Possible Aid to Fauto-Sterling

In Fausto-Sterling’s argument to deter infant surgery for the intersexed, she draws on a large batch of specific evidence, but I feel that she could benefit by appealing to Kantian ethics, and more specifically the categorical imperative. For a short introduction, the categorical functions as a sort of golden rule of Kantian ethics/deontology, as one should always act in a way that treats a person in as an end in itself and never as a means to an end. Here the language needs a bit of explanation: a person in the Kantian sense, is a rational being capable of performing from duty (which would exclude children and other non-rational beings), and means are similar to objects, because they have price in the sense that that do not hold any intrinsic worth and can be easily replaced. Ends are the contrast, as they would function to highlight the dignified intrinsic worth of a person.

While children may not follow under the category of person under deontology, this only serves to aid Fausto-Sterling’s argument. I think the consensus of the class was to let the intersexed individual choose to have surgery or not to have surgery at a later time, which would prove them to be autonomous. Deontology could suggest that this is all the more reason to let the child develop into a moral, rational being, and then let them make an autonomous decision on surgery or non-surgery. The importance of the matter lies in the agency of the intersexed individual instead of the doctors or the parents, which would be confirmed in deontology. While this does not solve the problem of how the child should be raised (along with images of the “which bathroom?” problem) or when its rationality should be deemed sufficient enough to warrant a decision on surgery, but it does seek to improve the autonomy of the intersexed. Without this justification of agency, the intersexed are being treated as means to an end of satisfying the gender and sex boundaries that are in place, albeit for the guise of the “convenience” of such operations. The intersexed are being objectified, as they have parts that are seemingly changeable/replaceable, and thus are not receiving the full benefits of a moral community. While I would agree that surgery must only be performed if the child’s life is at stake, other operation need to be postponed, as that would help restore agency to the intersexed, and combat dangerous surgeries and gender/sex confusions of the intersexed later in their life.

I believe that the argument could be strengthened with consideration to Kantian ethics, but also realize that this does not clear up how to raise the child/ I feel that agency is the most important matter of this debate, and Kant lends a helping in hand in how to characterize a dignified agency.