Crocetti Daniela, Arfini Elisa A G, Monro Surya, Yeadon-Lee Tray
School of Human and Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK.
University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Sociol Health Illn. 2020 May;42(4):943-958. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.13072. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
In this article we address activist, patient advocate and medic perspectives on framing intersex, variations of sex characteristics and disorders/differences in sex development medical treatment as human rights abuses. Problematic aspects of intersex medical treatment have increasingly been highlighted in national debates and international human rights bodies. Some intersex activists have framed aspects of intersex medical treatment as human rights abuses since the 1990s. Other stakeholders in shaping medical treatment, such as patient advocates and medical professionals, are not always content with human rights framing, or even the term intersex. In order to address the different perspectives in this arena we provide background on the primary rights claims that have arisen followed by key human rights framing of these claims. We provide a short discussion of activism styles, looking at pan-intersex social movements and variation-specific patient associations as different styles of health social movements. The analysis of stakeholder perspectives on the use of human rights strategy in health areas provides a useful case study for medical sociology and policy in general.
在本文中,我们探讨了维权人士、患者权益倡导者和医务人员对于将中间性、性特征变异以及性发育障碍/差异的医学治疗视为侵犯人权行为的观点。中间性医学治疗存在的问题在国内辩论和国际人权机构中日益受到关注。自20世纪90年代以来,一些中间性维权人士将中间性医学治疗的某些方面视为侵犯人权行为。而在塑造医学治疗过程中的其他利益相关者,如患者权益倡导者和医学专业人员,并不总是认同将其作为人权问题来考量,甚至对“中间性”这个术语也并非全然接受。为了探讨这一领域的不同观点,我们先介绍了引发的主要权利主张的背景,随后阐述了对这些主张的关键人权框架。我们简要讨论了维权方式,考察了泛中间性社会运动和特定变异患者协会,它们是健康社会运动的不同形式。对利益相关者在健康领域使用人权策略的观点分析,总体上为医学社会学和政策提供了一个有益的案例研究。