hunter of justice

N.Y. Court Slams Doctor’s Note Requirement for Name Change

by guest blogger Harper Jean Tobin - cross-posted to T-Equality Blog

A New York appeals court yesterday issued a two-page ruling overturning a lower court’s requirement that a transgender man present medical documentation supporting his petition for a name change. The NYC-based Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund, which represented the petitioner, said in its press release:

[T]he appellate court wrote, "[t]here is no sound basis in law or policy to engraft upon the statutory provisions an additional requirement that a transgendered-petitioner present medical substantiation for the desired name change."  The court's decision sends a powerful message that transgender people must be treated equally and that they cannot be subjected to different legal requirements than everyone else. People’s names are fundamental to their identities.  This decision confirms that each one of us has the right to be known by a name we choose.  That decision can’t be second-guessed by doctors, therapists or anyone else simply because someone is transgender.

Upon learning of the ruling, Olin [Winn-Ritzenberg, the petitioner,] said, "This means that I can finally change my name and move forward with my life.  My gender transition has been a very personal journey, and no one is in a better position to decide that I need to change my name than I am."
…

It’s well settled in law around the country that transgender folks can follow the same simple procedures for name change as individuals who are changing their names because of marriage, religious conversion, or for any other reason. Yet, around the country, judges periodically try to make it harder for trans people than for anyone else. Despite numerous prior New York court decisions supporting the right of transgender individuals to change names without meeting any special requirements, this particular lower court had been imposing the “doctor’s note” requirement routinely on transgender individuals. While most individuals were able to comply, TLDEF appealed in this case to get rid of this requirement once and for all. Kudos to them, and to the numerous other lawyers who assisted in this appeal, including Lambda Legal.

The terse decision concludes with the unnecessary statement, which has somehow become boilerplate for New York courts, that the grant of a name change is not legal proof of change of gender.

"Heckuva Job" award goes to ...

The morality police have come up with another really smashing idea: prosecute teenagers who send sexually suggestive photos of themselves to friends.  (When done by cellphone, this is "sexting.") The Wall Street Journal reports that district attorneys in Ohio, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and  Wisconsin have tried to stop this practice by filing charges against teens who send and receive the  pictures.

Hunter's Heckuva Job Award, though, goes to ... Wyoming, County, PA prosecutor George Skumanik, who opined that teens who sext are accomplices to the charge of producing child pornography. Mr. Skumanik now has to defend the lawsuit that he so richly deserves.  According to the ACLU, which represents three of the teens and their parents:

In February 2009, Skumanick sent a letter to the parents of approximately twenty Tunkhannock students, including the ACLU's clients, threatening the students with criminal felony charges if they did not agree to be placed on probation and participate in a counseling program he devised. A course outline indicates that the program will help the girls "[g]ain an understanding of how [their] actions were wrong," "gain an understanding of what it means to be a girl in today's society," and "[i]dentify non-traditional societal and job roles."

The district attorney told a group of parents and students in February that he has the authority to prosecute girls photographed in underwear, like the ACLU's clients, or even in a bikini on the beach, because the photos are "provocative."

There are so many things to love about this strategy. First, it's obvious from the description of these re-education camps that they aren't planning to do any for boys. What a surprise.

Second, the primary targets - sexually precocious teenage girls - are a group who society just loves to punish in order to protect. Think of the many wonderful disciplinary strategies developed in their name over history. Parental consent laws! Curfews! Long ugly skirts!

My favorite aspect of the anti-sexting campaign, though, is its wonderful counseling program, the one being set up so that these wayward types can "gain an understanding of what it means to be a girl." Including free lessons in "non-traditional societal roles." And people wonder why feminist has become a dirty word. This sounds like cultural revolution as devised by a team made up of Phyllis Schlafley and Catharine MacKinnon.

You're doing a heckuva job, George.

UPDATE: The federal court issued an injunction against George's plan.