title: Re Jamie (no 2): A positive development for transgender young people.
abstract: Re Jamie (No 2) is an important decision of the Full Family Court that significantly clarifies the law concerning "special medical procedures". The court has held that so-called stage one treatment for gender dysphoria, designed to suppress pubertal development, no longer requires judicial approval. The decision contains an important endorsement of the view that the phenomenon of gender dysphoria could be de-pathologised. Crucially, the decision also confirms that if a young person is found to be Gillick competent, the court has no power to override their treatment decisions. However, given the consequences of such treatment, and consistently with the authority in Marion's Case, the court will continue to have a "safeguard" role in determining whether Gillick competence exists. The article outlines some cautionary notes about the removal of court oversight at stage one, but argues that the decision is a positive one for enabling access to treatment and ameliorating the financial burden of legal proceedings on the families of transgender adolescents.
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Williams
authors.forename: John
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Chesterman
authors.forename: Phil
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Grano
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D001315:Australia; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis / Q000191:economics; D005260:Female; D005783:Gender Identity; D006297:Health Services Accessibility; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D016743:Mental Competency / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D033242:Minors / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D057829:Gender-Affirming Procedures; D063106:Transgender Persons / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000523:psychology