Diane won't quit marriage just because she was a man
Diane Hughes at home in Macroom.
A MACROOM woman who underwent a sex change operation has accused the government of " failing to understand the nuances of the human condition".
This follows the publication of recommendations by an inter-departmental Gender Recognition Advisory Group which, if implemented, would allow a transgender person to bring their legally stated gender into line with they recognise as their real gender. One of the conditions of the recommendation, however, is that any existing marriages that were entered into before the gender change must be annulled or divorced.
Diane Hughes from Macroom was born Richard Hughes in the UK and married wife Caroline over 30 years ago. She underwent a sex change operation in 2000 and remains happily married. Diane believes the recommendations highlight the State's difficulties in understanding transgender people and their rights.
"I've had the surgery so it's de facto. It doesn't need confirmation. This is their stuff; this is what people who aren't in my position are failing to understand. This is the State's baggage, not ours," Diane said, adding that the proposed legislation would affect birth certificates only. She said her driver's licence has her photo and all relevant details she needs to identify herself.
Diane, took legal action against the Southern Health Board to get funding for her operation, believes the State often treats human rights as privileges.
"I had a lot of trouble with the Health Board getting the surgery sorted out. There was a right to have that surgery done and to have it paid for by the Health Board. It is not a privilege, it is a right. This is what the State fails to understand," she said.
This week Dr Fergus Ryan, law lecturer at DIT argued that the requirement for a transgender person to dissolve their marriage to get legal recognition of their gender could be perceived as an attack on marriage, contrary to Article 41 of the Constitution.
"He is correct. This is an attack on marriage,," Diane said. " We have been together for 30 odd years now, you don't change something because the State has a hissyfit over it."
"The thing is that we could give up our marriage and go straight into a civil partnership but why should we? Again it is down to asking why should we be put out because the State fails to comprehend the nuances of the human condition?"
- JOE LEOGUE
