Conversion therapy ban discussion in the House of Commons

[jellyjellyinmybelly]

After PMQ s today I kept the telly on and there was a labour minister in a blue jacket (didn't catch her name sorry). She said they're pressing ahead with a full conversion therapy ban which will be fully trans inclusive and will protect lgbt plus people. She contrasted how Labour were definitely going to push this through compared to how the tories wouldn't.

She was asked whether parents would be consultant if their child is gender questioning and she didn't answer and said they were analysing the responses to the consultation. A man with a northern Irish accent asked whether adults could opt into faith based discussions and this be allowed and she said she'd look into that.

Interestingly Jess Phillips was sitting behind her on the front bench and looked defensive with arms folded. I wonder what she really thinks!

What does everyone think? I worry about the proposed conversion ban which could outlaw talking therapy for gender questioning children that isn't fully affirmative.

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?

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?"

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.

@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. '

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