Keywords: Sex-Selective Surgeries, Article 14,19,21 of Indian Constitution.
The Kerala High Court directed the State government to issue an order regulating sex-selective procedures on babies and children and to do it within three months.
In addition, according to Justice VG Arun, sex-selective surgery should only be authorized in accordance with the recommendation of a State Level Multidisciplinary Committee established by the State government until such legislation is enacted.
The High Court made this ruling after taking into account a couple’s (petitioners’) request to allow genital reconstruction surgery in order to raise their 7-year-old kid, who was born with “ambiguous genitalia,” as a girl.
The child’s verified medical diagnosis, “Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia,” was disclosed to the court and was classified as a Disorder of Sex Development (DSD) condition.
The court was also informed that the youngster was receiving therapy and that genital reconstruction surgery had been recommended by medical professionals.
The parents ultimately turned to the High Court for guidance since none of the physicians would perform the procedure without a judge’s approval.
But despite the parents’ appeal, the High Court finally ruled against immediately approving the operation since doing so may go against the child’s wishes.
“Permission to perform non-consensual sex affirmative surgery is requested. The Karyotype-46XX report of chromosomal analysis is not adequate for giving the license, the Court said, since it cannot be ruled out that a kid with Karyotype-46XX would have male-like traits as an adult.
Advocate TP Sajid, who spoke on behalf of the petitioners, said that surgery was essential since the kid had begun to notice the different traits. The parents also expressed worries about any future social exclusion the kid could experience.
Advocate Sajid argued that the parents were best prepared to choose the kid’s destiny in light of their choice to raise the infant as a girl. He argued that delaying the choice may put the family through hardship and give the kid excessive pain.
The performance of genital reconstructive surgery without the child’s permission, according to Justice Arun, would violate both the child’s dignity and privacy. The Court determined this would completely breach the child’s rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The High Court noted that granting such consent might have severe emotional and psychological repercussions if the kid later develops a preference for a gender different than the one to which they were surgically transformed.
The High Court then ordered the State Government to form a State Level Multidisciplinary Committee to evaluate the kid and determine if the youngster was in any imminent danger of dying as a result of the medical condition within two months.
The Court recommended that this group consist of a pediatrician/pediatric endocrinologist, a pediatric surgeon, and a child psychiatrist/child psychologist.
According to the High Court, authorization might be given to do the procedure if it is determined that the kid has a disease that requires treatment and poses a risk to their life.
Name: Anamika Parasher, College: Jagran Lakecity University,Bhopal, Semester: LLB 5th semester an intern under Legal Vidhiya
0 Comments