She said a person who becomes a woman “in consequence of a GRC” is entitled to those protections “just as much as others enjoy those protections who are recorded as a woman at birth”.
Ms Crawford told the court by effecting a change in legal status, a GRC has “far-reaching consequences” and is more than “just some legal fiction” or of “symbolic value”.
She added a GRC is “no more a legal fiction than adoption”, saying an adopted person is treated in law as the child of their adopter “and no-one else”.
Responding, Aidan O’Neill KC reiterated his call for the court to uphold the appeal, saying it came down to a question of women’s rights, which he said were “human rights”.
He said adoption was not comparable to a GRC as it only affected the “particular family relationship” of the people involved.
[Ed: Both legal fictions should be abolished. The law should uphold the truth – not introduce falsehoods which always have unintended consequences.]
Source: Sex changes ‘recognised in law’ with gender recognition certificate, court told