Re Imogen: the role of the Family Court of Australia in disputes over gender dysphoria treatment

Dimopoulos, Georgina; Taylor-Sands, Michelle

doi:10.1007/s40592-021-00138-0

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In her view, though it poses some difficulties, 'legislative reform may provide the clearest statement of the law' (France 2014, p. 247). This position is also taken by the authors of this article elsewhere (Jowett and Kelly 2021;Dimopoulos and Taylor-Sands 2021).…”

Section: Contemporary Views On Reformmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…8 Medical practitioners have voiced concern about the law's impact on trans youth's health and wellbeing, as well as on their finite clinical resources (Hewitt et al 2012;Telfer et al 2018a). Legal academics have critiqued the law, highlighting its myriad inconsistencies and failings as well as the economic barriers presented by mandatory Family Court involvement (France 2014;Kelly 2014;Bell 2015;Jowett and Kelly 2021;Dimopoulos and Taylor-Sands 2021). Legal barriers to gender-affirming care 'threaten the health, well-being, and survival of transgender children and young adults' (Martin et al 2021).…”

Section: A Case For Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reforming the Law on Consent to Medical Treatment for Trans Youth: A Renewed Call for Legislative Intervention

Jowett

Dimopoulos

Kelly

2022

Laws

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australian trans youth seeking medical treatment for gender dysphoria can encounter significant legal barriers to healthcare. Legal requirements for obtaining valid consent to gender-affirming care, first established in 2004, mean that an application to the Family Court is required in many cases before treatment can be provided. The development of Australian law concerning consent for the medical treatment of trans youth has been slow, haphazard, and remains incomplete. The Family Court process has been found to be damaging to trans youth and their families. There is widespread agreement that the law needs reform, even more so since the 2020 decision in Re: Imogen. This article explores the implications of the decision in Re: Imogen for trans youth and their families and raises possible models for reform. It starts by providing the background to Re: Imogen and explaining the current legal position. It then explores why the law needs to be reformed, highlighting the inconsistent approach to competency in Australian law and the harm the current law does to trans youth. Building on critiques of the law in this area, it reviews various options for law reform and suggests an optimal model.

show abstract

Section: Contemporary Views On Reformmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: A Case For Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reforming the Law on Consent to Medical Treatment for Trans Youth: A Renewed Call for Legislative Intervention

Jowett

Dimopoulos

Kelly

2022

Laws

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As highlighted earlier, two of the authors of this article have proposed a framework that places the Gillick competent decision as being determinative so far as possible through engagement and partnership with family and clinicians. 195 However, in the event of disagreement, the framework advocates for improved access to early mediation and engagement with a multidisciplinary team of specialists, including clinical bioethicists, to support young people, their families, and clinicians. 196…”

Section: Improved Integration Of Gender Carementioning

confidence: 99%

From clinical to judicial decision-making, and back again in Bell v. Tavistock? Preparing for the legacy of court involvement in gender care for minors

Garland

Horowicz

Dimopoulos

et al. 2023

Medical Law International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender care for minors in England has recently been scrutinised by the courts and is currently undergoing significant transformation, shifting away from the long-standing centralised service provision model. Alongside this change, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health has recently published Version 8 of its Standard of Care, which introduces radical changes that shift away from age restrictions on medical interventions. This article considers what role judicial decision-making could, or should, play in this new era of healthcare provision for adolescent gender care, especially since Bell v. Tavistock. Despite Bell seemingly returning decision-making to clinicians, patients, and their families, we argue that the decision has left the door open in a way that threatens the autonomy and rights of gender diverse children. Through a comparative analysis with Australian case law, we demonstrate how and why uncertainties left by Bell may in fact lead to continued court involvement. Finally, we suggest several pragmatic responses that may mitigate the risk of unnecessary and time-consuming court involvement.

show abstract

“…Among the various concerns raised about the implications of this decision, 8 prominent is its erosion of the Gillick competence principle. The Family Court's conclusion that Gillick competence is not determinative in cases of dispute stigmatises gender‐affirming health care, undermines respect for the decision‐making autonomy of Gillick competent minors, and may endanger their right to access other kinds of health care 9 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gender CARE beyond the courts: an alternative framework for resolving disputes over gender health care for children and adolescents

Dimopoulos,

Taylor‐Sands

2024

Medical Journal of Australia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Re Imogen: the role of the Family Court of Australia in disputes over gender dysphoria treatment

Cited by 3 publications

References 45 publications

Reforming the Law on Consent to Medical Treatment for Trans Youth: A Renewed Call for Legislative Intervention

Reforming the Law on Consent to Medical Treatment for Trans Youth: A Renewed Call for Legislative Intervention

From clinical to judicial decision-making, and back again in Bell v. Tavistock? Preparing for the legacy of court involvement in gender care for minors

Gender CARE beyond the courts: an alternative framework for resolving disputes over gender health care for children and adolescents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About