Conversion Therapy and Cass

[RedToothBrush]

So Cass raised concerns about homosexual children and trans activism.

The Mens Gay Network (Dennis Noel Kavanagh) has been pretty vocal about this and concerns about 'transing away the gay'. A number of whistleblower at the Tavistock raised the concern too.

Then there's been the Conversion Therapy bill which stalled in parliament because many MPs stood up and stated how problematic it was.

Yet Labour in their manifesto have committed to effectively making it impossible for doctors to use non affirmation only approaches because of the threat of being accused of conversion therapy. Counter to the findings of the Cass Review. Dennis Kavanagh has had a full on rant about this today and how Keir Starmer saying today that he would implement Cass is totally at odds with Labour putting this in their manifesto.

He's right. The two are completely at odds and not mutually compatible policies. One will have to give at some point. It's definitely worth catching up with his thoughts on this.

Anyway, Tamara Sears wrote a thread about the following 3days ago (AT TamaraSearsUK). I found it slightly difficult to understand in places and it's not easy to copy&paste plus there's a significant update on a none linked post today, this is the jist of it rephrased:

There was this document drawn up by the Therapist sector against conversion therapy called Memorandum of Understanding Against Conversion Therapy (MoU2).

One group - the UK council for psychotherapy (UKCP) decided not to support the document citing safeguarding concerns.

You can read about it here
https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/news/ukcp-update-on-conversion-therapy/

A group (not sure of their actual mandate or purpose) - "Therapists against conversion therapy and transphobia' decided to create a petition to remove the entire UKCP Board as a result.

Turns out the MoU2 was written in no small part by some of this bunch. And they are unsurprisingly full on TRAs. Transgender trend have looked into this before
https://www.transgendertrend.com/product/captured-the-full-story-behind-the-memorandum-of-understanding-on-conversion-therapy/

Malcolm Clark appears to have done some digging on them in the past. They are big on shit bias research by the looks of it.

The chair of the UKCP went on record with the Telegraph saying

Dr Chris Buckland
I stand by my quote in the Telegraph today: “As chair, I will not allow the UKCP to be bullied into turning a blind eye to the safety of children.”

The safety of children has to be the number one priority to a regulator of child psychotherapy.

Now this afternoon Chris Buckland resigned and the attempt to remove the entire board is still going ahead as planned. Which is kinda worrying to say the least.

Tamara finishes this main thread saying

How serendipitous. The UKCP has just sent an email updating its members. Turns out that the MoU2 is a problematic document for the lawyers and the insurance costs for AT UKCPUpdates have now gone sky high. So that's our registration fees up next year. Thanks for nothing AT TACTT

To make it clearer the key point on the attached image is that MoU was cited in two claims against UKCP and this has affected its public liability insurance premiums. They've increased from £3k to £90k.

This is a good indication of how things are going to go over the next couple of years. Sky high premiums on anything or anyone who goes near gender identity in any way. Insurers see the whole field as a massive risk now.

How this is good for any child caught in the middle I have no idea.

What a total mess. And it's appalling that we are seeing intimidation for having different opinions and trying to listen to Cass being a feature of these events

(And yes all highly relevant to Rosie Duffield and whether she gets some support from within Labour like Diane Abbott did...)

I appreciate the discussion has moved on somewhat but my definition of trans is,,,
anyone who, for any reason, wants everyone to pretend they are not the sex they are.

I'm pretty confident that covers all bases including non-binary.

Thanks for sharing your experience @PepeParapluie - I'd love to know, if you don't mind sharing, what was most helpful to you during that time?

Thanks @DameMaud for your kind words and thank you to @RedToothBrush for starting this thread and for your commentary on the need for unambiguous language in law. I was also struck by your comparison to the Dignity in Dying movement, which I happen to support as I am constantly horrified by the overreach of the MAID scheme in Canada.

The vote to remove the Board of UKCP takes place between June 20th and July 3rd

Tonight they did an event titled ‘Hear from the UKCP board of Trustees’

Tamara Sears AT TamaraSearsUK
The UKCP put forward its position in more detail. Nothing new to report other than they do not intend to rejoin the MoU as it was originally created as an activist document but is not really fit for legal use. Given that legal cases now refer to it, this has become problematic as insurance premiums have gone up because of it. They intend to coordinate with other organisations to draft a more detailed ban against conversion therapy reflecting the law and will be putting together a working group to facilitate this. Then lots of apologies for the lack of clear communication and a promise to learn from it, as well as a dedication to ensuring the LGBTQ+ community is protected. Nothing about whether GC therapists will be protected or considered. It was recorded and a copy will be sent out to all therapists via email. Voting will begin on Thursday 20th and run until 3rd July. I don't think their position will satisfy the petitioners, but hopefully it will reassure the more moderates in the middle so they are more confident to vote for the Board. This is purely now a numbers game to #SaveUKCP.

^^

@RedToothBrush "You come up with a range of proposals and examine whether they would be effective and they would work and what problems there might be. You discuss this with various interest groups so that you limit the possibility of missing important issues. This also helps you bring people along with change at a later stage."
I know someone who was part of a focus group for the Australian Labor party when they were developing their manifesto. Maybe seven years ago now? His recommendation was that they not seek to pass legislation banning conversion therapy. He had been a vicitm of a para-Church organisation that practised a sort of religious conversion program. There are all sorts of issues with religious freedom if legislation is taken to apply to what people do in Bible study sessions but, also, these groups 99% of the time it's the gay person who has sought out the group. He had also, as a young man, asked to a mainstream psychotherapist about therapy to stop him being gay. I must admit I didn't clarify this with him, but I assume his thinking was that if this psychologist (may also have been a psychiatrist) was worried about legislation they would have to have just said, no, sorry, end of session. Rather than saying the usual sorts of rapport building things like, lets explore that further (and maybe even having to dangle the possibility of that happening while trust is built, given the morass of self loathing and desperation a person could be in).

When the (Australian) Labor party released their plan to support conversion therapy bans he went all out publically saying what a good thing this was. Not many people will know that his advice to them, at the policy development stage, was to not do this.
I'm always frustrated by the screed my posts turn into but my point really is that I don't know where this whole push for conversion therapy bans came from. I think there were other focus groups that demonstrated to the Labor party they would look good to a big enough cohort of voters if they put this in their manifesto. And I don't think you can always know what individuals think when they come out in support of a party line in public.

It’s difficult to say really, I think it was a combination of things. I had a couple of very patient and supportive friends who would listen and gently challenge, but not in a combative way. And I eventually found a very good counsellor I got on well with, who was empathetic and didn’t try to impress her viewpoint or explanations on me. I was able to really explore the underlying causes with her.

There was also just the element of time - I grew up and the intensity of being a teenager softened. And time helped put distance between me and the underlying events that had caused me to feel so unhappy with myself and my body.

Also, breaking away from pro-anorexia websites and tumblr was very helpful, but very difficult because who wants to be away from everyone who agrees with them and surrounded by people who say they’re ill or wrong or crazy?

I suppose as with all these things it’s highly individual and what will help will depend on what the original cause of the issues is or was. That’s why it’s so important that therapists, counsellors etc have the ability to explore all of those potential issues without fear.

Thank you @PepeParapluie on this: "That’s why it’s so important that therapists, counsellors etc have the ability to explore all of those potential issues without fear."

I couldn't agree more.

In a rush, but quick share of Venice Allen interviewing Wes Streeting- first topic discussed is conversion ban/Cass:

Thanks for sharing this

Problem is he's referred to "trans young people" - which is the issue. Children aren't trans.

Trans is an adult aesthetic decision to change their body based on an idea it might improve mental health (and other drivers, obviously.)

And that's the issue with that Cass report; it still appeared to have the idea that some children are "trans." And from a young age.

Oh god the more light less heat trope.

Give it time.

We can't move from a to c at lightning speed. We are currently at station B Had Cass gone that far, it would have been accused of bigotry and erasing the existance of trans people. It would have undermined it. The position as it stands, makes it harder to ignore the report as a whole.

I note here, that Cass didn't have evidence to say there no such thing as a trans child. Cass has evidence to say that there is a problem with a huge number of children identifying as trans. But Cass can't produce an evidence based argument that theres no such thing as a trans child either - that a consquence of doing a report properly and not necessarily a reflection of what Hilary Cass herself might think. Its beyond the scope of Cass to do this tbh.

But the Cass Report SHOULD have had the impact of anyone discussing this properly should be refering to Trans-Identifying Children rather than Trans Children as best practice - because of desistance and concerns over it being a cohort which is heterogenus with multiple complex needs.

I spoke to my Lib Dem candidate about this yesterday. Where I live Lib Dem are likely to win. He was clear that Dr Cass’s report is important and good, and that it has brought something to this debate that we can all agree on and focus on. When I asked about banning trans conversion therapy he was not very clear on that. However when I (and, to my pleasant surprise, others) explained what the effect of it would be, he seemed surprised and said he would not agree with doing that. He said he is going to look into it some more and come back to me with more detail about his and the party’s position on this issue.

To my surprise and relief, a trans person who was there agreed that the ban on conversion therapy would be a bad idea and talked about the high rate of autism among the support group they attended. The candidate was surprised by the high correlation between autism and gender identity issues which suggests he is perhaps not very well versed.

Anyway, I am going to follow up with some more detail to him by email today to really explain this issue some more, and also to ask about the non binary ID policy and single sex spaces.

Problem is he's referred to "trans young people" - which is the issue.

Yes. This does seem to show a still incomplete grasp of things.

Terminology that communicates understanding- to refer to these children and young people and what's happening with them, is another area of definition requiring more clarity/reality.

As Cass uses the term 'gender questioning', trust in Streeting (or anyone else) being fully on board, would be greater if they used the same terms I would think?

Personally, I like something like 'gender-exploring', but hey, I'm not in charge!

This sounds really productive @PepeParapluie
Well done to you for opening someone up to thinking more critically on this.
These face to face conversations all add up I think, and where we can do our bit (and helps relieve the pressure of feeling powerless in it all too I've found) Even if it does tend to rely on an existing openess from the other person to consider things they hadn't thought through before. I suspect there are way more people like this (just unaware) than staunch activists.
Sounds like you are a good communicator too.

But the Cass Report SHOULD have had the impact of anyone discussing this properly should be refering to Trans-Identifying Children rather than Trans Children as best practice

Sorry. Just catching up with the thread after the video drop so only just caught this from @RedToothBrush
saying same thing about the language.

I'm really getting, and wanting to hone in on, how key language is in all this (I know. Slow on the uptake).
Properly seeing how it's the language (in all the areas) that is so much of this mess, and so how important is to focus on language- epsecially where any ground has been gained in bringing language back to naming reality.

Oh Fuck's sake Wes. Talking about it with more 'light less heat'. Fuck off.

If a trans identifying person with a penis wants to share changing rooms with my prepubescent or pubescent daughter and get zir cock out, it shouldn't be a case of 'both sides'. Unless you're in favour of children being props for penis-havers with a fetish.

Fucking fucks sake.

There is no fucking comprimise that doesn't result in destruction of child safeguarding and women's rights. None.

What's the compromise for the women / children who don't want to have to look at adult cock in their changing rooms and the cock-havers that will only accept forcing their way into spaces with unconsenting women and children.

They're not happy with third spaces. They've made that clear. And you've just said we need to compromise. How many Dolatowski victims is an acceptable number? How many women and children harmed?

ANSWER MY QUESTION WES!

Sorry I thought my first post didn't post. Anyway, it's a question Wes needs to wrap his mind around.

The 'both sides' thing is starting to give me the menopausal rage.

What next? Shall we 'both sides' the desire of those identifying as minor attracted people and lobbying for scrapping the age of consent to have careers as teachers in schools.

The candidate was surprised by the high correlation between autism and gender identity issues which suggests he is perhaps not very well versed.

Aka hasn't read Cass given it's a very key part of it!

Yes pretty much. But he seemed open to listening and accepted he didn’t know everything or know best on this topic which as @DameMaud is a start. I’ve sent him some bits on Cass and the GMN response to the labour manifesto, so hopefully that offers some food for thought. There are supposed to be only tens of votes between him winning and losing here, so I am hoping he is motivated to want every vote.