Schedule 1 - Gender Recognition Panels
Gender Recognition Bill [Lords]
11:00 am

Photo of Mr Andrew Selous

Mr Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire, Conservative)

Amendments Nos. 40 and 41 relate to the list of people eligible to sit on gender recognition panels, and amendments Nos. 34 to 37 relate to the authority of the evidence submitted to the gender recognition panels.

A number of Members have talked about a rigorous assessment in relation to the process of gender recognition. The amendments would ensure that a proper and rigorous assessment was carried out, in terms of those on the panel and in terms of the evidence provided. There should not be disagreement across the Committee on this. I note that in the other place Lord Filkin said that he believes that excellent diagnostic decisions are vital in these matters. I hope that the amendments go some way towards providing such decisions. They are intended to ensure that there is a high level of medical scrutiny, that the quality and independence of the panel are beyond question, and that it is not just a rubber-stamping exercise—that phrase was referred to earlier.

Most commentators would agree that gender dysphoria is a psychiatric condition, and therefore it seems sensible that one of the members of the panel should be a competent psychiatrist. That is not currently a requirement. The Government seem happy with chartered psychologists giving evidence. I understand that that can mean more or less anyone registered as a psychologist. The amendments suggest that there should be a properly qualified psychiatrist on the panel. There are thousands of qualified consultant psychiatrists in the UK who would be available to sit as members of gender recognition panels. The amendments also propose that the panel should consist of at least three members, in addition to the president, two of whom should be medical members, one of whom is a recognised psychiatrist.

All the amendments follow the grain of the discussion that we have had so far this morning about the process being rigorous and not a rubber-stamping exercise. They accord with comments made by Lord Filkin in the other place when he said that excellent diagnostic decisions are vital. I hope that the Minister will look favourably on the amendments.

Annotations

No annotations

Sign in or join to post a public annotation.