Re: Max

The proceedings before Hartnett J in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia concerned an application by the mother for orders permitting her child, Max, to undergo Stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria, to which the father did not consent. Max, who was born in 2004, wished to proceed with the treatment. The dispute centred on whether Max possessed Gillick competence to consent to the medical intervention, with the mother and medical experts asserting his competence, while the father disputed the diagnosis of Gender Dysphoria.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues: firstly, whether Max had been diagnosed with Gender Dysphoria, and secondly, whether he possessed Gillick competence to consent to Stage 2 treatment for this condition. The paramount consideration for the court was Max's best interests in relation to the proposed medical treatment.

Hartnett J found that Max did have Gender Dysphoria, as defined by the DSM-5, and that he possessed the necessary Gillick competence. This conclusion was based on evidence demonstrating Max's sufficient understanding and intelligence to comprehend the proposed treatment, including its risks, benefits, and alternatives. The court was satisfied that Max had been provided with comprehensive information and had demonstrated an ability to weigh this information, reaching an informed and realistic decision. The court also considered the evidence of Max's persistent and consistent gender identity, his expressed desire for treatment, and the views of his treating clinicians.

The court declared that Max was Gillick competent to consent to Stage 2 treatment for Gender Dysphoria and ordered that he be permitted to receive testosterone as prescribed by clinicians at the P Hospital Gender Clinic. Strict confidentiality orders were made to protect Max's identity and the details of the proceedings, with provisions for the anonymised release of judgments and orders.