We were struck by the blatant spin contained in a recent report published in the Medical Journal of Australia and an accompanying press release on the AMA website.
We are trying to find out the AMA’s position on non-consensual surgery on intersex infants. We are aware that some of their members remain very enthusiastic about carrying it out, despite many intersex people calling for it to be banned except in those very rare cases where it is required in order to save lives, such as cloacal exstrophy.
We find the use of the neologism DSD – Disorders of Sex Development – abhorrent and call for the use of this term to cease.
We also call for the cessation of non-consensual surgery on intersex infants.
AMA, Cancer risk in delaying sex assignment surgery, screenshot.
The case cited is hardly justification of any kind for non-consensual surgery on intersex infants, and we find it bizarre and appalling that it is being so blatantly misused in this way.
Instead, the case is excellent proof of the need for patient-centred medical care for intersex people. So is the quote at the end of this post from the AMA’s position statement, Sexual Diversity and Gender Identity – 2002.
This patient would have been far better served by possibly having the surgery he might have wanted at the age of majority, after having all the facts explained to him without bias or spin.
He might have even preferred to be she, both sexes or neither. Who knows what kind of hell he may have been living in all those years for want of early, appropriate and unbiased medical attention?
Quote from AMA position paper on GLBTI people.
4.5 Intersex people
4.5.1 There is little published research on the Intersex population in Australia however anecdotal research indicates that experiences or expectations of discriminatory treatment may lead to decreased accessing of healthcare facilities. This has flow on effects for untreated mental and physical health problems.
