PIL in Madras High Court alleges unethical practices, two-finger test by clinics for transgender persons

The petitioner said that several transgender persons who visit these clinics experienced unethical behaviour by the staff. They were asked to strip and the staff also performed the banned two-finger test on them.

The Madras High Court recently issued notice to the National Medical Council (NMC) and the Tamil Nadu government over a Public Interest Litigation alleging “unethical practices” and breach of World Professional Association for Transgender Health Guidelines (WPATH) protocol at the two transgender clinics in the State.

A Bench of Justices SS Sundar and P Dhanabal asked NMC and the Tamil Nadu Health and Family Welfare Department to respond to the PIL within four weeks.

The Court was hearing a PIL filed by a transgender person, who claimed that while TN was one of the two States to have exclusive transgender clinics, the staff at such clinics often acted in violation of WPATH Standards of care as mandated under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act 2019, while dealing with persons seeking gender affirmation surgeries.

In 2022, the Tamil Nadu government launched transgender clinics at two government hospitals – the Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital in Chennai and Government Rajaji Hospital in Madurai. These hospitals have clinics that offer counselling, obstetricians and surgeons on designated days of a week for transgender persons.

The petitioner said that several transgender persons who visit these clinics experienced unethical behaviour by the staff.

Most of them said they were asked to strip and the staff also performed the banned two-finger test on them.

The petitioner sought directions to the two hospitals to eliminate unethical, objectionable, medically unnecessary practices being conducted on transgender persons.

The plea also urged the Court to direct the State and Union authorities to formulate a standard protocol for medical institutions to follow when performing gender affirmation surgeries.

The petitioner told the Court that in the absence of technical and operational protocols for gender-affirming procedures, the mandate under Section 15(e) of the Transgender Persons Act would be defeated.

Courtesy :Bar and Bench 

Note: This news is originally published on barandbench.com and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially for human rights.