India’s changed gender rules can put transgenders’ health at risk
Under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, the country has taken away the right of its people to self identify their gender; a clinical evaluation by a medical board is now required to attest for the same. To align their sex with the gender, a social construct for identity, many transgenders have unique clinical needs like With the provision of ‘self identification’ of gender scrapped by the recent amendment to law, transgender persons are at a loss when it comes to the quality of healthcare given to them. When Mehr Khan, an transgender woman from Hyderabad went to a clinic for a routine hormonal therapy session, she was taken aback as the doctor hid his face and had nothing to say to her. She was informed the government had narrowed down the scope of people who could use this treatment, according to Reuters. In other words, she needed a ‘legal’ recognition of her gender which would involve a panel of doctors making the decision for her identity. The 26-year-old event planner could feel the fear that filled the faces of the clinical staff. Under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, 2026, India took away the right of its people to self identify their gender and rather a clinical evaluation by a medical board is now required to attest for the same. Paused treatments Khan is one of the many transgender people who now need a medical certificate to prove her identity only after which she can pursue her treatment. Transgender persons have complex healthcare needs, with many of them suffering from body dysmorphia, a condition where a person experiences intense shame and worry over perceived body defects. As per experts, this regressive move can put the healthcare of transgender persons at a greater risk, with healthcare facilities pausing their treatment or delaying surgeries. In Bengaluru, a transgender business development manager Ananya Balamurali’s (24) gender affirming surgery scheduled at a private clinic in New Delhi has been put on an indefinite hold after changes were made to the law, according to Reuters. Likewise, a 30-year-old makeup artist from Kozhikode in Kerala was refused hormonal replacement therapy at a government clinic despite multiple prior consultations. Old versus new Before the clipped law, a transgender person could easily have their gender marker changed online after fetching a letter from a gender-affirming care provider, be it a surgeon or a psychiatrist. But now, they will have to get clinically evaluated before getting an official certificate of identity. These changes, according to the government, have been brought in to curb misuse of welfare policies and boost safeguards. However, with the fear of prosecution hanging around the doctors, they are not able to help them with the medical needs of transgender persons. Also, the government is yet to specify the nature of specialists to make gender evaluations and whether its jurisdiction comes in the scope of the State or the Central authority. This can cause further delay for transgenders seeking medical help. Amid this uncertainty, there is a fear of them bypassing conventional routes of clinical care and choosing quacks over certified medical doctors for health concerns. Additionally, this can also add an additional layer to shame and stigma around a community which is already marginalised in more than one sector of life. Price of uninterrupted treatment To align their sex with the gender, a social construct for identity, many transgender persons have unique clinical needs like hormone-based therapy which help them feel more like themselves in everyday life. Some may also need implants or sex-altering surgeries to find that alignment and sometimes they may do it to fight off the stigma around their identity. Hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) makes use of hormones such as estrogen, progesterone and testosterone to regulate one’s physical health. For instance, in women having PMOS (polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome), the affected females very often have testosterone beyond permissible levels and doctors may give hormonal treatments to restore a hormonal balance. Likewise, transgender persons may also need these hormones to feel more aligned with their perceived identity. Abruptly stopping these hormones can cause metabolic dysfunction, disrupted endocrine function, loss of bone density, and other symptoms that can mimic menopause. Also, the stigma around the situation can make them wary of reaching out to medical help from established routes. Courtesy : DH Note: This news is originally published on https:/deccanherald.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
NHRC issues second advisory focused on ten key areas to ensure welfare of transgenders
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued a second advisory to Secretaries of 11 Ministries, the Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner and the Chief Secretaries of all the states and union territories to ensure the welfare of transgender persons. The Commission noted that encouraging responses have been received from all concerned authorities to its earlier advisory of September 2023 and the constructive engagement reflecting a shared commitment to this cause. Based on NHRC’s continued engagements, including field interactions, stakeholder consultations and reviews of implementation, the Commission has identified a range of persistent and emerging challenges affecting transgender persons. NHRC said that the advisory focuses on ten key areas for action to ensure the welfare of transgender persons. These include integrating gender diversity in national data systems, reviewing laws to ensure gender inclusivity, building an inclusive legal framework, right to property, right to education, healthcare and inclusivity at the workplace. Courtesy : NOA Note: This news is originally published on https:/newsonair.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Parliament passes Transgender Persons Amendment Bill, 2026 with Rajya Sabha approving it today
Parliament has passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, with the Rajya Sabha approving it today. The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha yesterday by a voice vote amid an Opposition-led walkout. The bill seeks to redefine the category of transgender, removes the provision of self-perceived gender identity and excludes several socio-cultural identities as well as transmasculine individuals from its ambit. It also further defines transgender persons within a biological framework, based on intersex variations and differences in sexual development. Replying to the discussion on the Bill in the Rajya Sabha, Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Dr Virendra Kumar said the government is compassionate towards the well-being of the transgender community. He said the Bill has provisions to empower the transgenders and give them dignity. The Minister said that the NDA government has taken several initiatives to bring transgender people to the mainstream and stop discrimination against them. Starting the discussion in the Upper House, Congress MP Renuka Chowdhury said this bill dilutes the privacy of an individual provided under the Constitution. Opposing the Bill, Ms Chowdhury said self-identification cannot be taken away through bureaucratic certification. Criticizing the government, she said that the proposed bill undermines the fundamental rights and dignity of transgender persons. Calling such a move wrong and illegal, she argued that forcing transgender persons to provide their identity through official certificates is against the spirit of equality and dignity guaranteed by the constitution. She also questioned the government’s approach for not properly consulting with the transgender community before bringing the Bill. She also referred to the Supreme Court’s landmark NALSA judgement of 2014, which recognized the right of transgender persons to self-identify their gender. Ms Chowdhury said the proposed Bill violates the principles laid down in that judgement and fails to respect an already established legal framework. DMK MP Tiruchi Shiva also opposed the Bill, saying that even if the Bill is passed in Parliament with a majority, it will be struck down by the Supreme Court. He further added that the Bill violates Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and it deprives the community of the right to freedom, dignity and self-determination. Supporting the Bill, BJP MP Medha Vishram Kulkarni said, ” This Bill ensures justice, dignity, protection from criminalisation and legal safeguards for transgender persons. She also thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi for bringing this bill with certain amendments in order to ensure that the benefits reach the deserving people in a proper manner. She said there is a need for a law that brings justice to real transgender individuals and punishes fake ones. Mrs Kulkarni said the benefits should be extended to those who are transgender by birth. She said that the amendment to extend punishment will bring down the rate of crime and forced identities. TMC’s Saket Gokhale said that 31% of Transgender people in India have attempted suicide because of the discrimination that they are facing. He alleged that now the government is going to start discriminating against them as though social discrimination were not enough. He called it unacceptable. Mr Gokhale expressed concern that gender is going to be decided by the Chief Medical Officer and a District Magistrate, and the bill does not prescribe any qualifications for the Chief Medical Officer. Sanjay Singh of AAP said the Bill is a big let-down for the transgender community. He accused the government of not doing anything for the community. RJD’s Manoj Kr Jha said that prejudices against transgender people should stop, and they should be able to live with dignity. He added that self-determination of gender should not be taken away. CPI(M)’s John Brittas said it is a black-letter day and the Bill is taking India a century back. He pleaded with the government to either withdraw the Bill or refer it to a Select Committee. Jaya Bachchan of the Samajwadi Party also questioned the government over the legislation. She sought to know what the urgency was in bringing the Bill, without examining it with the depth and care that it deserved. Courtesy : NOA Note: This news is originally published on https:/newsonair.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Anaya Bangar Undergoes Transgender Verification Test; Says She Was ‘Asked To Undress In Front Of Male Doctors, Felt Exposed’
Anaya Bangar, the daughter of former Indian cricketer and coach Sanjay Bangar, has shared a deeply personal account of the transgender verification process she recently underwent as part of a legal gender recognition procedure. In an emotional video posted on Instagram, Anaya described the medical assessment as invasive and said the experience left her feeling vulnerable and exposed. Anaya Bangar, the daughter of former Indian cricketer and coach Sanjay Bangar, has shared a deeply personal account of the transgender verification process she recently underwent as part of a legal gender recognition procedure. In an emotional video posted on Instagram, Anaya described the medical assessment as invasive and said the experience left her feeling vulnerable and exposed. Speaking about the process, Anaya revealed that she was required to appear before a medical panel at a government hospital following the implementation of the recent transgender amendment law. According to her, the assessment involved a full physical examination conducted in the presence of multiple doctors. Explaining what happened, she said, “Because of the recent trans bill being passed and as part of the process I had to stand in front of a medical panel at a government hospital. They asked me to undress and have my whole body assessed in a room full of doctors, which included men as well at the same time. An invasive gynaecological assessment was also performed as part of the assessment.” Recalling the emotional impact of the experience, Anaya shared, “I remember lying there thinking, why do I have to prove my body to be recognized as who I am on the paper? This whole experience was very invasive and I felt very vulnerable and exposed at the same time.” She said she chose to speak publicly about the ordeal to create awareness about what many transgender individuals may encounter during the legal recognition process. “I’m sharing this cause not all of us know what this process can involve, and I hope that we all can agree that legal recognition respects people’s dignity,” she added. Earlier this year, Anaya underwent gender-affirming vaginoplasty surgery and has since been documenting her recovery while continuing to advocate for transgender rights and inclusion. What Is The Transgender Verification Process? Under the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Act, individuals seeking legal recognition of their gender identity may be required to undergo verification by a state-appointed Medical Board as part of the certification process. The procedure, often referred to as medical board certification or state verification, is intended to validate an applicant’s gender identity for official documentation. Courtesy : TFPJ Note: This news is originally published on https:/thefreepressjournal.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
ALIFA seeks gender safeguards in electoral roll revision, says women, transgender persons face higher risk of exclusion
Hyderabad: The All-India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA) on Friday urged the Election Commission of India (ECI) to introduce gender-sensitive safeguards in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, alleging that women, transgender persons and minority communities face a higher risk of exclusion due to systemic barriers. In a representation to the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners, the alliance sought an extension of the SIR timeline, alternative documentation for women, migrants, homeless and transgender persons, gender-friendly help desks, publication of gender-disaggregated data, social audits, and a mechanism to restore eligible voters omitted from the revised rolls. It also urged the ECI to clarify that exclusion from the SIR electoral rolls does not amount to denial of citizenship. ALIFA, a network affiliated with the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), said electoral roll revisions must ensure that no eligible voter is left out. Citing ECI data from the first two phases of the SIR in 13 states and Union Territories, it claimed the revised rolls contained 8.9% fewer living voters and alleged that women, transgender persons and minorities, particularly Muslims, were deleted at disproportionately higher rates. It also alleged that revised rolls in Bihar, Rajasthan and West Bengal showed a decline in the gender ratio. The alliance argued that the current eligibility framework’s reliance on lineage, kinship and household relationships disadvantages women who migrate after marriage, transgender persons estranged from their families, homeless persons and migrants. It urged the ECI to accept alternative documents, including marriage invitation cards and records showing women as parents in children’s birth or school certificates, for applicants who have Aadhaar, ration cards or voter identity cards but lack other proof. For transgender voters, ALIFA sought acceptance of gazette notifications and transgender identity certificates as valid documents, alternative methods for establishing eligibility for those estranged from their families, and implementation of the principle of self-determination of gender recognised by the Supreme Court and the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019, pending rules under the Transgender Amendment Act, 2026. The alliance also sought written protocols, anti-discrimination training, travel support and helplines for booth-level officers, besides accountability for non-distribution or wrongful rejection of forms. It urged the ECI to review “logical discrepancy” criteria that could adversely affect married women who changed their names and women who had children at a young age. ALIFA further called for publication of booth-wise, Assembly constituency-wise and district-wise gender-disaggregated data on additions, deletions and restorations of names, independent monitoring through spot checks and social audits, a one-year window to restore eligible voters excluded during the SIR without requiring fresh registration, withdrawal of the proposed tribunal mechanism for determining voter eligibility, and a formal clarification that exclusion from the revised electoral rolls does not amount to denial of citizenship. Courtesy : TOI Note: This news is originally published on https:/timesofindia.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Transgender group, family clash over train seats at Old Delhi Railway Station
NEW DELHI: A quarrel between a group of transgender persons and a family over seats in a general coach at Old Delhi Railway Station has gone viral on social media, prompting authorities to take note of the incident. The altercation occurred around 11.30pm on June 30 at Platform 16, where both parties were waiting to board the Brahmaputra Mail with general tickets. Railway Protection Force (RPF) constables Vicky and Chandrakant, who were on patrol duty, intervened, dispersed the crowd and pacified both sides. The family was advised to lodge a complaint but declined and instead boarded the train in another coach. Officials said no PCR call was made and no formal complaint was filed. Courtesy : TOI Note: This news is originally published on https:/timesofindia.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
In A First, Kerala-Based Mar Thoma Church To Give Membership To Transgenders
With this, it has become the first Christian church in India to allow transgender persons to become members of the church. Thiruvananthapuram: In a historic decision, the Mar Thoma Church leadership in Kerala has decided to give church membership to transgender persons. The Episcopal Synod of the church held on Wednesday decided that there is no legal obstacle in granting membership to transgender persons. With this, the Mar Thoma Church has become the first Christian church in India to allow transgender persons to become members of the church. Dr Theodosius Mar Thoma Metropolitan, the Supreme Patriarch of the Mar Thoma Church, told ETV Bharat that the church had not previously banned transgender people. The transgender persons were never restricted from freedom of worship in any church before. However, the act of granting new membership to a church is considered a first in the history of Christian churches in India, he said. The decision to grant church membership to transgender persons in the Mar Thoma Church has been warmly welcomed, according to Father Mathew Philip Idivi, Director of the Mar Thoma Navodaya Movement Society, which works for transgender individuals under the church. There are very few transgender believers in the Marthoma Church. With this decision, people from other churches are expressing interest in joining the Mar Thoma church, he said. He said that there are nearly 25,000 transgenders in Kerala and a quarter of them are likely Christians. Mathew Philip clarified that he has been working among them for 12 years. Although funeral rites and other prayers could be conducted for those born into the church or who have become members, the church has not yet authorized marriages for transgender persons. The church still believes that altering any part of the human body is against divine will. At the Maramon Convention in 2018, two transgender persons, Selin Thomas Lakshmi and Sreekutti, addressed the convention, speaking about gender justice and the need to accept the transgender community. The Mar Thoma Church has historically organized conventions such as this. The church had previously taken revolutionary decisions, such as allowing funeral services and care for believers who committed suicide, which other churches followed. Until then, many Christian churches refused to perform funeral rites or provide care for believers who committed suicide, arguing that it was against divine will. Courtesy : ETV Bharat Note: This news is originally published on https:/etvbharat.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Parliament passes Transgender Persons Amendment Bill, 2026 with Rajya Sabha approving it today
Parliament has passed the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026, with the Rajya Sabha approving it today. The bill was passed by the Lok Sabha yesterday by a voice vote amid an Opposition-led walkout. The bill seeks to redefine the category of transgender, removes the provision of self-perceived gender identity and excludes several socio-cultural identities as well as transmasculine individuals from its ambit. It also further defines transgender persons within a biological framework, based on intersex variations and differences in sexual development. Replying to the discussion on the Bill in the Rajya Sabha, Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Dr Virendra Kumar said the government is compassionate towards the well-being of the transgender community. He said the Bill has provisions to empower the transgenders and give them dignity. The Minister said that the NDA government has taken several initiatives to bring transgender people to the mainstream and stop discrimination against them. Starting the discussion in the Upper House, Congress MP Renuka Chowdhury said this bill dilutes the privacy of an individual provided under the Constitution. Opposing the Bill, Ms Chowdhury said self-identification cannot be taken away through bureaucratic certification. Criticizing the government, she said that the proposed bill undermines the fundamental rights and dignity of transgender persons. Calling such a move wrong and illegal, she argued that forcing transgender persons to provide their identity through official certificates is against the spirit of equality and dignity guaranteed by the constitution. She also questioned the government’s approach for not properly consulting with the transgender community before bringing the Bill. She also referred to the Supreme Court’s landmark NALSA judgement of 2014, which recognized the right of transgender persons to self-identify their gender. Ms Chowdhury said the proposed Bill violates the principles laid down in that judgement and fails to respect an already established legal framework. DMK MP Tiruchi Shiva also opposed the Bill, saying that even if the Bill is passed in Parliament with a majority, it will be struck down by the Supreme Court. He further added that the Bill violates Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and it deprives the community of the right to freedom, dignity and self-determination. Supporting the Bill, BJP MP Medha Vishram Kulkarni said, ” This Bill ensures justice, dignity, protection from criminalisation and legal safeguards for transgender persons. She also thanked Prime Minister Narendra Modi for bringing this bill with certain amendments in order to ensure that the benefits reach the deserving people in a proper manner. She said there is a need for a law that brings justice to real transgender individuals and punishes fake ones. Mrs Kulkarni said the benefits should be extended to those who are transgender by birth. She said that the amendment to extend punishment will bring down the rate of crime and forced identities. TMC’s Saket Gokhale said that 31% of Transgender people in India have attempted suicide because of the discrimination that they are facing. He alleged that now the government is going to start discriminating against them as though social discrimination were not enough. He called it unacceptable. Mr Gokhale expressed concern that gender is going to be decided by the Chief Medical Officer and a District Magistrate, and the bill does not prescribe any qualifications for the Chief Medical Officer. Sanjay Singh of AAP said the Bill is a big let-down for the transgender community. He accused the government of not doing anything for the community. RJD’s Manoj Kr Jha said that prejudices against transgender people should stop, and they should be able to live with dignity. He added that self-determination of gender should not be taken away. CPI(M)’s John Brittas said it is a black-letter day and the Bill is taking India a century back. He pleaded with the government to either withdraw the Bill or refer it to a Select Committee. Jaya Bachchan of the Samajwadi Party also questioned the government over the legislation. She sought to know what the urgency was in bringing the Bill, without examining it with the depth and care that it deserved. Courtesy : NOA Note: This news is originally published on https:/newsonair.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Trump faces setback on birthright citizenship order, hails US Supreme Court ruling on transgender athletes as ‘Big win’
The US Supreme Court struck down Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship but upheld state laws barring transgender athletes from competing in women’s and girls’ sports. “BIG WIN”: Trump after US SC upholds state laws barring transgender athletes from women’s sports(Photo Credit: x.com/WhiteHouse) US President Donald Trump received both a setback and a victory as the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down President Trump’s executive order and upheld birth right citizenship for all children born in the United States. Moreover, Trump also hailed the US Supreme Court’s decision upholding state laws that bar transgender athletes from competing in women’s and girls’ sports. Terming it a Big win, Trump wrote, “BIG WIN: The United States Supreme Court just RULED AGAINST MEN PLAYING IN WOMEN’S SPORTS.” “Wow! That takes that ridiculous situation off the table!!!” He made this announcement on the Truth Social platform. What did the Supreme Court rule on transgender athletes in women’s sports? Trump’s statement came after the US Supreme Court decision to uphold laws in Idaho and West Virginia that restrict transgender athletes from participating in women’s and girls’ sports. The court held that Title IX, the federal law prohibiting sex discrimination in education, permits schools to maintain separate sports teams based on biological sex. Read more: ‘Very possible that they will never…’: Trump breaks silence after US strikes Iran following attack on Panama-flagged tanker As per the Politico, the court’s conservative majority also denied claims that the laws infringe upon the constitutional rights of transgender individuals. This was a landmark decision in relation to the legal challenge pertaining to transgender athletes competing in schools. How did Donald Trump react to the Supreme Court’s two major rulings? Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, stated, “The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America.”The ruling came in challenges to laws enacted by Idaho and West Virginia, both of which argued that the measures are intended to protect athletes assigned female at birth from physical disadvantages arising from biological differences between males and females. The states also maintained that Title IX applies based on biological sex and that the laws do not discriminate against transgender women and girls, Politico reported. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, writing for the court’s liberal wing, argued that the court should have required states to justify the restrictions for specific sports and categories of transgender athletes rather than upholding broad bans.”To the majority, the fit here is simply good enough,” Sotomayor wrote, accusing the court of relying on “overbroad generalisations” instead of allowing lower courts to undertake a more detailed review, according to Politico. Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the ruling, “Consistent with Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause, we hold that the states may maintain women’s and girls’ sports for biological females. They may determine eligibility for women’s and girls’ sports based on biological sex. The Constitution and Title IX do not require an overhaul of women’s and girls’ sports throughout America.” Written by: Sumaila Zaman Edited by: Sumaila Zaman Courtesy : India.com Note: This news is originally published on https:/india.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights
Fact check: The truth behind the viral Clavicular kissing trans woman clip
A viral clip of Kick streamer Clavicular has been spreading on social media with claims that he kissed a trans woman right after asking if she was transgender. Many people believed the caption without watching the full video. However, a closer look at the footage tells a different story. The video shows two separate moments involving two different women. Clavicular has also reacted to the viral clip, saying people were using misleading edits to make money from the situation. Viral clip of Clavicular kissing a trans woman leaves out an important detail The claim started after a short video was shared with a caption saying Clavicular asked a woman if she was trans and then kissed her moments later. The post quickly spread across social media, and many users accepted the story as true. But when the full 46-second clip is watched carefully, the events do not happen the way the caption describes. At one point, Clavicular asks one woman if she is transgender. Later in the video, he is seen kissing another woman. These are two different people shown in two different moments. The viral caption combines both scenes into one story, making it appear as if they happened with the same woman. The video itself does not support that claim. As a result, the widely shared statement that Clavicular kissed the same woman he had just asked about being trans is not backed by the footage that is available. Clavicular responds after the misleading clip goes viral After the clip gained attention online, Clavicular responded on X. He wrote, “Clippers betraying me with bait for money. Brutal backstab JFL.” His post suggests that he believes content creators or clip channels edited or presented the video in a misleading way to gain more views and engagement. However, he did not directly explain the interactions shown in the video. The clip has continued to spark discussion because Clavicular is known for making bold content that often goes viral. Because of his online reputation, many viewers believed the caption without checking the full video first. Based on the footage that has been shared, the facts are simple. Clavicular does ask one woman if she is trans. He also kisses a woman later in the clip. But the available video does not show that both moments involve the same person. This explains why the viral claim is misleading. This post links two events that occur separately into one incident. Without further information being provided, all one can glean from this video is that the kissing scene and the question are not from the same time and involve different women. Courtesy : TOI Note: This news is originally published on https:/timesofindia.com/bha and is used purely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes, especially human rights