Sex-selective surgery without consent violates child’s dignity, privacy: Kerala High Court
The court directed the Kerala government to issue an order regulating such surgeries on infants and children within three months.
The Kerala High Court has denied a plea seeking sex-selective surgery on a minor, saying that it violates the child’s dignity and privacy, PTI reported on Tuesday.
The order was passed by Justice VG Arun who was hearing a plea filed by the parents of a seven-year-old with ambiguous genitalia, seeking permission from the court to allow genital reconstructive surgery to raise their child as a female.
The petitioner had told the court was the child was undergoing treatment and that doctors had advised genital reconstructive surgery. However, they were not willing to perform the surgery without orders from a competent court.
On Monday, the court said that it cannot grant permission for surgery merely on the appeal of the parents, reported Bar and Bench.
“Permission is being sought to conduct non-consensual sex affirmative surgery,” the court said. “The Karyotype-46XX report of chromosomal analysis is not sufficient for granting the permission, as the possibility of a child with Karyotype-46XX developing male-like tendencies in adulthood cannot be ruled out.”
Justice Arun, however, said that considering the parents’ concerns about the health of the child, necessary interventions can be made based on the recommendation by a medical board.
It then directed the government to constitute a state-level multidisciplinary committee consisting of experts that shall include a paediatrician or pediatric endocrinologist, pediatric surgeon and child psychiatrist or child psychologist, according to PTI.
The court also directed the state government to issue an order regulating sex-selective surgeries on infants and children within three months.
“Until such time, sex-selective surgery shall be permitted only based on the opinion of the state-level multidisciplinary committee that the surgery is essential to save the life of the child/infant,” the court added.