Gömda under kniven : En kritisk diskursanalys av juridiska och medicinska riktlinjer av intersexuella tillstånd i Sverige

Sammanfattning: The perception of how sexed bodies should behave and look has shifted throughout history and today we see a rise in discussions about bodily autonomy and the opportunity for diverse bodies to co-exist and flourish in modern society. Human rights activists and organisations led by people born with intersexual variations of sex characteristics (IVSC) have persistently critcized health care regulations for “fixing” intersex bodies without the consent of the individual. This study investigates how the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (NBHW) intend to protect intersex infants from invasive surgeries and interventions performed early in life. The study also adresses the pathological aspects of how intersex conditions are being described by medical discourses as well as how current legislations manage to secure the rights and integrity of people with IVSC. By using Faircloughs critical discourse analysis I delve into the updated guidelines presented by the NBHW to review if significant changes in the recommendations for medical practice of intersex health appear in line with the organisations’ requests. This essay takes on a poststructuralist perspective with support from Judith Butler’s body and gender based theories as the main theoretical framework.Previous studies have concluded that most medical practises regarding intersex remain unchanged. They show that there is a tendency to rationalize normalizing interventions with a primary focus on the looks of genitalia. There seems to be an underlying lack of communication between the medical world and the human rights organisations, these conclusions were brought to light by authors such as Erika Alm and Surya Monro. The results of this study show that a traditional and pathological definition of intersex dominates the medical discourse and that progressive terminology is only discussed on a doctor-patient level and not on a structural scale. These results impart on the current legal inconsistencies which weaken the protection of intersex integrity as they remain unchanged. While the importance of patient integrity is addressed, the NBHW argue that there is lack of evidence based knowledge to implement more resolute restrictions and they express a lack of ambition to investigate further into these matters.