Patrick Parkinson

Family lawyer, emeritus professor, Executive Director, Publica @PublicaAus; one of the Jesus crowd.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Today I offer a new proposal on how the rights of theologically conservative faith-based schools can be reconciled with LGB+ rights. It is possible to have a win-win solution. https://t.co/PssPWrpMXc

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Other aspects of the decision are specific to Scottish regulations but not the finding in relation to indirect discrimination

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

This is a significant new decision concerning the provision of toilets in a primary school. The judge found that the school 's arrangements amounted to indirect discrimination against girls because, after toileting, they had to wash their hands in a common area shared with boys.

[Michael Foran @michaelpforan]

The Scottish Court of Session has just ruled that providing multi-user unisex toilets in a primary school amounted to indirect sex discrimination against female pupils.

https://t.co/ulFHKebMK9

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

The decision does not rest upon any peculiarities of Scottish or British law. The reasoning would be equally applicable to the Sex Discrimination Act in Australia.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Check out my latest article: Joint decision-making and after the 2023 amendments to the Family Law Act https://t.co/JPM30Dnyim via @LinkedIn

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

@vigee_elisabeth @ThatAussieWoman @salltweets @aytchellesse I think there is evidence that some transgender identification is associated with adverse childhood experiences, including abuse and family dysfunction. There is also a little evidence from twin studies pointing to the possibility of genetic or hormonal influences in some cases.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

The Giggle case raises a fundamental issue of societal organisation, akin to whether the State will allow private property. Trans rights need to be accommodated where possible, but not at the expense of ignoring basic differences between sexes.@salltweets @aytchellesse @DoNoHarm79

[andysayshi @andysayshi1]

I posted this elsewhere but it bears repeating:

I’m a gay left-wing atheist, and Albanese is my local member as well as my PM. I’m pretty much a lifelong Labor voter. I’m certainly no right wing religious zealot.

Yet Labor lost my vote last Friday. I wrote to the PM about this issue and got a passive-aggressive response from a staffer that talked about Liberals and tax policy, and didn’t even address my complaint. It told me everything I needed to know.

A party that can’t stand up for simple dignity and safety for women and girls is a party that I cant trust on any issue.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

@ThatAussieWoman @salltweets @aytchellesse Almost all the problems in this area arise from the insistence that women are not permitted to exclude trans females from their groups or facilities. This tramples on women's basic rights to privacy, safety and dignity. Men are usually not impacted in the same way.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

@ThatAussieWoman @salltweets @aytchellesse Should a shop owner be allowed to refuse to serve an obviously trans customer? Should a bank be allowed to sack an employee who now identifies as 'non-binary'? How about whether a trans man, that is, born female, should be allowed to compete as a male? These are simple examples.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

There is no doubt that the amendments will have to be carefully drafted. There have to be ways in which concepts of natal sex and gender identity can live together in the same Act; but this involves balancing rights. At the moment, there is effectively a hierarchy of rights. Women's rights always lose out unless you accept the fiction that everyone who identifies as a woman is a woman; and that is one of the most bizarre claims of the last 100 years.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

I think the plurality (majority) judgment deserves very careful reading. There is a reason they did not join Perry's judgment. It seems that it was important to their judgment that Tickle is a transexual - in the old sense - who has undergone sex reassignment surgery and sought legal recognition as female. There are cases going back decades in which courts have given that transition legal recognition. The plurality judges declined to offer an opinion on whether any trans-identifying male, even one who has taken no steps towards medical transition, should be similarly recognised.
I don't know they could have reached a different decision, given the current legislation, on these facts. I hoped they would find a way; but clearly they didn't want to, since they agreed with Tickle that a person who has gone through gender reassignment should be treated as the identified sex for all purposes. To me, the majority judgment leaves other questions open.
That's not much comfort though. The problem is that Sall could not know, at least without asking, what transition any male-looking person might have undergone. So on that logic she would have to admit all males who identify as female or ask them very personal questions which that person may be offended to be asked. That's not remotely feasible in other contexts such as public facilities intended for one sex.
I think we have to have legislation that protects the freedom of association of non-governmental communities such as lesbian groups to determine their own membership and boundaries. We must also allow any organisation to have sex-specific facilities such as changing rooms or women's gyms that are based on sex, or at least sexual characteristics, not identity.
These are the minimum changes needed. Putting the definition of male and female back into the Act won't actually help much if other aspects of this judgment are left untouched.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

The key problem, as I read the judgements, is that the judges say that belonging to one protected group - natal females - does not permit you to discriminate against other protected groups in the legislation such as transfemales. If this part of the judgment stands without unequivocal law reform, then we will see ongoing problems. I am not sure how to overcome that argument without statutory change.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

With respect, I think you have misunderstood completely what I am saying. In order to bring about change when strong groups will vigorously defend the existing law, you have to find smart strategies that politicians, needing votes from both sides, can take up. Generally, the successful outcome will involve finding some middle ground, and it will help to show some graciousness. You will not succeed by alienating not only the people with different views, but potential allies as well. Yes, this is a women's issue but you have many allies amongst the other half of the population, so many of whom have women and girls in their lives as partners, daughters and granddaughters.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

A trans adult says trans issues should not be taught in schools. "All you do is confuse children by essentially marketing a way to be special and get attention." The marketing of trans-identification in primary schools must stop.

[Brianna Wu @BriannaWu]

I don’t think children should be exposed to transsexuality until they are much older. It’s shouldn’t be in the schools. It shouldn’t be on television.

No one needed to tell me I wanted to be a girl. For an actual trans child, it’s all they’re ever gonna think about. All you do is confuse children by essentially marketing a way to be special and get attention.

Some of these kids will play around with gender presentation. Parents should stop that bullying instantly. Give kids space to figure out who they are.

But the reality is, we cannot sort out the actual trans girls from the gay boys until they are like 12 and puberty starts onsetting. I would not allow my child to change pronouns or name before then.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Singapore is the latest jurisdiction to examine the evidence and to ban puberty blockers and hormones for minors. Yet Australian gender clinicians persist in denying there is an issue. https://t.co/dSs3wmLikG

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

The tragic account of a young gay boy who was told with certainty by his medical specialists and others that he was 'born in the wrong body'. Now he is in a body that doesn't function the way that either a male or female body should. https://t.co/4WDuK6JykZ

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Section 38P of the NSW Anti-discrimination Act is also quite clear. Nothing in that part of the Act "renders unlawful the exclusion of a transgender person from participation in any sporting activity for members of the sex with which the transgender person identifies." So really there is no excuse for the pressure being put on women to play against trans-identifying males in a women's sports competition.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

This is a fascinating article by Michael Biggs and a colleague. Michael has done so much to expose falsehoods and misunderstandings about transgender issues in Britain. What this article shows clearly is that, while numbers are fortunately low, rather more transgender persons are perpetrators of homicide than are the victims of it. Yet you would not know this from media reporting, which has bought the line that transgender people are disproportionately murder victims. A must -read article correcting yet another misunderstanding.

[Miroslav Imbrisevic @Miroandrej]

Who are "the most vulnerable in society"?

New paper by Michael Biggs and Ace North:
"It analyzes all homicides involving transgender people in Britain from 2000 to 2025. Victims were outnumbered by perpetrators, even excluding those who declared a transgender identity after imprisonment. Almost all cases involved natal males identifying as transwomen. The victim-perpetrator ratio among these individuals closely resembles that for males overall and differs markedly from that for females."
https://t.co/oPJReDgBIz

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

This post has clearly generated some strong reactions! I understand that; but look at it another way. A young doctor, just starting out, has been so strongly and publicly criticised- for good reasons - that they choose to move to the other side of the world. What place is there in our society for grace, forgiveness and tolerance? If a professional, who has had this bad a start to their career, doesn't learn from what has happened when given a new start in another country, that is on them; but I don't think any of us really want to live in a society that doesn't offer any opportunity for fresh starts.
The other point is that I expect there are a number of other transgender medics in Australia - born here. So we have to work out accommodations and compromises that, so far as possible, respect all rights and allow people their dignity. For the most part, we can choose our doctors. The trashing of women's rights has been a shocking aspect of the recent 'trans rights' movement; but we mustn't trash others' rights or trample upon people's dignity, in the process of correcting those errors.

[Patrick Parkinson @ProfPParkinson]

Australians should welcome Dr Beth Upton as we welcome so many other migrants who join our caring professions. Australia is the land of the fresh start. Dr Upton needs this after the adverse publicity of the case in Scotland. Dr Upton clearly said some silly things in the witness box under pressure. We all make mistakes. All doctors understand that there are some conditions that only women have and some that only men have. Dr Upton, I am sure, does not believe that one can self-identify into female medical conditions!
However, the warm Australian welcome has to be conditioned on Dr Upton allowing women, including nurses, their private spaces and respecting the fact that some female patients will not be comfortable being examined by a transfemale doctor. These are small concessions to ask, so that all rights are equally respected.@AusHumanRights; @RachaelWongAus;@rachelbaxendale.