![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
torreycanyon.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
transFrom FTM Australia
On 12th October 2001 His Honour Justice Richard Chisholm of the Family Court of Australia delivered a landmark judgement Re: Kevin and Jennifer -v- The Attorney General for the Commonwealth whereby a Sydney couple won their legal battle against the Commonwealth to have their marriage declared to be valid.
The decision, which declared the law of Australia, is of considerable legal and social significance; especially for people who have experienced transsexualism and other people who have experienced variation in their development or formation as human beings as well as their loved ones, family and friends.
The full text of the judgement can be accessed at http://www.familycourt.gov.au/judge/2001/html/rekevin_text.html
The singular question to be answered in the case was whether Kevin, the Applicant Husband, was a man for the purpose of the marriage law of Australia notwithstanding his transsexual background; Kevin being more commonly referred to as 'a post-operative female to male transsexual'.
Kevin and Jennifer
Kevin and Jennifer are concerned to ensure that others who have experienced suffering as a result of difference can take heart from their victory in this case. At the same time Kevin and Jennifer are obliged to exercise some care concerning what they presently say about this important decision given that the Commonwealth Government has until late November in which to appeal the decision.
In these circumstances Kevin and Jennifer issue the following joint statement:
"As we celebrate our Family Court victory we acknowledge with gratitude the many people who helped to make it possible.
We thank our legal team, particularly Rachael Wallbank, for her dedication to our case (above and beyond the call of duty) and for her grace under pressure.
We thank our family, friends, colleagues and other community members for lending support during this difficult process.
We thank our expert witnesses, whose contributions to this case and to the body of medical and scientific knowledge are incalculable.
Finally we pay tribute to all the heroic individuals who have experienced transsexualism, and their loved ones, who inspired us and paved the way.
In turn we hope Justice Chisholm's findings bring comfort and relief to others who, through no fault or choice, experience a similar predicament. We have risen above ignorance and prejudice to live simple, honest lives with dignity, as productive members of our society, harming no one. Our life together has been dominated by a quest for equal rights - the kind of security, responsibilities, privileges and social recognition which other couples and their children may take for granted.
We sought to bring anomalies and injustices to light, and challenged the misconceptions, bias and blame which have so often clouded transsexualism.
In so doing we developed deep pride in each other and demonstrated our strength as a family. We now hope to emerge from the shadow of legal uncertainty, and return our focus to our family life as we await with great excitement the birth of our second child."
Rachael Wallbank - Applicants' lawyer
The Applicants' lawyer, Rachael Wallbank, said:
"I saw my most important work in the case as ensuring that His Honour, who had the task of declaring the law of Australia in respect of these issues, had at his disposal extensive evidence of how Kevin was perceived as a man in his daily life and how the average Australian understood transsexualism.
Equally important was to ensure that His Honour had before him the very best expert medical and scientific evidence Australia and the world had to offer. We filed 39 affidavits of family, friends, work colleagues and acquaintances who vividly confirmed their perception of Kevin as a man, a mate, a son-in-law, a husband and a father.
I was fortunate to be able to obtain the assistance of a number of the best Australian and international experts on the subject of human sexual formation and transsexualism. From across the medical disciplines these eminent experts cumulatively provided the evidence sufficient for His Honour to find that a human being's sexual identity is biologically derived as a result of the sexual differentiation of the brain which, like the genitalia and gonads, irreversibly differentiates in the process of a person's formation as a human being.
In this context then, the procedure called sex assignment or re-assignment can be seen to be a process of rehabilitation of the individual's body in order to help bring it into harmony with the mind. The reality is that a small but significant proportion of the population experience difference in their sexual formation requiring sex assignment and reassignment.
Justice Chisholm found that Kevin, a so-called post-operative 'female-to-male transsexual', was a man within the ordinary, everyday meaning of that word.
His Honour also found that, in so far as the test of a person's sex for the purpose of marriage is concerned, the law of Australia should not be limited to one arbitrary set of characteristics, but should have regard to all of the sexually differentiated biological characteristics of a person, including brain sex, as well as the cultural characteristics of the person such as his or her lived sex.
I hope people can begin to appreciate the incredible courage demonstrated by Kevin and Jennifer in their bringing this case and seeing it through. I trust that the information and the message of appreciation and inclusion expressed in this judgement confirms that Australians continue to be a people conspicuous for their humanity and sense of justice."
On 12th October 2001 His Honour Justice Richard Chisholm of the Family Court of Australia delivered a landmark judgement Re: Kevin and Jennifer -v- The Attorney General for the Commonwealth whereby a Sydney couple won their legal battle against the Commonwealth to have their marriage declared to be valid.
The decision, which declared the law of Australia, is of considerable legal and social significance; especially for people who have experienced transsexualism and other people who have experienced variation in their development or formation as human beings as well as their loved ones, family and friends.
The full text of the judgement can be accessed at http://www.familycourt.gov.au/judge/2001/html/rekevin_text.html
The singular question to be answered in the case was whether Kevin, the Applicant Husband, was a man for the purpose of the marriage law of Australia notwithstanding his transsexual background; Kevin being more commonly referred to as 'a post-operative female to male transsexual'.
Kevin and Jennifer
Kevin and Jennifer are concerned to ensure that others who have experienced suffering as a result of difference can take heart from their victory in this case. At the same time Kevin and Jennifer are obliged to exercise some care concerning what they presently say about this important decision given that the Commonwealth Government has until late November in which to appeal the decision.
In these circumstances Kevin and Jennifer issue the following joint statement:
"As we celebrate our Family Court victory we acknowledge with gratitude the many people who helped to make it possible.
We thank our legal team, particularly Rachael Wallbank, for her dedication to our case (above and beyond the call of duty) and for her grace under pressure.
We thank our family, friends, colleagues and other community members for lending support during this difficult process.
We thank our expert witnesses, whose contributions to this case and to the body of medical and scientific knowledge are incalculable.
Finally we pay tribute to all the heroic individuals who have experienced transsexualism, and their loved ones, who inspired us and paved the way.
In turn we hope Justice Chisholm's findings bring comfort and relief to others who, through no fault or choice, experience a similar predicament. We have risen above ignorance and prejudice to live simple, honest lives with dignity, as productive members of our society, harming no one. Our life together has been dominated by a quest for equal rights - the kind of security, responsibilities, privileges and social recognition which other couples and their children may take for granted.
We sought to bring anomalies and injustices to light, and challenged the misconceptions, bias and blame which have so often clouded transsexualism.
In so doing we developed deep pride in each other and demonstrated our strength as a family. We now hope to emerge from the shadow of legal uncertainty, and return our focus to our family life as we await with great excitement the birth of our second child."
Rachael Wallbank - Applicants' lawyer
The Applicants' lawyer, Rachael Wallbank, said:
"I saw my most important work in the case as ensuring that His Honour, who had the task of declaring the law of Australia in respect of these issues, had at his disposal extensive evidence of how Kevin was perceived as a man in his daily life and how the average Australian understood transsexualism.
Equally important was to ensure that His Honour had before him the very best expert medical and scientific evidence Australia and the world had to offer. We filed 39 affidavits of family, friends, work colleagues and acquaintances who vividly confirmed their perception of Kevin as a man, a mate, a son-in-law, a husband and a father.
I was fortunate to be able to obtain the assistance of a number of the best Australian and international experts on the subject of human sexual formation and transsexualism. From across the medical disciplines these eminent experts cumulatively provided the evidence sufficient for His Honour to find that a human being's sexual identity is biologically derived as a result of the sexual differentiation of the brain which, like the genitalia and gonads, irreversibly differentiates in the process of a person's formation as a human being.
In this context then, the procedure called sex assignment or re-assignment can be seen to be a process of rehabilitation of the individual's body in order to help bring it into harmony with the mind. The reality is that a small but significant proportion of the population experience difference in their sexual formation requiring sex assignment and reassignment.
Justice Chisholm found that Kevin, a so-called post-operative 'female-to-male transsexual', was a man within the ordinary, everyday meaning of that word.
His Honour also found that, in so far as the test of a person's sex for the purpose of marriage is concerned, the law of Australia should not be limited to one arbitrary set of characteristics, but should have regard to all of the sexually differentiated biological characteristics of a person, including brain sex, as well as the cultural characteristics of the person such as his or her lived sex.
I hope people can begin to appreciate the incredible courage demonstrated by Kevin and Jennifer in their bringing this case and seeing it through. I trust that the information and the message of appreciation and inclusion expressed in this judgement confirms that Australians continue to be a people conspicuous for their humanity and sense of justice."