Almost 10,000 gender certificates granted amid rise in Gen Z applications
Almost 10,000 gender recognition certificates (GRCs) have been granted in the UK since their introduction two decades ago, with an increasing proportion going to young adults, analysis shows.
Some 1,169 GRCs were issued in the year to March 2025, more than three times the number in 2019/20, when it stood at just 364.
It is also the highest annual total since 2005/06, which was the first full year that the scheme – which allows a person's acquired gender to be recognised legally in the country – was in operation.
The surge is likely to reflect recent changes in the certification process, including a big cut in fees, combined with more applications from young people.
Nearly a quarter (24%) of certificates granted in the latest year were for people born since 2000 – loosely known as Generation Z – and 68% were for those born since 1990, up from 4% and 41% respectively in 2019/20.
The analysis has been compiled by the PA news agency using data published by the Ministry of Justice, which shows a total of 9,633 GRCs had been granted in the UK up to March 2025.
The findings come after the Supreme Court's ruling in April on the definition of sex, which followed a dispute centred on whether someone with a GRC recognising their gender as female should be treated as a woman under the UK 2010 Equality Act.
In a long-awaited judgment, the court confirmed the terms woman and sex in the 2010 Equality Act 'refer to a biological woman and biological sex'.
This means transgender women with a GRC can be excluded from single-sex spaces if 'proportionate'.
In the wake of the ruling the boss of Britain's equalities regulator suggested that while it does not mean GRCs are 'worthless', their 'efficacy' could be re-examined.
Baroness Kishwer Falkner, chairwoman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) told BBC Radio 4's Today programme in the days after the ruling: 'I think the next stage of litigation may well be tests as to the efficacy of the GRC, and or other areas.'
Asked about whether she thinks GRCs are now 'worthless', she replied: 'We don't believe they are. We think they're quite important.'
Government advice on how to apply for a GRC states that the Supreme Court ruling does not affect the application process, but advises people to contact the EHRC if they have questions.
The Gender Recognition Act came into effect on April 4 2005, giving adults the right legally to change the gender that was recorded on their birth certificate.
This is done by applying for a GRC, a document that shows a person has satisfied the criteria for changing their legal gender.
Applications are made to the Gender Recognition Panel, a body of legal and medical experts, who issue a certificate only if the application meets the necessary criteria.
GRC applications hit a record 1,517 in 2024/25, up from 1,397 the previous year and 443 in 2019/20.
The application fee for a certificate was cut in May 2021 from £140 to £5, while there was a switch to online applications in July 2022.
A GRC is granted if the applicant has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria; has lived in the acquired gender for at least two years, and intends to live in that gender for the rest of their life.
PA analysis shows the age of those receiving GRCs has changed considerably over the past decade.
Some 63% of certificates issued in 2014/15 went to people born before 1980 – but by 2024/25 this had dropped sharply to just 17%.
By contrast, people born from 1980 onwards accounted for 83% of certificates in the most recent year, up from 37% a decade earlier.
More recently, there has been a steady increase in the proportion of certificates going to people born since 2000, up from 4% in 2019/20 to 24% in 2024/25.
The age group currently responsible for the biggest proportion is people born in the 1990s, who accounted for 45% of the total in the year to March 2025.
The balance in applications between males and females has also changed over time.
In 2005/06, the first full year that certificates were available, more than three-quarters (77%) were granted to people whose sex at birth was male, with just under a quarter (23%) going to those who were female.
By 2015/16 the gap between these percentages had narrowed at 67% and 33%, and in 2023/24 the figures were almost equal, at 52% for males and 48% for females.
In the most recent year of 2024/25, the gap widened slightly with 55% of certificates granted to people whose sex at birth was male and 45% for those who were female.
Nearly one in 10 people receiving certificates in the year to March 2025 were part of a married couple – a proportion that has been relatively stable since the law was changed in 2014 to allow some applicants to remain married while obtaining gender recognition.
Of the 1,169 certificates granted in 2024/25, 109 (9%) were for married applicants with the vast majority – 1,033 (88%) – for people who were single, while 27 were recorded as 'other/unknown'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
16 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
New Jersey can have a grand jury investigate clergy sex abuse allegations, state high court rules
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — New Jersey can have a grand jury examine allegations of clergy sexually abusing children, the state's Supreme Court ruled Monday, after a Catholic diocese that had tried for years to block such proceedings recently reversed course. The Diocese of Camden previously had argued that a court rule prevents the state attorney general from impaneling a grand jury to issue findings in the state's investigation into decades of allegations against church officials. But the diocese notified the court in early May that it would no longer oppose that. Camden Bishop Joseph Williams, who took over the diocese in March, said he'd met with stakeholders in the diocese and there was unanimous consent to end the church's opposition to the grand jury. The seven-member Supreme Court concluded such a grand jury inquiry is allowed. 'Courts cannot presume the outcome of an investigation in advance or the contents of a presentment that has not yet been written," the court wrote in an opinion joined by all seven justieces. 'We find that the State has the right to proceed with its investigation and present evidence before a special grand jury.' The state attorney general's office praised the decision in an emailed statement and said it's committed to supporting survivors of sexual abuse. 'We are grateful for the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision this morning confirming what we have maintained throughout this lengthy court battle: that there was no basis to stop the State from pursuing a grand jury presentment on statewide sexual abuse by clergy,' First Assistant Attorney General Lyndsay V. Ruotolo said in an emailed statement. An email seeking comment was sent Monday to the Catholic League, an adcvocacy and civil rights organization that still opposed the grand jury after the diocese's change. A Pennsylvania grand jury report in 2018 found more than 1,000 children had been abused in that state since the 1940s, prompting the New Jersey attorney general to announce a similar investigation. The results of New Jersey's inquiry never became public partly because the legal battle with the Camden diocese was unfolding amid sealed proceedings. Then this year, the Bergen Record obtained documents disclosing that the diocese had tried to preempt a grand jury and a lower court agreed with the diocese. The core disagreement was whether a court rule permits grand juries in New Jersey to issue findings in cases involving private individuals. Trial and appellate courts found that isn't allowed. Hearing arguments on April 28, members of the high court repeatedly questioned whether challenging the state was premature, since lower court proceedings prevented New Jersey from seating a grand jury that would investigate any allegations or issue findings, called a presentment. 'We don't know what a grand jury would say, am I right?' Justice Anne Patterson asked the attorney for the diocese. Lloyd Levenson, the church's attorney, answered that 'you'd have to be Rip Van Winkle' not to know what the grand jury would say. 'The goal here is obviously to condemn the Catholic Church and priests and bishops,' he said. He noted the state could still pursue criminal investigations and abuse victims could seek civil penalties. The court said Monday it wasn't ruling on any underlying issues and a trial court judge would still have the chance to review the grand jury's findings before they became public. Mark Crawford, state director of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests, said Monday in a text message he's 'elated' by the court's decision. "Decades of crimes against children will finally be exposed," he said. How the diocese won early rulings In 2023, a trial court judge sided with the diocese, finding that a grand jury would lack authority because it would be focused on 'private conduct,' rather than a government agency's actions. An appeals court affirmed that judgment last year, and the attorney general's office appealed to the state Supreme Court. Documents the high court unsealed in March sketched out some of what the state's task force has found so far, without specific allegations. They show 550 phone calls alleging abuse from the 1940s to the 'recent past' came into a state-established hotline. The diocese argued a grand jury isn't needed, largely because of a 2002 memorandum of understanding between New Jersey Catholic dioceses and prosecutors. The memorandum required church officials to report abuse and said authorities would be provided with all relevant information about the allegations. But the Pennsylvania report led to reexamining the statute of limitations in New Jersey, where the time limits on childhood sex abuse claims were overhauled in 2019. The new law allows child victims to sue until they turn 55 or within seven years of their first realization that the abuse caused them harm. The previous statute of limitations was age 20, or two years after realizing abuse caused harm. Also in 2019, New Jersey's five Catholic dioceses listed more than 180 priests who have been credibly accused of sexually abusing minors over several decades. Many listed were deceased and others removed from ministry. The church has settled with accusers The Camden diocese, like others nationwide, filed for bankruptcy amid a torrent of lawsuits — up to 55, according to court records — after the statute of limitations was relaxed. In 2022, the diocese agreed to pay $87.5 million to settle allegations involving clergy sex abuse against some 300 accusers, one of the largest cash settlements involving the Catholic church in the U.S. The agreement, covering six southern New Jersey counties outside Philadelphia, exceeded the nearly $85 million settlement in 2003 in the clergy abuse scandal in Boston, but was less than settlements in California and Oregon.
Hamilton Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
New Jersey can have a grand jury investigate clergy sex abuse allegations, state high court rules
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — New Jersey can have a grand jury examine allegations of clergy sexually abusing children, the state's Supreme Court ruled Monday, after a Catholic diocese that had tried for years to block such proceedings recently reversed course. The Diocese of Camden previously had argued that a court rule prevents the state attorney general from impaneling a grand jury to issue findings in the state's investigation into decades of allegations against church officials. But the diocese notified the court in early May that it would no longer oppose that. Camden Bishop Joseph Williams, who took over the diocese in March, said he'd met with stakeholders in the diocese and there was unanimous consent to end the church's opposition to the grand jury. The seven-member Supreme Court concluded such a grand jury inquiry is allowed. A Pennsylvania grand jury report in 2018 found more than 1,000 children had been abused in that state since the 1940s, prompting the New Jersey attorney general to announce a similar investigation. The results of New Jersey's inquiry never became public partly because the legal battle with the Camden diocese was unfolding amid sealed proceedings. Then this year, the Bergen Record obtained documents disclosing that the diocese had tried to preempt a grand jury and a lower court agreed with the diocese. The core disagreement was whether a court rule permits grand juries in New Jersey to issue findings in cases involving private individuals. Trial and appellate courts found that isn't allowed. Hearing arguments on April 28, members of the high court repeatedly questioned whether challenging the state was premature, since lower court proceedings prevented New Jersey from seating a grand jury that would investigate any allegations or issue findings, called a presentment. 'We don't know what a grand jury would say, am I right?' Justice Anne Patterson asked the attorney for the diocese. Lloyd Levenson, the church's attorney, answered that 'you'd have to be Rip Van Winkle' not to know what the grand jury would say. 'The goal here is obviously to condemn the Catholic Church and priests and bishops,' he said. He noted the state could still pursue criminal investigations and abuse victims could seek civil penalties. Mark Crawford, state director of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests, said 'victims want their story heard.' 'They want to get in front of the grand jury and tell that story,' Crawford said. 'They want some level of accountability and acknowledgement.' In 2023, a trial court judge sided with the diocese, finding that a grand jury would lack authority because it would be focused on 'private conduct,' rather than a government agency's actions. An appeals court affirmed that judgment last year, and the attorney general's office appealed to the state Supreme Court. Documents the high court unsealed in March sketched out some of what the state's task force has found so far, without specific allegations. They show 550 phone calls alleging abuse from the 1940s to the 'recent past' came into a state-established hotline. The diocese argued a grand jury isn't needed, largely because of a 2002 memorandum of understanding between New Jersey Catholic dioceses and prosecutors. The memorandum required church officials to report abuse and said authorities would be provided with all relevant information about the allegations. But the Pennsylvania report led to reexamining the statute of limitations in New Jersey, where the time limits on childhood sex abuse claims were overhauled in 2019. The new law allows child victims to sue until they turn 55 or within seven years of their first realization that the abuse caused them harm. The previous statute of limitations was age 20, or two years after realizing abuse caused harm. Also in 2019, New Jersey's five Catholic dioceses listed more than 180 priests who have been credibly accused of sexually abusing minors over several decades. Many listed were deceased and others removed from ministry. The Camden diocese, like others nationwide, filed for bankruptcy amid a torrent of lawsuits — up to 55, according to court records — after the statute of limitations was relaxed. In 2022, the diocese agreed to pay $87.5 million to settle claims involving clergy sex abuse against some 300 accusers, one of the largest cash settlements involving the Catholic church in the U.S. The agreement, covering six southern New Jersey counties outside Philadelphia, exceeded the nearly $85 million settlement in 2003 in the clergy abuse scandal in Boston, but was less than settlements in California and Oregon. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Starmer and Trump to hold ‘one-on-one' talks at G7 in push to wrap up trade deal
Sir Keir Starmer has said he will meet US President Donald Trump for 'one-on-one' talks at a major global summit in a push to get the US-UK trade deal over the finish line. The Prime Minister said he expected the economic pact to be completed 'very soon' ahead of a meeting with Mr Trump at the G7 conference in Canada. Britain's long-coveted free trade deal with Washington was agreed upon last month but is yet to be implemented, with both sides yet to take the necessary steps to reduce tariffs. Asked whether he would be able to finalise the deal as he crosses paths with Mr Trump at the international leaders' summit in Kananaskis, Sir Keir said: 'I'm very pleased that we made that trade deal, and we're in the final stages now of implementation, and I expect that to be completed very soon.' Amid speculation that the two leaders will carve out time for a bilateral meeting between G7 plenary sessions, Sir Keir said: 'I'll be having a one-on-one with him. 'I think I'm seeing him on a number of occasions today because we're in all of the sessions together, so I'll be having a lot of conversations with President Trump.' He added: 'We will be talking about our trade deal… because that really matters for the vital sectors that are safeguarded under our deal, and we've got to implement that.' The Prime Minister is walking a diplomatic tightrope as he seeks to strengthen ties with Canada, the G7 host nation, while keeping the US president, who has repeatedly threatened to annex the country, on side. On Sunday, Downing Street confirmed efforts to revive stalled trade negotiations between London and Ottawa after a bilateral meeting between Sir Keir and Mark Carney. In warm words at the top of the talks, the UK leader challenged Mr Trump's call for Canada to become a '51st state', speaking of the importance of Britain's relationship with the country as 'independent, democratic sovereign countries'. In recent months, the UK has held a series of engagements aimed at securing a reduction in the tariffs Mr Trump imposed on Britain and the rest of the world on April 2. Along with 10% tariffs on all British goods, the president imposed 25% levies on cars and steel. He later increased the tariff on steel to 50%, but gave the UK a reprieve, keeping its rate at 25% until at least July 9. Under the broad terms of last month's agreement, the US will implement quotas that will effectively eliminate the tariff on British steel and reduce the tariff on UK vehicles to 10%. The White House has also voiced concerns about plans to build a Chinese embassy near London's financial centres, with reports suggesting the issue has been raised in trade talks. The redevelopment proposals for the former site of the Royal Mint were called in last year, and ministers will now have the final say on whether the project goes ahead. On his way to the G7, Sir Keir was asked by reporters whether he was confident the matter would not undermine efforts to complete the trade deal, and whether US objections would be taken into consideration in the Government's decision-making. He said: 'We will act in our own national interest at all times on any issue including in relation to the embassy. 'We will carefully balance what is in our national interest in any decision that we take.' Sir Keir faces a busy week of diplomacy as leaders from the world's major economies descend on a luxury mountain lodge in the Rockies amid spiralling conflict in the Middle East and the war in Ukraine. As well as heads of government from Canada, the US, France, Italy, Japan, Germany and Britain, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky is also expected to attend the conference. The Prime Minister told reporters he had a 'good relationship' with the US president, which is 'important' at a time of heightened global instability. 'I've been saying, for probably the best part of six months now, we're in a new era of defence and security, a new era for trade and the economy,' he said. 'And I think it's really important for Britain to play a leading part in that, and that's what I'll be doing at the G7, talking to all of our partners in a constructive way. 'And I'm very pleased that I have developed good relations with all the G7 leaders.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
