The UK High Court has ruled that a mother caused her 7 year-old son “significant emotional harm” by making him live as a female, holding that there was no evidence of him being diagnosed as having gender dysphoria.
An order was granted so that the son could continue to live with his father, who separated from the mother within 12 months of the child, referred to as ‘J’, being born. The case had initially been transferred to the High Court on the basis of the trial judge’s increasing concerns for J’s welfare.
Initially, J had been living with his mother; the father’s contact arrangement in respect of his son had broken down. The mother opposed the father’s application for a Child Arrangement Order to restore contact, arguing that he refused to recognise J’s gender variance. As part of these proceedings it emerged that several agencies had voiced their concerns regarding the mother’s mental health and J’s presentation as a female at school. Accordingly, the trial judge authorised investigations by the Local Authority and by a clinical psychologist.
Mr Justice Hayden in the High Court echoed the trial judge’s concerns that in the course of these proceedings, J had had no access to his appointed guardian, had not been attending school and that his current address was now unknown. On the case being transferred to the High Court, Mr Justice Hayden criticised the Local Authority’s investigation as “inept” for having dismissed concerns voiced by the NSPCC, J’s school and the Police as to potential emotional abuse of J. His judgment found that if these referrals had been accorded due weight and led to Local Authority intervention, J “could have been spared significant emotional harm”.
The High Court found that having been removed from the mother’s care to that of the father and his partner, J had become “settled and secure” and his presentation had changed. According to the clinical psychologist in the case, J and the mother were in an “enmeshed relationship” and that when provided with space and choice in the father’s care, J clearly identified as a boy. Mr Justice Hayden therefore held that the mother’s contact with J was proving to cause distress to the child, citing as her as having made an active determination that J should live as a girl. The Judge acknowledged that it could cause trauma to J if he were to lose all direct contact with the mother but that contact should be carefully supervised to prevent the “corrosion of his identity” – contact was suspended temporarily, to be resumed on a monthly basis when J started at school again. In addition, Mr Justice Hayden imposed on the Local Authority statutory duties by means of a Care Order to ensure continuing and proactive intervention while J continues to live with the father.
Click here for the full judgment in Re J (A minor).