Conversion therapy ban discussion in the House of Commons

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
I have PM'd you with full link to original briefing. ( don't want to derail the thread).

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex I forgot I saved the full original briefing before it was amended and my memory was right! (old mumsnet rule- save everything before they deny it!).

Here is the reference in the original briefing (page 17) to Labour removing the spousal consent clause (which currently prevents heterosexual women having their marriage/ sexual orientation legally converted by their husband when he says he's a woman):

'It was reported that these plans (Labour manifesto 2024) involve removing the requirements for spousal consent for and proof of having lived in the acquired gender for two years. '

Thank you for sharing this.

There's a quote from Wes Streeting which could tie quite a few things together...

“We’ve got to find a way through that treats trans people with respect and respects women’s safe spaces.”

This could well point towards:

• (if the Supreme Court finds that sex in the Equality Act is biological sex) the government reverse ferreting on this stance and "clarifying" that what they meant all along was people with a GRC can use the facilities of the opposite sex i.e. that it's "legal sex" that counts here
• a faster, "more dignified" (i.e. self ID + one doctor) GRC application process
• conversion therapy law which stops therapists from unpicking why people might feel the way they do about their body. In practice, this will mean those who are vulnerable to believing they need hormones and surgery to "fix" themselves missing out on an exploration of any other reason for their distress and frequent flyers to Málaga Airport sailing through to their new legal status with ease
• an increase in GRC applications
• a muddling through to attempt to ringfence children away from this e.g. children's therapy could include exploring root causes of the distress but in practice, as children near 18 (from say 16 onwards) therapists will be cautious and back off.
• a void in good therapeutic care for children, where they increasingly recognise the Cass recommendations but can't square the circle on how to remain neutral. Particularly when schools are continuing to promote gender identity as fact. Many will recognise the futility in trying to provide good care.
• a void in adult care where it's just not worth it. Similar to children but the futility is that adults have autonomy to a) get GRCs and b) have surgery
• genderist-aligned therapists stepping forward to fill the gap (as themostspecial has said above)

Counselling, educational psychology and general psychology services seem to be mostly captured anyway, so this little sliver of sunlight for children under the Cass recommendations is probably not going to have any impact other than the self-exclusion of good therapists from these situations. If a child in their care is gender questioning they'll likely just refer on to "specialist" care, when what children need is a gentle but firm holding of a neutral line. And as we've already seen, the specialist care seems to be a collection of different regional centres, each operating independently and many (all?) with ex-GIDS senior leadership.

They'll likely do a social transition as they refer on i.e. they'll change the child's pronouns, for fear of falling foul of conversion therapy law. This means children entering a care pathway from an affirmation position instead of neutral. Even if they revert to "they" to describe such children, that's still a social transition because the status quo is no longer recognised. The child is already untethered from it.

You are right and eventually the HoL would have to give way but are allowed to keep going until their "reasonable amendments" have been addressed. This would probably be in the area of specific definitions. As in "What is a transgender child?"

One would hope so, especially with many of the Lords being vocally rational about this issue, but doesn't the Lords have some sort of policy on passing laws that has been promised in the election manifesto? Something to do with the public having shown their approval of the law very voting that party into power?

I take comfort from Parliamentary Procedure. The Bill will have the strength of being part of Labour's manifesto but it is clearly a conscience Bill and is unlikely to be whipped. It will survive the committee stage with amendments but will not survive the third stage without the government accepting significant amendments from the HoL.

This could be wishful thinking though.

Maybe the mp got her facts from Hollyoaks

Who do we need to be writing to about this? What a shitshow it will be. It's already getting hard for people to find therapists for children who AREN'T completely captured because the GC ones mutter in private but don't advertise it.

@SinnerBoy
Sorry forgot the link- here are Labour's lies to get elected in the national press.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/12/18/labour-will-let-trans-people-use-some-single-sex-spaces/

I shouldn't be shocked at the contemptuous behaviour of our country's leadership, the lack of integrity and contempt for women, but somehow, I still am. It really damages public trust.

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
Cots on twitter only wrote about the 'parenthood' original wording so for the rest of the original briefing someone on mumsnet is bound to have saved it. Or you could email in to the address on the document and ask them to send the original (doubt they will).

@SinnerBoy Here's the telegraph article (if you can read- may be paywalled) confirming Labour are happy to give men who say they are women access to what should be SS spaces (thus excluding women).

Thanks Chariot. Is there a way to find out if that document has been edited? The date says 26 Nov, which was one of the two days in court for FWS I think?

Chariothorses

This is a male rights movement. (After confirmation today from Anneliese Dodds that Labour are happy women who need SS spaces are being excluded from everything from changing rooms to abuse support my revulsion at the cruelty/ misogyny/ lies of Labour MPs knows no bounds. ).

Bloody Hell! That's almost unbelievable, it's difficult to believe that she / they could be so crass.

It's so fucking bonkers. Was I subject to 'conversion therapy' when my therapist gently challenged the thinking that made me petrified of flying? Should they have affirmed only my anxious flyer self and my belief (not rooted in reality) that air travel was highly unsafe?

Gender questioning kids won't be able to get the kind of care Cass recommends -quality mental health support -; as the therapists will all be too scared of being found guilty of conversion therapy.

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
Well interestingly, I remembered it from this briefing last month but the reference to labour's plan to remove spousal consent is no longer there.
researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-10137/CBP-10137.pdf
Now it just says ' A consequence of one person in a marriage gaining legal gender recognition may be to change a marriage from being that of an opposite sex couple to that of a same sex couple'.

so either I remember wrongly or they have amended it ( any amendment has been done following the FWS court hearing- perhaps someone saved the original version?) .The writers have also amended the 'parenthood' references ( originally the briefing said transparents only remained mother or father for existing children- and the Cots group complained and got it corrected to reflect reality and the Supreme Court judgement).

Here's past references to it:
labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/the-spousal-consent-clause-in-the-gra-an-important-protection-for-women/
there's a useful legal assessment here:
https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/06/10/womens-consent-matters/

It would be good to know that in addition to the Mengele inspired medics sterilising children, the politicians who promote these dangerous ideas are also held personally accountable in the courts.
It won't happen - they're teflon in terms of accountability.

I wonder if the minister is willing to be personally liable when the lawsuits come in?

Don't forget Labour have also confirmed they are going to remove the Spousal Exit Clause

Where did you see that @Chariothorses? Not doubting you but wondering if this is more bad news they're dumping out before Christmas

Don't forget Labour have also confirmed they are going to remove the Spousal Exit Clause which protects a spouse (mainly heterosexual women) from finding their marriage has been forcibly and unilaterally 'converted' from a heterosexual marriage to what the state records as a 'same sex' marriage without their consent. (At present he gets an interim GRC, which either partner can use to end the marriage, so both have equal say in their marriage).

It mostly protects heterosexual women/ religious believers as usually it's men who decide in middle age after fathering kids they are the women. Labour plans to remove the balance of power and the distress caused will be immense. This government really want to target women and religious believers to cause as much harm and distress as they can.

This is a male rights movement. (After confirmation today from Anneliese Dodds that Labour are happy women who need SS spaces are being excluded from everything from changing rooms to abuse support my revulsion at the cruelty/ misogyny/ lies of Labour MPs knows no bounds. ).

I think that there will be quite a few therapists who would say they cannot work with trans-identifying young people (especially) if they are worried about the 'conversion ban'.

I think the more tactically-minded trans activists very much have their eye on ethical and critically thinking therapists withdrawing from the area of gender identity creating a vacuum to be filled.

Yes -pushing this through against countless well thought out, evidenced arguments will yet again be saying the quiet bit out loud. That the demands of men with a fetish are prioritised over children's safety and wellbeing. The general public are already aware of how much harm this has done to children and are no longer prepared to be bullied into silence about it.

Yes, it's difficult to understand why they would push forward legislation that is so ill-conceived it will cause them nothing but trouble - as if they weren't in enough trouble already. So perhaps that's the explanation.

I do wonder whether this is one of the pay offs for all the freebies given to labour MPs by a Stonewall ally (Lord Ali)? He must have wanted something for all that investment and maybe this is part of it?

@JellySaurus

If a person claims a trans identity, it suddenly becomes everybody's business because it depends upon everybody pretending that something patently untrue is true.

On everyone pretending that something patently untrue is true OR on everyone genuinely coming to believe that while women (and men) exist, we've somehow got it wrong who was who all through human history , and the thing that makes a person a woman is not her female sex but something in her mind, and actually women can be either sex. And that thinking we need women only spaces is right but not because of how society treats female bodies but because it's really important people take their clothes off only in front of people who have the same type of mind.

This will blow up in Labour's face unless they can square the impossible circle of completely excluding children from this. They'll also need to exclude professionals (social workers, psychologists, therapists) and parents / family members from asking mentally vulnerable children and adults about why they think a sex change is the solution to their mental illness.

Fortunately there's now a wealth of informed organisations able to point out how this will allow trans extremists to employ their preferred methods of coercive control and try to bully parents and responsible adults out of safeguarding children and young people.

It's a sop to the trans extremists still nestling under Labour's banner but in the light of Cass and the collapse of trans dominated healthcare for children, they'll struggle to produce anything coherent - even a legal definition of gender identity.