Former transgender law: 28 interviews document lasting harm

A government-commissioned study records the personal cost of rules that tied legal recognition to infertility and unmarried status.

The Netherlands’ former transgender law caused lasting harm, a new study based on 28 interviews documents. Researchers spoke with transgender and intersex people about requirements they faced when changing their legally registered sex.

The law operated from 1985 to 2014. Its requirements included irreversible infertility and unmarried status. As a result, some people underwent operations to remove reproductive organs or felt forced to divorce.

Radboud University, a Dutch university, conducted the research. The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science commissioned it. The findings appear in a report by NOS, the Dutch public broadcaster.

The study describes physical, psychological and social harm. It also records how people understood those effects at different points in their lives. Some felt the loss straight away, while others recognised it much later.

The personal cost of legal recognition

For those seeking to change their legal records, the requirements reached far beyond paperwork. Irreversible infertility meant losing the ability to have biological children. Some interviewees underwent surgery to remove reproductive organs to meet that condition.

Meanwhile, the unmarried requirement put relationships under pressure. Some people felt they had to divorce before they could secure legal recognition. The choice therefore affected family life as well as their official records.

The process also required a statement from a doctor and psychologist. Together, these conditions placed medical and personal demands on people seeking a change in their registered sex. The interviews examine what meeting those demands meant in practice.

Radboud University researcher and report coauthor Marloes Hülsken said:

“Bij sommige getroffenen zorgde dit direct voor een gevoel van rouw en pijn, bij anderen kwam het besef van de impact soms pas jaren later.”

In English, she said some people immediately felt grief and pain, while others only recognised the impact years later.

The timing matters. A person could complete the legal process yet only later understand the full cost.

What the interviews show, and what they cannot establish

The study centres on the experiences of 28 people. Their accounts give detail about decisions that a summary of the law cannot show. In particular, they explain how legal conditions reached into health and relationships.

Still, that interview count does not establish how many people across the country experienced each kind of harm. Readers should not treat the accounts as a nationwide survey. Their value lies in the experiences they record.

The findings also distinguish several forms of harm. Physical consequences concern the body, while psychological consequences include grief and pain. Social consequences concern the effects on relationships and life with others.

These effects can overlap within one person’s account. For example, a requirement concerning fertility can carry emotional meaning as well as bodily consequences.

A report that follows the government‘s apology

The Dutch government apologised for the former law in 2021. That apology acknowledged a policy history stretching back to 1985. The new research now adds firsthand experiences to that formal acknowledgement.

However, the apology and the study serve different purposes. An apology records the government’s position on past rules. Interviews document how people lived with those rules and their consequences.

The end of the law in 2014 did not undo earlier operations or restore lost choices. Nor does a change in legal requirements erase the experiences described by interviewees. This explains why a historical law still has present-day relevance.

What this means for people living in the Netherlands

This report concerns people affected by the old requirements, including transgender and intersex residents. It may also matter to their partners and families. However, it describes historical conditions, not a guide to today’s registration process.