我國跨性別者如欲申請變更性別登記，依現行內政部函釋之規定，須提出已接受摘除生殖器官之變性手術證明書，此函釋除有違反層級化法律保留原則之疑慮外，亦對跨性別者之性別自主權與生育權影響深遠。蓋我國跨性別者在申請變更性別登記時，須先接受變性手術，摘除生殖器官，此將導致生育能力喪失，造成跨性別者性別自主權與生育權之保障產生衝突。 本文借鏡德國與美國法制，首先探討跨性別者性別自主權與生育權之性質、內涵與憲法地位，並透過觀察我國變更性別登記之要件，以及性別自主權與生育權保障之衝突現象，究明跨性別者之生育權有何特殊之處，其復面臨到如何之困境，以釐清為何要賦予更周延之保障；其次，由於變更性別登記要件與程序之立法寬嚴，將直接影響到跨性別者之生育權，故攸關跨性別者性別自主權與生育權保障之變更性別登記制度，在立法上應如何進行價值取捨，亦屬本文研究重點；末者，跨性別者生育權之保障範圍，除允許跨性別者以人道方式變更性別登記，以保存自然生育能力，尚包括得合法接受人工生殖技術，以輔助其等實現生育權。惟我國現行人工生殖法之受術主體，僅限於已婚異性不孕夫妻，未明文跨性別者，且未開放代孕生殖技術，對跨性別者生育權之保障似有不周，未來我國人工生殖法修法時，宜擴大受術主體，並嘗試納入代孕生殖制度，賦予跨性別者之生育權更完善的保障。;If transgender individuals in Taiwan wish to apply for a change of their registered legal gender， they must， according to the current administrative interpretation issued by the Ministry of the Interior， submit proof that they have undergone gender-affirming surgery involving the removal of reproductive organs. This administrative interpretation not only raises concerns regarding a potential violation of the principle of hierarchical legal reservation but also has profound implications for transgender individuals’ rights to gender self-determination and reproductive autonomy. Specifically， because transgender individuals in Taiwan must first undergo gender-affirming surgery and the removal of reproductive organs in order to apply for a change of legal gender registration， this requirement inevitably results in the loss of reproductive capacity， thereby creating a conflict between the protection of gender self-determination and the right to reproduce. Drawing upon the legal frameworks of Germany and the United States， this article first examines the nature， content， and constitutional status of transgender individuals’ rights to gender self-determination and reproduction. By analyzing the requirements for changing legal gender registration in Taiwan and the conflicts that arise between the protection of gender self-determination and reproductive rights， this study seeks to clarify the characteristics of transgender individuals’ reproductive rights and the specific challenges they face， thereby explaining why more comprehensive legal protection is necessary. Secondly， since the degree of restrictiveness in the legislative design of the requirements and procedures for changing legal gender registration directly affects transgender individuals’ reproductive rights， determining how the law should balance the protection of gender self-determination and reproductive rights within the legal gender recognition system constitutes a central focus of this study. Finally， the scope of protection for transgender individuals’ reproductive rights should include not only allowing them to change their legal gender registration in a humane manner while preserving their natural reproductive capacity but also granting them lawful access to assisted reproductive technologies to facilitate the realization of their reproductive rights. However， under Taiwan’s current Artificial Reproduction Act， the subjects eligible to receive assisted reproductive treatment are limited to infertile married heterosexual couples. The law does not explicitly include transgender individuals， nor does it permit surrogacy. Consequently， the protection of transgender individuals’ reproductive rights appears to be insufficient. In future amendments to the Artificial Reproduction Act， Taiwan should consider expanding the scope of eligible recipients and exploring the inclusion of a surrogacy framework， thereby providing more comprehensive protection for the reproductive rights of transgender individuals.
