Does the European Commission oblige to allow children to choose their sex? The truth about the Equality Strategy LGBTQ+ 2026–2030

The British conservative newspaper “The Telegraph” has published an article showing that, according to a European Commission strategy, children may be free to choose their sex. European officials explained what the truth is.

EU children cannot choose their sex. Photo: Shutterstock

Children could be free to choose their sex, according to a new strategy presented by the European Commission, is shown in an article published by the British Conservative newspaper The Telegraph.

“Member States could be punished for challenging gender ideology, according to a new strategy revealed by the European Commission. Any age limit on gender recognition could be removedand the therapy to verify that children really want to change their own gender would be forbidden by plans”, The quoted source shows.

In support of the statements of the journalists, the LGBTQ+ 2026–2030 equality strategy, which was adopted on Wednesday.

“The requirements for the legal recognition of the genre vary significantly between the Member States. While a number of Member States have adopted self -determination models, others impose medical procedures, which the European Court of Human Rights found that they can violate human rights. The Commission will facilitate good practices between Member States to support the development of legal recognition procedures age restrictions ” – shows the passage from the LGBTQ+ 2026–2030 equality strategy quoted by English journalists.

What European officials say: Member countries will exclusively establish the legislation

The statement that the European Commission will allow children to choose their sex, as shown in the quoted article, is false, say European officials.

“Any suggestion that the Commission would force or impose such measures to the Member States is false. The strategy promotes equality through cooperation: Member States decide their own laws, and the EU facilitates the exchange of good practices. The Commission fully complies with the competences of the Member States, including the exclusive competence of the age of legal consent regarding the legal recognition”, “ He explained today Eva Hrnčířová, spokesperson for social affairs at the European Commission, at the European Commission's press conference on Friday.

In other words, the member countries will establish independently and exclusively the legislation on gender issues and its change. The European Commission only will facilitate the exchange of good practices between the Member States.

“The strategy aims that all LGBTQ+ people in Europe will be treated equally and not be discriminated against ”the spokesman said. She also stated that the strategy for 2026-2030, approved this week by the Commissioner College, is based on the existing strategy of 2020.

What the European Court of Human Rights says

The Passage in the Strategy quoted by British journalists specified “While a number of Member States have adopted models of self -determination, others impose medical procedures, which the European Court of Human Rights has found that they can violate human rights.”

This clarification was interpreted by British journalists as an argument of the conclusion: the European Court of Human Rights would have decided that children can choose their sex. Nothing more fake.

The text of the European strategy refers to the trial of an Italian citizen, 60 years old, against the state regarding the refusal to recognize the name change and sex in official documents – SV v. Italy (Hudoc, Id. 001-187111). The ECHR decision was issued in 2018.

The applicant was born in 1965 and lives in Ostia Lido.

At birth, the applicant was registered in the civil status registers as a male person and was given the first name L. However, the applicant said that she has always identified as a woman and lived in society as a woman, using the first name S. for example, her service colleagues (the applicant works as a public official from 1999), she has always appointed S. that of a woman.

In 1999, SV began a treatment with feminizing hormones, as part of the gender transition process.

On November 9, 2000, she submitted an application to the District Court in Rome, based on Article 3 of Law no. 164/1982, declaring that he wants to complete the transition process by permanently modifying his primary sexual characteristics and has requested the authorization to undergo sex re -insurance surgery.

By a decision of May 10, 2001, the District Court found that the applicant initiated the gender transition process after a careful reflection. Taking into account its firm decision, the court authorized it to undergo surgery to adapt its primary sexual characteristics to its female identity.

On May 30, 2001, the applicant, while waiting for the surgery authorized by the District Court, asked the prefect in Rome to change the first name, based on Article 89 of the Presidential Decree no. 396/2000. She claimed that, given that a transition process of several years is followed and taking into account her physical appearance, the fact that her identity documents indicated a masculine first name was a constant source of humility and embarrassment. He also mentioned that the waiting period for surgery was about four years.

By a decision of July 4, 2001, the prefect rejected the applicant's request, arguing that, according to the presidential decree no. 396/2000, the first name of a person must correspond to his sex. In the opinion of the prefect, in the absence of a definitive court decision ordering the change of the legal status of the applicant, according to Law no. 164/1982, its first name could not be modified.

The applicant appealed this decision to the Lazio Regional Administrative Court and also requested the suspension of the prefect's decision.

After a long string of trials that lasted until May 17, 2008, the Iralian courts concluded that “The modification of the civil status registers of a transgender person must be ordered by the court that rules on the request for reinsurance. Therefore, he considered that the prefect proceeded correctly when he rejected the applicant's request. ” The applicant appealed to the ECHR and in 2018, the European court was pronounced.

The meaning of the SV case against Italy

In the case of SV against Italy, the European Court of Human Rights found that Italy violated articles 8 and 14 of the Convention, refusing to a person transgender the right to change their first name before the completion of the surgery to reinsurance.

The court considered that this condition was disproportionate and violated the right to privacy and dignity, because it forced it to live for years with a male name that did not match its gender identity. The decision establishes that Member States must provide rapid and accessible procedures for legal recognition, without imposing surgical operations or other restrictive conditions.

The decision of SV v. Italy is considered an important precedent in the European jurisprudence on the rights of transgender persons.

It confirms that gender identity is part of the private life protected by article 8; States cannot condition the legal recognition of the genre of surgery; The delay or refusal of legal recognition may be a form of discrimination.

The officials of the European Commission have submitted to the press that the discussions on “age restrictions” did not consider the possibility of minors to choose their sex:

“Age restrictions in this field of law are exclusively within the competence of the Member States. However, to avoid any misunderstandings: the commission did not consider minors when referring to age restrictions. In fact, the CEDO cases mentioned in this context in strategy aimed at all adults, some of them being over 60 years old at the time of introducing the action. ”

Regarding the potential sanctions for the states that would not comply with the Strategy of the European Commission, the targeted document does not speak of the punishment of the Member States, in the context in which it recognizes their exclusive right to decide how to regulate the problem related to gender change.