Perhaps parents should only be allowed to decide on behalf of their children in cases where there is eminent danger in case the surgical alteration is not performed. A life-threatening scenario may call for such an intervention. It is however notable that intersex condition is not life-threatening other than it holds the possibility of harming the child psychologically if the child grows to identify differences from other children. Intersex Initiative (2008) indicates that the possibility of pain or sickness is rare in intersex conditions although serious health concerns may be present thus requiring medical treatment.
Intersex Initiative (2008, para 6) however argues that “correcting” the appearance of the intersex genitals will not change the underlying medical needs. ” This therefore rules out the possibility of a parent consenting to surgical alteration of intersex infant on the basis of medical urgency. The Constitutional Court of Columbia has a laudable option whereby parents are only supposed to consent to surgical alteration of their intersex infants with consideration of the urgency and invasiveness of the procedure as well as the age of the said child.
Children who are older than five years are for instance considered old enough to have their autonomy respected (Greenberg & Chase, 1999). Conclusion Surgical alteration of intersex infants is a controversial issue and the role parents in making the decision to alter intersex infants and forced gender assignment is a real issue. A superior view from the above discussion is that parents should not alter the genitals of intersex infants or assign gender to the infants. Instead, intersex children should be left to grow to a point where they can make informed decision on the best choice.
By parents consenting on behalf of their infants, they undermine the principle of patient autonomy and ignore the risks of gender identity crisis associated with early gender assignment. Failures and negative effects of surgical alteration is a strong proof of the risks of early genital alteration. In addition, it is unfortunate that parents consider genital-alteration for their intersex children in order to safeguard their own interests rather than making the interests of the child a priority.
In that case, the child should be left to attain an age of informed consent and choose whether to remain an intersex or to attain the preferred gender and surgical treatment.
References
Baur, K. and Crooks, R. (2007). Our sexuality. ISBN 0495095540: Cengage Learning. Beh, H. G. and Diamond, H. (2000). An emerging ethical and medical dilemma: should physicians perform sex assignment on infants with ambiguous genitalia? Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, 7 (1): 1-63. Dreger, A. (2008). Shifting the Paradigm of Intersex Treatment.
Intersex Society of North America. Retrieved 9, Aug. 2010 from http://www. isna. org/compare Greenberg, J. A. and Chase, C. (1999). Background of Colombia decisions. Retrieved 9, Aug. 2010 from http://www. isna. org/node/21 Intersex Initiative. (2008). Intersex FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions). Retrieved 9, Aug. 2010 from http://www. intersexinitiative. org/articles/intersex-faq. html Switzer, L. (2005). Can surgery for intersex babies be justified? The York Scholar, 2 (Spring): 67-73.