Sex Matters: Response from MP about conversion therapy

[Ithinktheysaurus]

I wrote to my MP about the government consultation on its proposal to ban conversion therapy (using the template from Sex Matters) and received the below response. Did anyone else?

That is too small to read and the quality is so low that is blurs when I zoom in.

Can you take another pic with better light (put the flash onto "on" mode, not auto) and move the camera closer to the page please?

I just spent £200 on my new glasses and an eyetest, so I know it is not my vision.

OP, you've covered up the MP's name in the signature but it's still in the header - if you didn't want to reveal who it is you might want to ask MN to delete.

I can read it.

Seems a bit fence sitting to me. Kicking can down the road until the enquiry report comes out.

Same MP here, @Ithinktheysaurus. More or less the same response as yours, all the same core wording. He's young and ambitious, was being touted as a future star when May was in charge, and has sat on the fence for most issues waiting to see which way the wind is blowing.

My MP is Keir Starmer. I have emailed him several times on gender critical issues, including this one. He never replies.

Seems very noncommittal. Still, at least he didn’t trot out the “most marginalized community” rhetoric, which is a bonus. Does it cover all or indeed any of the points you made? I haven’t seen the template and can’t look it up right now.

It's interesting he repeatedly uses LGBT but in the final paragraphs only mentions issues relating to the T. Was that in response to your correspondence or is he revealing the real priority of the bill?

I got a response from my Labour mp. Very general party approved statement in support of the Bill. Didn't demonstrate any interaction with either my personal comment or the sex matters information.

Sorry for my late reply, I had a busy few days and I appear to have lost the letter! I realised after I posted I hadn’t hidden the letter header, not to worry

The letter I sent read:

“I am writing to tell you urgently about a piece of legislation that the government is trying to rush through - starting with a consultation lasting just six weeks - that will put children and vulnerable people at risk.

The government is proposing to ban “conversion therapy”. This sounds straightforward; of course everybody condemns “gay cure” conversion therapies that used to go on, involving electric shock treatments, imprisonment and medication. But this has not been a practice in the UK for decades. There is no evidence that such abusive practices are happening now, and they are already illegal.

This legislation covers something different: “gender identity” and in particular explorative therapy offered to children and vulnerable people who are having issues with their gender.

Over the past few years there has been a massive rise in the number of children, particularly girls, becoming convinced they were “born in the wrong body” and seeking to take puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones. This is a controversial, experimental medical treatment for a complex mental health issue. We have also seen an increase in the number of young people “detransitioning” and regretting the irreversible changes made to their bodies.

This is a difficult medical issue, and the Department of Health has commissioned Dr Hillary Cass to undertake an independent review of the evidence and to recommend ways forward. Now is not the time to legislate with a simplistic approach that divides therapy into “affirmation” and “conversion” and which threatens to criminalise parents, teachers, therapists and social workers if they do not immediately accept a child’s own diagnosis that they are transgender.
I am attaching a briefing paper by the campaign group Sex Matters which gives a summary of the legislative proposal, and of concerns. They would be happy to talk to you if you have questions.

As your constituent, and someone who is deeply concerned about this legislation, I am asking for your help. Will you contact Mike Freer, Minister for Equalities, Liz Truss, Minister for Women and Equalities and Kemi Badenoch, Minister for Equalities and convey to them my concern?

Please ask them to (1) Extend the consultation period beyond 6 weeks, (2) Revisit the research evidence and (3) Wait until the Cass Review has completed its work.

With best wishes,
[signed]”

The response reads:

“I hope you are well. Thank you for contacting me about conversion therapy and puberty blockers.

The Government Equalities Office commissioned a large scale LGBT survey in 2017. Sadly, two per cent of respondents to the national LGBT survey said they had undergone conversion therapy in an attempt to ‘cure’ them of being LGBT. Unfortunately, in this survey, what conversion therapy entailed was not defined, nor were the respondents asked whether or not the conversion therapy referred to in their answer was offered in the UK.

The Government launched a six week consultation on how Ministers plan to ban practices of so called ‘conversion therapy’. The consultation was due to close on 10th December but has now been extended by eight weeks, this is to ensure the widest possible views are being taken into account. I would like to reassure you that the Equality Hub is engaging with a wide range of stakeholders who will hold different views in relation to conversion therapy. The government’s consultation invites views of the Government’s proposals from members of the public, victims of conversion therapy, LGBT organisations, faith groups, psychiatric and counselling bodies, charities and other interested stakeholders to ensure we hear from all voices in shaping the ban on conversion therapy. I would therefore encourage you to take part at the following link – www.gov.uk/government/consultations/banning-conversion-therapy

Although I appreciate that many of my constituents will have divergent views on the use of puberty blockers for children, I do believe that what unites us all is a desire to do what is best for our children and young people.

What I think we can all agree on is that it is crucial that the needs of children and young people with gender incongruence are properly met and understood and I welcome the fact that the NHS has recognised this. In September 2020 Dr Hilary Cass was asked to carry out an independent review of the gender identity development service. This review will be wide ranging in scope, with a focus on how care can be improved for children and young people.

I will continue to follow this sensitive issue closely; there is a moral imperative to get these issues right for the welfare and futures of our children and young people.

Yours sincerely,
[signed]"

Thanks OP, your post has reminded me to respond to the consultation (closes on 4 Feb).

The link to respond via Sex Matters (who have prepopulated some of the responses) is here:

sex-matters.org/take-action/conversion-therapy-consultation/

For anyone wavering as they don’t know quite what to put, or are not confident in articulating their concern, have a go anyway; every response counts. Someone once told me that politicians might not read every letter or submission, but they do ‘weigh’ them, so the numbers matter.

Typical non-commital response, Ithinktheysaurus. And doesn’t show any engagement with the very clear points you took the trouble to make.

But it may be an improvement on the response I had about three years ago from my (Labour) MP. I’d written about the need for single-sex space, and mentioned my own experience of childhood sexual assault by a stranger. He ignored that and my other points, and just virtue-signalled about the need to be fair (ie totally submissive) to these poor misunderstood trans people.

Your MP seems more concerned about not putting a foot wrong in either direction. Still being careful not to enrage the TRAs, but trying to sound reasonable to ordinary people.

It’s an encouraging sign if the template response has become a lot less preachily genderist. I’m only comparing two examples, of course. Could it be a little shuffling move in the right direction?

-- I've waited to post this till I had a reply from my MP, which I've just received. Needn't have bothered to wait for it: standard Stonewall waffle about trans rights, and how they must be protected from bigotry.

Not a response to what I had written. Not a word about the need for talking therapies to explore the reasons a person might feel they were in 'the wrong body', or the good sense of waiting before committing a healthy person to a lifetime of drugs and surgery.

@LilithOfEden Bim Afolami seems to have cautiously picked a side, judging by his recent re-tweets (which interestingly seems to have coincided with Keir dropping his TWAW/women-can-have-a-penis clanger). I suppose this means I will have to vote for him next week.

Your MP seems more concerned about not putting a foot wrong in either direction. Still being careful not to enrage the TRAs, but trying to sound reasonable to ordinary people.

@thinkingaboutLangCleg I'm just having a little stalk on social media. It's all just retweets so far. He retweeted Danny Kruger who said something along the lines of hoping every teenage girl who thinks she is a boy and thinks that surgically removing her breasts will make her happy reads this (link to detransition story). A (male) constituent has replied asking why he hates trans people so much and is he trying to supress some childhood trauma etc etc YAWN.

I suspect it's all for show and just taking advantage of Labour making themselves look like total idiots, although I hope not. Hopefully these sorts of replies don't put him off.