Gone are the times when everyone nodded along to the idea of a ‘conversion therapy’ ban, says Communications Manager Paul Huxley.
As long as Christian Concern has existed, we’ve been defending the freedom of people to receive prayer and/or counselling to help them live in line with the body God gave them: male or female, with sexual attractions and behaviours that match how they are made.
We stood by people like Lesley Pilkington and Mike Davidson when virtually no other public figure or organisation would defend them. When Theresa May and Boris Johnson first pushed plans for ‘conversion therapy’ bans, few stood with us to highlight the damage that such a ban would cause.
Things have changed.
Labour’s draft bill to ban conversion practices was published yesterday. Politicians, commentators and campaigners are panning the bill. No more do people say “yes conversion therapy is terrible but please carve out an exemption for [whatever they care about]”.
What’s changed?
Trans-inclusive, parent-inclusive ban
Like the Conservatives before them, Labour intend the ban to be trans-inclusive.
That means that the label ‘conversion practice’ can be used for someone who seeks to help someone reconcile their feelings to their body – to help them accept their body rather than to go down the route of trans ideology, mutilating their body with puberty blockers, hormones, breast binders and reassignment surgery.
Because the doctors who give or suggest such treatments are counted as healthcare providers, they are exempt from Labour’s ban – unless their care is deemed to fall well below professional expectations.
But parents are not exempt. And it is very easy to see how a parent encouraging their child (particularly a teenager) will be accused of abusive conversion practices if this bill is made law.
Parents will be under fire
The draft bill starts by defining conversion practices. The definition is all-encompassing, essentially saying it applies to any action that intends to cause an individual to have or not have a particular sexual orientation or transgender identity. Or any act to cause a person to believe that this is the case.
The language here is very long-winded but amounts to any attempt of a person to direct a person’s sexuality or gender identity, or to make them believe that this has happened.
But the government does not aim to ban all conversion practices – only those that it defines as ‘abusive’.
It says that the question of whether a conversion practice is abusive should be “determined by reference to all the circumstances of the case, including in particular the nature of the conduct”.
This vagueness allows ‘abusive’ to be very broadly or very narrowly interpreted. It gives a list that should be considered when making this judgement:
(a) words or behaviour of a sexual nature;
(b) violent or threatening words or behaviour;
(c) controlling or coercive words or behaviour;
(d) use of economic pressure;
(e) use of psychological or emotional pressure.
Just about everyone would read this list and say they’d never consider doing any of the above. But it’s easy to see how some of these phrases could be twisted against parents in particular.
Parents are responsible for their children. They economically provide for them. They are in positions of authority within the household. They guard the life of the family and can be responsible for the behaviour of other children.
So a rebellious teenager who starts to identify in a different gender could very easily accuse their parents of abusive conversion practices. Any rules laid down about what goes on in the house, rules about how the teen dresses, even refusing to use a chosen name could be called controlling or coercive words and behaviours.
Any restrictions or limitations on how the teen uses money can be branded as economic pressure.
And if the parents tell the teen’s siblings to continue using the teen’s given name and accurate pronouns, this could be labelled as psychological or emotional pressure. That’s 3 out of 5!
Protection orders would be abused
The criminal charges, which can receive an unlimited fine and up to 5 years in prison, require “serious harm to the individual’s physical or mental health” or “serious alarm or distress … which has a substantial adverse effect on their usual day-to-day activities”.
In the case of a parent acting in the ways mentioned above, this would be hard to prove. But the bill also introduces conversion practice protection orders where courts can put in place orders to supposedly protect people deemed to be in danger of such harm.
It is very easy to see how this measure in particular would be used against parents given no evidence of actual harm would be needed – just the claim that harm would be done if the court does not intervene.
Government admits not all ‘conversion practices’ are abusive
It is worth noting that the legislation, combined with the explanatory notes, admit that not all conversion practices are abusive. Note 22 seeks to explain the need for this law by claiming that some forms of abuse are not covered by other criminal offenses, which it lists. But it ends with the clear message: “Not all conversion practices include these elements.”
This is true – in fact, it is true in nearly every case. Normal prayer and conversations with a trusted pastor, counsellor or therapist would not, in reality, be abusive in the 5 ways the bill lays out.
However, the process will be the punishment.
If the bill becomes law, the definitions will be stretched well beyond their reasonable meanings. In particular, point E – ‘Psychological or emotional pressure’ – will be stretched to cover just about everything.
For example, a good, faithful Christian pastor teaches that sexual faithfulness means not having gay sex as part of his ordinary ongoing ministry. Someone in the church experiences same-sex attraction and reaches out for help. They receive prayer and some ordinary Christian discipleship. But this is interpreted as happening under psychological and emotional pressure because of the church’s teaching that gay sex is a sin. The person experiencing same-sex attraction sees this as emotional pressure because they claim they will be shunned by the church and told they’re going to hell if they don’t comply.
Reinterpretations, decades later
There is no limit on when this kind of claim could be made. There are many stories shared in the news about people who have received this kind of prayer or counselling in a church. They find it beneficial at the time, but later reject Christ and embrace a gay lifestyle. Because – decades on – they experience depression or anxiety, they attribute it to their experience of this prayer and counselling.
This bill is a charter for pastors to be put under the pump for this kind of normal pastoral support.
I suspect it would be very difficult for a pastor to be convicted in this way, but not before they are dragged through months or years of trials.
Take a look at Matthew Grech in Malta – accused of a crime (‘advertising conversion practices’) that he transparently wasn’t guilty of and that had only become illegal after the accusation was made. He was still dragged through years of costly and time consuming hearings to defend himself. Even now, his case is subject to appeal.
Pastors should expect the same kind of treatment if accused of conversion practices.
Time, again, to stand
The draft bill will not protect anyone. It will only be weaponised against people who offer the kind of support that LGBTQ+-captured institutions do not offer – particularly pastors and parents.
The wonderful news is that over the years, many politicians and public figures are ready to vocally and energetically oppose this harmful bill.
By warning your friends, family and church about the bill, you will merely be saying what many others are saying – it helps no one and harms many.
This is vital, Christian work. Because the gospel is meaningless without change.
The gospel converts us from death to life. And it doesn’t leave us unchanged – we are transformed from glory to glory. We lay our sins and our sinful desires at the foot of the cross and seek to follow Jesus Christ in everything.
This bill will stop people being able to access support as they seek that change. It will be used to punish pastors and parents for supporting people in normal, responsible ways.
That’s why we must cast off any pre-conceived notions about what ‘conversion practices’ are and oppose this ban.
Subscribe to our email updates to get more analysis of the bill in the weeks ahead, along with tools to help you stand against this unnecessary, dangerous bill.