I agree that both could be useful in different contexts. I’m only speaking of biological sex in my definition, which is different from gender.
in ~99.9% of cases, doctors can tell from observation at birth what someone’s sex is, and it is noted on the birth certificate. (to clarify, do you consider the birth certificate to be a medical record?).
I do support the amending of birth certificates if the doctors observed incorrectly.
I don’t think think any other medical records would have to be shared with the government, but (beside the point: ) you should assume they always are anyway.
but doctors could never “check medical records to determine gender” anyway, as gender and sex are not the same.
Just to be clear, such a change to the birth certificate should NEVER happen if the person involved does not agree with it. It would 100 percent violate the Hippocratic Oath, as it can be very harmful.
I agree that both could be useful in different contexts. I’m only speaking of biological sex in my definition, which is different from gender. in ~99.9% of cases, doctors can tell from observation at birth what someone’s sex is, and it is noted on the birth certificate. (to clarify, do you consider the birth certificate to be a medical record?). I do support the amending of birth certificates if the doctors observed incorrectly. I don’t think think any other medical records would have to be shared with the government, but (beside the point: ) you should assume they always are anyway. but doctors could never “check medical records to determine gender” anyway, as gender and sex are not the same.
Just to be clear, such a change to the birth certificate should NEVER happen if the person involved does not agree with it. It would 100 percent violate the Hippocratic Oath, as it can be very harmful.