학술논문
젠더불쾌증에 대한 트랜스젠더리즘의 인권적 접근의 한계: 의학·신학·비교법학의 학제 연구를 중심으로
Limitation of Human-Right Approach under Transgenderism toward Gender Dysphoria: Focusing on Interdisciplinary Discourse of Medical Science, Theology and Comparative Law
Limitation of Human-Right Approach under Transgenderism toward Gender Dysphoria: Focusing on Interdisciplinary Discourse of Medical Science, Theology and Comparative Law
Document Type
Article
Author
Source
교회와 법 / Church and Law. Feb 28, 2024 10(2):185
Subject
Language
Korean
ISSN
2288-9205
Abstract
트렌스젠더를 포함한 모든 사람은 인권을 보유하며 불합리하게 차별되어서는 안된다. 그러나, 생래적인 남녀 양성 대신 다양한 젠더 스펙트럼 속의 자신의 젠더 유형을 찾아가야 한다는 소위 젠더 이론 및 트렌스젠더리즘의 영향 아래 젠더 정체성에 대한 인권적 접근 수용해 온 영국·미국은, 그 결과, 사회적·정치적 갈등과 법적 분쟁으로 골머리를 앓고 있다. 우리나라가 인권적 접근을 채택한다면, 미국 영국에서 보듯, 10대 트렌스젠더의 급증, 성별구분 이용시설의 이용으로 인한 갈등, 이용자의 불안, 스포츠 경기 참여 여부를 둘러 싼 불공정성 시비·여자선수 부상, 찬반 양측간 소송과 공동체내 갈등을 촉발시킬 것으로 예상된다. 젠더불쾌증은 정신보건적 치료가 필요하기에 치료적 접근을 통해 병존하는 정신질환, 공통되는 원인의 해소를 상담을 통해 찾아가야 한다. 사춘기 억제제, 반대 성호르몬 투여, 성전환 수술 등 확인치료는 지양함이 적절하다. 성인에 성전환 수술 전후 정신과 치료, 호르몬 투여를 통한 제한적 성별정정이 가능함에도 인권적 접근을 통한 2011년 성전환자의 성별정정 허가신청 사무처리지침의 개정 및 2022년 대법원 전원합의체 결정은 사회적 파장, 공동체 최약자에 대한 고려가 현저히 부족한 것이었다. 성별정정에 대한 기준을 법률에 도입하는 입법론을 고려하되, 성전환수술과 사회적 승인이라는 사회 공동체에 대한 안전장치를 두어야 할 것이다.
Everyone including transgenders has human right, not subject to unreasonable discrimination. However, U.S. and U.K.,1) adopting a human-right approach on gender dysphoria under influence of gender theory and trans-genderism encouraging search of one’s preferred type of gender within a gender spectrum, whereupon have suffered from social conflicts, political turmoils and legal disputes. If Korea takes the approach, such negative results, occurring in U.S. and UK are expected as a sudden surge of teen-aged transgenders, conflicts and users’ uneasiness due to use of toilet/locker/spa, unfairness derived from transgender male’s joining female sports competition. A treatment-based approach is proper which focuses on psychological treatment for mental disease(s) co-occurring with gender dysphoria and care for common cause(s) of mental illness, along with counseling, rather than so called affirmative therapy accepting patients’ request without counseling through use of puberty-blocker, injection of sex-hormone and operation of sex re-assignment surgery(SRS). Korean judiciary and government try to adopt the human-right approach without careful investigation on the negative outcomes derived from it, thereby leading to continuous revisions loosening 2006 judicial guide on dealing with motion for a sex-change and en banc Supreme Court decision of 2022 allowing sex-change to a father with children. While legislation on sex-change is recommended, minimum safeguards for the guide on dealing with motion for a sex-change should be necessary which requires SRS and social recognition on the sex-change as important conditions.
Everyone including transgenders has human right, not subject to unreasonable discrimination. However, U.S. and U.K.,1) adopting a human-right approach on gender dysphoria under influence of gender theory and trans-genderism encouraging search of one’s preferred type of gender within a gender spectrum, whereupon have suffered from social conflicts, political turmoils and legal disputes. If Korea takes the approach, such negative results, occurring in U.S. and UK are expected as a sudden surge of teen-aged transgenders, conflicts and users’ uneasiness due to use of toilet/locker/spa, unfairness derived from transgender male’s joining female sports competition. A treatment-based approach is proper which focuses on psychological treatment for mental disease(s) co-occurring with gender dysphoria and care for common cause(s) of mental illness, along with counseling, rather than so called affirmative therapy accepting patients’ request without counseling through use of puberty-blocker, injection of sex-hormone and operation of sex re-assignment surgery(SRS). Korean judiciary and government try to adopt the human-right approach without careful investigation on the negative outcomes derived from it, thereby leading to continuous revisions loosening 2006 judicial guide on dealing with motion for a sex-change and en banc Supreme Court decision of 2022 allowing sex-change to a father with children. While legislation on sex-change is recommended, minimum safeguards for the guide on dealing with motion for a sex-change should be necessary which requires SRS and social recognition on the sex-change as important conditions.