It is unethical and harmful to individuals and to wider society to perpetuate the idea that being lesbian, gay, bi or trans is a mental illness that must be “cured”.
One of these things requires medical treatment. One of these things is not the same.
one in seven trans people report they have been offered or have had “conversion therapy”, making them the most vulnerable group subjected to the practice.
Was a clear definition given as to what form this conversion therapy took? Otherwise, given the routine hyperbole demonstrated by many transactivists, it seems quite possible that the “conversion therapy” offered was any treatment that wasn’t instant affirmation.
The government has scrapped plans to ban trans “conversion therapy” on the grounds that it would be harmful for children who have doubts about their gender. However, there is currently scarce evidence to suggest that this is the case.
Clearly defining in the legislation what is and isn’t covered by “conversion therapy” will leave room for actual therapeutic services for trans people, or those who are still exploring their gender identity and in need of psychological support.
Congratulations, Zoe Greaves. The fact that it wasn’t clearly defined, alongside the suspicion that the vagueness was wholly deliberate, was exactly why this has been put on hold. Possibly once the Cass report is complete, it will be possible to make this definition clear. My understanding was that the intent was to delay until the situation was clarified, which seems reasonable, given the current situation.
This decision comes at a time when healthcare services for trans people are inadequate, with many trans people experiencing gruelling long waits to access gender identity development services. Long waits to access services make trans people vulnerable to being forced or persuaded to use so-called corrective therapy that is designed to suppress their identity.
So do the right thing and improve services. Don’t take the lazy path of bringing in a law which is indirectly assumed to help, when there is no evidence it will make a difference and, in the proposed form, was more likely to have caused harm.
If the government leaves out trans people from the legislation banning “conversion therapy”, this will make it an outlier among other jurisdictions that have banned the practice on the basis of both sexual orientation and gender identity.
Well perhaps, in time, Britain will be seen to have been a leading light in applying common sense and nuance to this debate, rather than following like sheep, when it appears to many that the sheep are heading towards a cliff. There’s a strong possibility that failing to consider the unintended (by politicians, though likely not transactivists) side-effects of bringing in poorly thought out laws with ill-defined terminology will result in harm to many children.