society in return for addressing our complex needs through balanced law.

There are understandable concerns with a much larger group dfferent from the one intended when the law was written becoming legalised and we support women in fearing safeguards may be unwisely compromised.

Today the GRA protects society from abuse of the system via accountable doctors serving as a check and balance on applicants. Self ID gives no independent comeback.

The transsexuals here consider this tried and tested law as a bond of trust with the wider public evolved across half a century. We know our lives are hard for many to understand. Asking reassurance is not for us viewed as bigotry.

We believe it is essential for that basis of trust to remain and not be removed unwillingly from those who signed up to the rules designed to build that trust.

In current law ONLY transsexual - a word we ask MUST remain - is specified. Transgender is a self expression not a medical diagnosis and excludes many people the law currently covers who do not have a gender identity.

Nor do we not want to take from society independent professionals who assess all cases and can and should call out safeguarding concerns that may arise.

Someone who has self declared offers their own word and whilst most will be honest this loss of reassurance to the public must bring some distrust.

If no independent assessment occurs nothing protects against deception - even by applicants who may need that help to guard from deceiving themselves.

This change is not creating a safer, fairer law in our opinion. Self ID - as clear from public forums and polls - erodes trust which we as transsexuals worked hard to establish in exchange for freedom to live our lives.

This law should be a balance of give and take. Not all take.

We respect understandable concerns over our accommodation within society - in areas such as fairness in sport or all women short lists. Independent oversight also helps to address that need for balance.

If self ID becomes law it diminishes safeguarding, removes protections for women and destroys the concord that we as GRC holding transsexuals have built over the past half century. We continue to regard this as vital to living our lives.

These changes are dilutions of this law and being made without support of many people for whom the law was written under mutually agreed rules in 2004.

If you are one such person please add your support to this statement to oppose these changes. Many fear this revision will destroy decades of bridges built with society.

We urge you to reconsider redefining a law that has worked as intended when guided by doctors - the real experts in this field - NOT us.

We support the defining of new laws to cover self expression of gender. But not erasing existing laws.

Eroding trust and mutual respect damages this law we signed up to on the basis it was written.

It will be a huge backward step for those with a GRC and make acceptance for everyone harder.

As transsexuals we transition to disappear into ordinary productive lives and rarely look back afterwards. This law was created to facilitate that.

We seek nothing more. Are happy with a balance of rights as exist today and believe the current law fair.

Transgender can seem to desire visibility and seek changing definitions of established words like ‘woman’. We have no wish to redefine words.

This law was intended to help us live normally not shout in the world's face. But we must retain our definition - transsexual - as a medical condition that should not be renamed by those who have none.

Give and take and mutual understanding is our preferred way and has served us well for decades. We do not agree with enforcement of rights at the end of a pronoun.

So we ask you to rethink these major changes as we fear they will lose mutual trust for all people however they identify.

Please preserve the true balance and meaning of the original GRA.

Do not make our act become meaningless.

Transsexuals supporting the statement:-

Andrea Davies & Sylvia Petronella Van Wijk

GRC and document holders with numbers:- 000687, 001819, 003840, 004298 And 523190

Other people supporting the statement:-

These will both be updated as posters ask to be included in either category.