A child’s body should not undergo irreversible changes simply because adults find it difficult to accept. Yet intersex people still have to campaign for that basic protection. Another awareness day offers governments an opportunity to express support. The harder test is whether they will turn that support into enforceable rights.
Ahead of Intersex Awareness Day on October 26, Kate Osborne, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly’s rapporteur on LGBTI rights, called for European recommendations to become law. She highlighted a principle that should hardly require repeating: intersex people must not face medically unnecessary, irreversible interventions merely to make their bodies conform to expectations of male or female anatomy.
The demand deserves more than a sympathetic statement. Governments should explain what protects a child today, who investigates violations, and what happens when those protections fail.
Difference does not erase bodily autonomy
Intersex people are born with variations in sex characteristics, which can involve anatomy, chromosomes, or hormones. Some variations become apparent at birth, while others emerge later. These physical characteristics do not, by themselves, determine someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
Nevertheless, public debate often turns intersex people into talking points about what bodies should look like. The person whose life is affected can disappear behind arguments about categories, social expectations, and parental anxiety.
The ethical starting point should be the individual. A body does not lose its claim to protection because it differs from what others expect. Nor does discomfort with that difference create permission to alter it.
Consent cannot be replaced by good intentions
The central concern is medically unnecessary treatment performed before a person can meaningfully consent. UN human rights bodies have repeatedly called for an end to such interventions and for families to receive information, counseling, and support. Their guidance distinguishes unnecessary procedures from treatment that is genuinely required for medical reasons.
Parents facing unfamiliar medical information may feel frightened or overwhelmed. They deserve clear explanations and access to independent advice. Presenting an irreversible intervention as the obvious route to an easier childhood can prevent them from understanding the alternatives.
Fear of future bullying should prompt action against bullying. Anxiety about social acceptance should prompt support for the family. Neither concern should automatically become a reason to change a child’s body.
Good intentions cannot guarantee a good outcome. More fundamentally, they cannot erase the future adult’s interest in making decisions about their own life.
Recommendations must become protection
The Council of Europe’s 2025 recommendation calls for legislation prohibiting non-consensual interventions on sex characteristics. It says procedures should generally wait until the person can decide, with narrowly defined exceptions involving imminent threats to life or serious physical harm, and safeguards for sufficiently mature minors who request treatment. It also calls for oversight, access to medical records, and remedies for past violations.
That framework gives governments a practical direction. However, an international recommendation does not automatically create an enforceable domestic safeguard. Legislators must establish clear duties, while regulators must ensure that healthcare providers follow them.
Exceptions also need scrutiny. A protection becomes weak if vague claims about social adjustment can override it. Decisions should explain the medical need, the urgency, the alternatives, and why waiting would cause serious harm.
At the same time, protecting consent must preserve access to necessary healthcare. Intersex people should receive appropriate treatment and support throughout their lives, including care they freely choose.
Accountability must include those already harmed
Preventing future violations will not answer every existing injustice. People who underwent unwanted interventions should be able to obtain their records, understand what happened, and seek an effective remedy. The Council of Europe’s guidance explicitly recognizes the need for justice, compensation, and other forms of redress.
An institution should not be able to celebrate improved practice while refusing to examine its past. Accountability requires more than acknowledging that attitudes have changed. It requires listening to those who continue to live with the consequences.
Intersex people must also help shape the policies intended to protect them. Consultation should influence decisions, rather than provide a photograph for an institution’s annual report.
Awareness should lead somewhere
Awareness campaigns can challenge ignorance and help people find support. Activists have worked hard to make experiences visible that institutions once dismissed or concealed. That work matters.
However, governments should not treat visibility as a substitute for action. A supportive message cannot investigate a complaint, secure compensation, or stop a prohibited procedure. Those tasks require laws, resources, and institutions willing to enforce them.
Intersex people do not need to prove that their bodies deserve respect each October. They need protection that remains in force when the speeches end, the flags come down, and the next medical decision takes place behind a closed door.
