Sex Change Law.Theres an interesting discussion started by Prosec. Ann Tugbang-Torres: Do you think thereshoudbeaawaowing!ersonswhoha"eundergoneasexre-assign#ent surgerytoasochange the entry in their Certi$icates o$ Li"e %irth to con$or# with their current sex&' The way (see it) the issue on aowing a change in gender *as a!!earing in the %irth Certi$icate+ by reasono$ sex change is inked with the issue o$ sa#e-sex #arriage.,irst o$$) et #e say that the beauty o$ see#ingy useess acade#ic discussions) such as this) isthe exercise that co#es with it. -ou get to ex!ore the sub.ect #atter e"en be$ore the need todiscuss it) which #eans you are !re!ared shoud the issue cro! u!. Theres a #ore i#!ortantreason: based on #y ex!erience) this kind o$ discussion eicits he!$u and briiant insights $ro#e"eryone. /ith that in #ind) ets !roceed to skin the cat) so to s!eak.There is no aw go"erning sex reassign#ent and its e$$ects. /hie there is no aw banning sexreassign#ent) there are existing aws go"erning na#es and the Ci"i 0egistry. /e know that theSu!re#eCourtturneddowna!etition$or changeo$ na#e*under thecircu#stances) not aty!ogra!hica error which #ay be changed without court !roceedings+ by reason o$ sexua re-assign#ent surgery)co##onycaedsex-changeo!eration.A changeo$gender1sexentry*asubstantia change that re2uires court action+ in the %irth Certi$icate by reason o$ sex-change isaso not aowed because a !ersons sex 3 #ae or $e#ae 3 is deter#ined at birth.(notherwords) soongasexistingawsarenot a#ended3a!owerexcusi"eyodgedinCongress 3 any !erson who success$uy undergoes a sex-change o!eration cannot) but reasono$ the sex-change) success$uy ask $or the re"ision o$ the gender1sex and na#e a!!earing in the%irth Certi$icate or Certi$icate o$ Li"e %irth.Congress has the !ower to enact aws reguating sexua re-assign#ent surgery. ( dont see anyserious constitutiona chaenge to that) athough a case can de$initey be cra$ted to 2uestion sucha#o"e. Thisnewawcannarrowyi#it itse$ tothereguationo$ sex-changeo!erations)without aowing changes in the gender a!!earing in the birth registry. 4owe"er) this new awcan "ery we a#end or change existing aws) incuding aws go"erning na#es and the Ci"i0egistry. ,or instance) the new aw #ay !ro"ide that a !erson who"e success$uy undergonesex-change#ayaskthecourt toha"ecertainentries *ikegender andna#e+ inthe%irthCerti$icate changed *$or con"enience) ets ca these changes Sex-change A#end#ents'+.A chaenge on this new aw) which concerns an indi"idua and what the indi"idua seeks to dowithhis1her 5/6body)#ay co#e$ro#a sighty di$$erent 2uarter 3 #arriage and$a#iy.There is e"eryreason to beie"e that the ega e$$ects o$ sexua re-assign#ent surgeries)s!eci$icay any change in the sex1gender re$ected in the %irth Certi$icate) woud be 2uestionedusing the Constitutiona !ro"isions on the $a#iy as the $oundation o$ the State) on #arriage asthe $oundation o$ the $a#iy) and on #arriage as an in"ioabe socia institution.Lets !ut it this way) sa#e-sex #arriageis not recogni7ed in the Phii!!ines) yet this ex!osi"eissuecanbecircu#"entedbytheSex-change A#end#ents. /iththeogicachangebroughtabout by any #o"e to aow the change o$ gender in the %irth Certi$icate) so#eone who used tobe a #an) now a wo#an') #ay subse2uenty #arry another #an. This woud sti be consistentwith the existing aw on #arriage) the ,a#iy Code) which de$ines #arriage as a union betweena man and a woman.The re2uire#ent $or #arriage to be a union between a #an and a wo#an is s!eed out in a aw)the ,a#iy Code) and notexpressly!ro"ided in the Constitution itse$. The Constitution does65T say that #arriage #ust be between a #an and a wo#an. The Constitution does 65T saythat the wo#an' shoud not be a !re"ious #an who"e success$uy undergone sex reassign#entsurgery. The Constitution does 65T say that ones gender is $ixed at birth and) $or !ur!oses o$#arriage) can ne"er be changed.5n the other hand) the Constitution does say that #arriage is an in"ioabe socia institution. Andthis socia institution) at the ti#e when the Constitution was cra$ted *this one) (# !retty certain+and as intended by the $ra#ers *( coud be wrong) o$ course+) re2uires a bioogica #an and abioogica wo#an*$i intheargu#entsandcounter-argu#entsabout chid-bearingca!acity)etc.+. This socia institution) as the Constitution !ro"ides) is in"ioabe. Any #o"e to diute thissocia institution shoud not be aowed.(n su#) this is a "ery interesting *and contentious+ issue. There are strong argu#ents on bothsides o$ the $ence. (n #y #odest o!inion *and unti ( stu#be u!on $acts1argu#ents that woud#ake #e change #y #ind+) there are serious constitutiona issues against any #o"e to aow achange in the sex1gender) as a!!earing in the %irth Certi$icate) by reason o$ sex reassign#entsurgery.