Trans and non-binary categories added to official forms for reporting the death of a child

[IwantToRetire]

NB not checked story, only source DM

The Department of Health and Social Care has this month updated the forms that must be submitted following the tragic loss of a young person.

The paperwork asks: 'Which gender did the child identify as at the time of death?'

It includes the categories 'male (including trans male)', 'female (including trans female)' and 'non-binary'.

As recently as July the form simply listed 'male', 'female', 'other' and 'unknown' under the 'sex' category.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13964311/trans-non-binary-official-forms-death-child.html

Birth and death records are public records and they need to make sense. This makes no sense. Presumably this particular record and process been targeted by TRAs so that they can shout bigot at anyone who understands what a public record is and why falsifying documents is wrong.

My issue with it would be if it was used to inflate the 'risks' of death for trans kids as we know some activists love doing.

So if for example a child was attacked or took their own life the immediate reaction would be 'Oh my God it was a transphobic murder / a trans suicide! We must fund more trans charities!'

When in fact the follow up questions might as accurately be: was your child autistic? Was your child same sex attracted and struggling with internalised homophobia? Did your child experience childhood sexual abuse? For example all of these things would potentially increase the risk of suicide and all would require very separate funding to organisations and services to reduce risk.

Sex is the first question.

Followed by 'gender identity', for those over 10 years old.

(Screenshot)

There needs to be a legitimate reason to ask every question.

I can understand why there might be concern about the number of parents having to fill out this form for their trans children.

But this is not the way to do it. Its pushing an ideology. Everyone has a name, date of birth and sex. Very few people identity as having a gender. This form assumes everyone over 10 has a sex and a gender identity.

The question should have been in the form of "did the child identify as trans or non binary?" Where parents could answer and then specify.

"Male including trans male" is confusing wording. Is 'trans male' a girl who wants to be seen as a boy, or boy who wants to be seen as a girl?

Imagine a situation where a child identifies as trans but the parents don't. Then the child dies and they are presented with this form.

Is it sensitive or could it be yet another kick in the teeth that is dreadfully traumatic to a family?

I agree with this, but similarly, parents who do subscribe to GI could be upset if there is no option to recognise how the child identified, no? It's just another minefield created by gender bollocks.

So the form says:

Sex:
Gender if applicable:

Explainer of why we collect data in this way to improve our understanding of premature deaths and to also try and reflect and respect the lives of individuals.

Magic done.

Ah, yes that seems like it would be acceptable to most.

So why is a government department lacking the brain cells to do this?

That's the question.

That took me all of 10seconds to work out.

The argument isnt that trans shouldnt be mentioned on the form, its that the question should be tackled with a lot more sensitivity.

Im guessing that the question has been added because its been argued that trans status is thought to be in a factor in some deaths. They are using this form to establish this?

But the question forces all parents to state their childs gender identity in the same way they have to state name, sex and date of birth. The concern is activists are using this form to normalise the idea that all children have gender identity.

That's a question I've been asking myself all too often with all of this stuff. Probably got someone whispering in their ears about it all.

Im guessing that the question has been added because it's been argued that trans status is thought to be in a factor in some deaths. They are using this form to establish this?

I assume it's as a result of the Brianna Ghey murder. There was a lot of criticism about death certificates at the time.

Using dead children for point scoring about pronouns is a very deep low to sink to.

That.

As GC as I am, I find this board toxic these days, and this is a new low.

But this also isn't the solution though is it?!

It's just a total lack of critical thought as to various groups and situations.

The proposed wording of the form, in lumping trans identity into sex, means you learn nothing about whether trans death rates are significantly higher than the general population because trans people are invisible with this methodology because they are included with the opposite sex and don't have their own unique identification category.

No one is going to come along after the fact and match up every death certificate with every birth certificate to establish a difference between sex on the birth certificate and what it put on the death certificate.

Therefore it's fucking useless for anything other than affirmation purposes.

We have processes for when various matters are a factor in deaths: the coroner's court.

The activist lobby pushing for this is going to find public sympathy run out very soon if the plan is to force bereaved parents to engage with their agenda, since they are the ones using dead children to score points.

I do not understand this accusation.

The suggestions being made on this thread to improve the form would help everyone.

Parents who are grieving don't need to be faced with a form in which it is unclear how to answer any of the questions. That just creates more stress and worry.

It is good that parents will have an opportunity to register their child’s gender identity where that is important to them and their child.

But there will be other parents who will be distressed at the limited options given. If their child had no gender identity, then they have nowhere to represent that child on this form.

A compulsory form, to be filled out at such a difficult time, should be done better - clearly written and inclusive of everyone.

I read the forms and the protocols for going through them yesterday. A lot of care and thought has rightly gone into how to gather necessary information sensitively and respectfully.

So I find it quite jarring that this one question has been added in such a careless and clumsy way. Even the columns are badly formatted; it really wouldn't take much to make sure it was clear and well presented.

It could easily be worded to be clear, respectful and helpful for those who wish to record this detail of a child's identity, and also respectful to those who don't.

But this also isn't the solution though is it?!

No, it's just a knee jerk thing that's been done in response.

Surely birth and death certificates should be based on objective information and should match for each individual. Someone's sex doesn't change whatever their age of death. Gender identity is subjective, can be mutable, and depends on who is reporting it. How on earth do you record a young person's gender identity who has become severely depressed because they've realised that their decision to 'transition' was a massive mistake?

If, exceptionally, errors were made in the recording of a child's sex when they were born (eg, due to misreading of physical characteristics and which genetic testing later proved to be incorrect) then the birth certificate should be changed to be accurate about their actual genetic sex. Then the birth and death certificates will still match.

If someone is wanting to collect data eg. for research about suicide - something that may be tremendously useful if done in a robust way - far more subtle information is needed than a couple of confusing tick boxes about 'gender identity'. Where is the data about bullying, food/weight issues, same sex attraction, exam pressures, loneliness, drug use, other diagnoses like OCD or Autism etc. etc? It's useless without the very much bigger, unique picture for each young person. There is potential for this kind of parallel project to exist alongside the recording of fact but it is a separate exercise with different needs for data collection and interpretation.

If children were dying with a particular attribute ‘A’, it would make sense to log A on the certificate. Presumably the logical thing, once establish more children with A were dying than the normal child population, would try your utmost to get rid of A asap.
So for that reason, I think it’s a good thing if it is administered correctly.
Edited: but yes, good points to pp it needs to be administered very robustly and there’s a lot of room for error. Maybe this is to initially flag cases.

My worry is the scenario of the kid who identifies as trans with the parents who see the trans related issues (potentially lack of access to comorbid mental health needs because trans = CAHMS won't touch them, which we know a lot of parents have reported) as contributing to the death. The parents 'not being supportive' is actually them seeing that their child's issues were not about gender but a much broader set of issues.

That's going to cause so much distress in that situation.

Even Brianna Ghey's parents have seen their child's death through this lens even though they were supportive of transition. They've made comments about a lack of access to service and a lack of protection as a vulnerable young person identifying as trans. There is a review of Warrington Borough Council provision of safeguarding as a result.

(They've lumped the most vulnerable kids into the same additional support unit as the most violent and difficult kids, without actually informing the school fully of the risk these kids might pose - and no one saw how this might end up causing problems)

So ok, I can get the point of those wanting to recognise their child's beliefs but I also think that they would want it reflected that they were actually trans if it's potentially relevant to their death too. It doesn't actually help to put them into the 'correct gender' in this scenario, without also making them somehow identifiable as trans too (and by definition allows parents who don't believe in gender to retain sex).

I think the people designing the form assume that ticking sex as say, female, and then ticking the male, non binary and perhaps other boxes will caputure the trans children?

Anyone can see this isn't the best way to caputure this information. If its important enough to collect, its important enough to get right.

Absolutely.

What is the purpose of the certificate (and what is it used for)?

What is the objective and goal for changing the certificate?

My issue here is that official documents should remain as factually accurate in order to retain their integrity and value for record and data collection.

They should not be focused on feelings over that.

This doesn't mean there isn't room, to take those feelings into account and reflect them, but they should not override the primary existence and purposes of the documents either.

That's going to fuck up someone's genealogy search one day. Also, how does a stillborn child identify its gender? Woke nuttery!