The term hermaphrodite, inherited from Greek mythology, refers in biology to an organism that possesses both male and female reproductive structures. In humans, the clinical reality is more nuanced: we now speak of differences in sexual development (DSD), a medical framework that encompasses dozens of distinct diagnoses. Recent advances, both scientifically and legally, are reshaping the way these variations are understood, managed, and protected.
Differences in sexual development: what genetic diagnosis changes
The diagnostic assessment of a difference in sexual development now relies on a precise sequence. A study published in BMJ Open in September 2022 notes that the examination systematically begins with a karyotype, followed by next-generation sequencing to refine the diagnosis. This protocol allows for the identification of chromosomal or genetic anomalies that clinical examination alone cannot reveal.
This multidisciplinary approach marks a turning point from previous practices, where diagnosis primarily relied on anatomical observation at birth. Genetic sequencing paves the way for more precise diagnoses, but it also raises questions about the management of information conveyed to families.
Recent clinical recommendations emphasize limiting unnecessary irreversible surgical interventions. The so-called “good practices” protocols published since 2021 prioritize a supportive approach where the therapeutic decision involves endocrinologists, surgeons, psychologists, and, as much as possible, the individual concerned. To follow the latest on Hermaphrodite and the developments of these protocols, several French-speaking platforms now compile scientific publications and field feedback.
UN Resolution on Intersex Persons: Scope and Limits
In April 2024, the UN Human Rights Council adopted for the first time a resolution specifically dedicated to intersex persons. Titled “Combating discrimination, violence and harmful practices against intersex persons” (Resolution 55/14, April 4, 2024), it constitutes a formal international recognition.
The scope of this text remains to be measured. A resolution from the Human Rights Council is not binding on member states. It sets a reference framework and encourages national legislations, without imposing a timeline or sanctions.
The available data do not yet allow for conclusions about the concrete impact of this resolution in countries where early surgical interventions on intersex children remain common. Field feedback varies on this point depending on the regions of the world.
German Law on Intersex Surgeries: A Review that Raises Questions
Germany was one of the first states to formally regulate early surgical interventions on intersex children. Article 1631e of the German Civil Code, in effect since 2021, requires judicial validation before any irreversible surgery on a child with a difference in sexual development.
The report published in 2026 by the NGO OII Europe questions the effectiveness of this law. Of the 71 procedures recorded for the years 2023-2024, 70 interventions were approved by family courts with parental consent. This ratio leads the organization to conclude that the legislation, in its current state, does not protect the bodily integrity of intersex children.
Several factors explain this finding:
- Family courts rely on medical expertise that frequently recommends intervention, which reduces the judicial filter’s role to an administrative formality.
- Parental consent, obtained in a context of significant medical and social pressure, is rarely contested by judges.
- The absence of independent legal representation for the child in the procedure limits the possibilities for contradiction.
This review raises a question applicable to other European countries: does a protective law without an independent oversight mechanism suffice to change medical practices? Field feedback suggests that the legislative framework alone is insufficient without specific training for judges and healthcare teams.
Hermaphroditism in Animal and Plant Biology: Research and New Observations
In biology, hermaphroditism remains an active research topic, distinct from human medical issues. In animals, hermaphroditic reproductive strategies take various forms depending on the species.
- Simultaneous hermaphroditism (both reproductive functions are active at the same time) is observed in many marine invertebrates, some fish, and terrestrial gastropods like snails.
- Sequential hermaphroditism (sex change during life) involves several families of reef fish, where an individual can switch from male to female or vice versa depending on the dynamics of the social group.
- In the plant world, the majority of flowering plants are hermaphroditic, bearing both stamens and pistils on the same flower, which constitutes the norm rather than the exception.
Recent research in population genetics is focusing on the molecular mechanisms that trigger sex change in sequential species. These studies could eventually shed light on certain aspects of differences in sexual development in humans, although parallels between species must be approached with caution.
Evolving Terminology: From Hermaphrodite to Intersex
The terminological shift from hermaphrodite to intersex in the medical and legal fields is not just a matter of vocabulary. The term hermaphrodite, in the strict sense, refers to an organism possessing both functional reproductive systems. No documented human case corresponds to this strict definition.
The adoption of the term intersex (or intersexuation) aims to more accurately describe the biological reality of the individuals concerned while reducing the mythological burden and the negative connotations historically associated with the word hermaphrodite. In France, associations of concerned individuals have favored this term for several years.
This terminological evolution is reflected in institutional texts. The resolution of the UN Human Rights Council adopted in 2024 exclusively uses the term “intersex persons,” without reference to the word hermaphrodite. The choice of words structures the way public policies address these issues: naming precisely also delineates the scope of rights and protections.
The scientific, legal, and terminological framework surrounding differences in sexual development continues to evolve. The coming years will reveal whether international resolutions and national legislations succeed in changing medical practices beyond the texts.