Please can someone explain why the GRC process needs to be simpler?

[OlennasWimple]

I'm drafting my response to the GRC consultation. I know what I'm writing for the latter bits, where it gets into the interplay with the Equality Act and single sex spaces. But I'm getting quite cross with the first bits about the actual process and the cost of applying for a GRC. I fell like I must be missing something, because surely we aren't going through the whole consultation process - and hostile debate on self-ID - because some trans people don't want to fill out a lengthy form and pay a few hundred quid (or fill out a form to apply for a fee remission)?

This is a genuine question, not intended to be a re-hash of the arguments for or against self-ID, just a discussion on the actual process of applying and why it's so terrible at present.

Well at the moment someone needs to get two medical reports (one being from a doctor who specialises in gender dysphoria) and the person needs to pay for each report (around £80 each), they then need to fill out a wad of paper work detailing a load of things like if they were married, addresses and so on. Then they need to get a statuary declaration (I.e living in role till they die ect) that costs around £25 to do. They also then need to provide two years at least of documentation to prove it all. This is then submitted to a Panal who decides if they are serious about it all 'proving trans enough'. If it's approved then it's issued, if not then well its a no, this costs £240.

Now what it's all about is a lot of trans people find it too costly (lack of income, ect), and also other things a pain such as if a report is wrong then a new one has to be done (another £80 a time) as well as then having to pay the £240 fee again.

This is why a lot of people want reforms of it, just to make it easier such as the Irish system.

Of course, if they actually thought that making a life altering permanent decision such as changing legal sex was more important than changing your photo on Twitter then they might actually have thought that going to see those doctors FIRST was a sensible step.

And as such be well on the way to transition without it being an apparent pain in the backside optional extra that is stopping them from living their life.

Just like, you know, when you do something obviously way more important than change your life forever and go for 2 weeks holiday in Africa and you so see a doctor and, God help you, pay to have any injections they recommend before you set off.

Why is going on vacation for a fortnight more important than changing your gender status forever?

With priorities like that I find the 'onerous' demands of getting a GRC hard to accept as credible reason to abandon them.

The barriers are there for good reason.

If you see a fence and a sign saying no entry without permission, the decent person asks how they might get permission and do what is necessary - and, if they do not qualify, say okay, fair enough.

The people who smash down the fence with a bulldozer and plough on in are not the ones we should be accommodating.

We definitely should not just say - oh well, they don't like the fence and sign, we should take it down and let the world come in.

Their inconvenience matters more than any crooks or vandals who might walk in unhindered and mess up our property.

In any case, thinking that will happen is mean and we have been reassured it has not happened in Argentina so we should shut up.

thatjourno - If there is a regular problem with the reports being incorrect and needing to be re-done, surely the sensible thing to do is improve the process for producing the report, not just remove the requirement for the report?

thatjourno

Paperwork is a necessary evil of modern life. I don;t find it easy myself for health reasosn and Dh is the same. ((Aplos for typing, having toruble today.)

I think that there should be more state assistance for people with disabities inc MH issues where there are difficulties to filling out paperwork (some actual reasonable adjsutments under the EA would be nice!) rather then having to rely on the CAB ect if you have no freinds/family to help, but outside of that, the GRC prwcess is pretty comparable to many otger things..

Rightly or wrongly, you have to take 2 forms of ID just to get a library card these days; one photo, one proof of address... if you aren't a driver you'll prob have to get a passport so you have photo ID.

Most adults will have some kind of bank address in their own name, even if no utilities becasue they rent a room etc. I have had to use bank plus docotr's letter/ benefit letter when we had to live in shared housing so no utilities, so it is not impossible but, yes it maybe takes a bit of effort for some people in certain circs. Again, the CAB/ wlefare rights can advise and no more than you have to do for various other thiggs.

beyondraggedy if the demedicalisation of being trans goes through then a GRC won't help you I am afraid. And they will still make sure you have to spell out difficulties in painful detail becasue of the old chestnut 'it is not your condition, it is how it affects you'. Even for conditions that it is entirely bloody obvious how a person would be affetced.

The fee remission is detailed here www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees and, as I thought, those in receipt of means tested benefits like income related JSA and ESA, Income Support etc, do get automatic 'passporting' to zero fees/ reductions without needing to fill in another form.

Funny how posters like Snappity disappear when you respond with facts (unless it is biology related of course).

seafret - thanks, that's really interesting (about "passporting" of automatic fee remission)

Personally, I hate filling out forms and I am terrible at it! I can write really well, I'm intelligent and well educated....but give me a form to complete and I get it all wrong. I write my surname in the first name box; I use the wrong format for my date of birth (MM/DD/YY or DD/MM/YY); I put the wrong dates down for my DC's birthdays.... I don't know why, but it's something I've always struggled with. So I am very sympathetic when groups say that a particular bureaucratic process is difficult or needlessly cumbersome.

I'm still not seeing, though, how the GRC process is so terribly hard

But, still waiting for evidence to persuade me

This is then submitted to a Panal who decides if they are serious about it all 'proving trans enough'. If it's approved then it's issued, if not then well its a no, this costs £240.

It's 140 pounds. And only if you earn over 28,415 pounds a year (threshold may have gone up now as that was in 2012).

www.transitionftmuk.co.uk/downloads/grp-fees.pdf

Then they need to get a statuary declaration (I.e living in role till they die ect) that costs around £25 to do.

It's £5 flat fee, fixed by law.

It's £140 to submit your application with a fee waiver for low income (yes, you have to fill in a form).

If there's an obvious error with your applicaton the administration team will contact you to rectify before it gets sent to the panel. The panel may also get in touch for further info or evidence. This is why very few applications fail outright. Only if your application is outright refused will you have to pay the fee to apply again.

Yes you may have to pay £80 each for medical reports. Lots of PIP, ESA and UC LCW claimants also have to pay for these to support their appeal when the government have stopped the money they need to live on.

Maybe trans people could fundraise for this instead of taxi fares / reparative pizza and cigarettes

Honestly, reading the section on costs in the consultation document has made me so pissed off.

This is why very few applications fail outright

Is there a link somewhere with the details of how many applications are granted / refused? I'd be really interested to see that info, as a low refusal rate suggests that most applications are well prepared and meet the criteria

Is there a link somewhere with the details of how many applications are granted / refused?

www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2017-10-06/105995/