The government has attempted to allay concerns that a proposed ban on supposedly abusive 'conversion therapy' practices will necessarily involve a clampdown on the freedoms of speech and religion.
Critics of the plan point out that abusive practices are already illegal and that a law specifically targeting counselling for people with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria is unnecessary at best and dangerous at worst.
Of particular concern is the exact definition of the word “abusive”, with the Free Speech Union noting, “The difference between a caring, thoughtful clinical conversation and an ‘abusive’ practice will depend entirely on how the legislation is drafted and how it is enforced. We will be scrutinising both with great care.”
Similar concerns have been raised in Parliament. In a recent debate Baroness Fox told the House of Lords the “loose definition of ‘abusive’ ... could indeed trigger criminalising parents; for example, if you are a mum who says to a teenager who says that they are born in the wrong body, ‘No you’re not’. That is a challenge to their identity, and that could even trigger social services investigations.”
In response Labour’s Lord Collins, who is himself gay, said the bill would not “interfere with the rights of parents”. In response to another question from the Bishop of Leicester, Martyn Snow, raising concerns about prayer and counselling falling foul of the law, Lord Collins said the bill “should not” prevent religious leaders giving their views on LGBT matters.
"My Lords, I welcome the intentions behind the draft bill. Indeed, in 2017, the General Synod of the Church of England passed a Motion, in fact by a large majority, which called on the Government to outlaw conversion therapy," said Bishop Snow.
"However, I want to mention today that I have a number of concerns about the drafting of the bill, and indeed particular concerns about the lack of clarity on the difference between harmful conversion practices and perfectly acceptable practices of pastoral care and indeed prayer, which is much needed for those who are in difficulty. If this difference is not crystal-clear within the legislation, it will potentially have a very significant negative impact on what I believe is legitimate spiritual care offered by faith groups."
In response to a question from the bishop about what consultations have taken place with faith groups, Lord Collins said: "The Government have no intention of interfering with people’s right to religious belief and expression. We are not seeking to prevent people living a life that aligns with their religious or cultural values.
"This is not about telling people that they cannot hold certain views. We are targeting clear instances of abuse here, and we are very clear about sending a message that LGBT+ people deserve to be safe from harm."
He said that under the bill, an offence will have occurred "if someone seeks to change a person’s identity through abusive conversion practices that result in harm".
"A religious leader teaching their faith’s views on LGBT+ matters should not be affected by this draft bill," said Lord Collins.
"The principle that the right reverend Prelate raises with regard to counselling and advice is covered by what I said about parental responsibility and medical advice. These things are absolutely covered in the bill, but we will address these questions in the pre-legislative scrutiny."
The government has attempted to give similar assurances in the House of Commons, with Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson earlier arguing that the proposed bill "does not remove anyone's right to freedom of expression or religion, or to choose how to parent; this bill simply prevents abuse".
Many Christian groups remain unconvinced, with The Christian Institute, Christian Concern and the Evangelical Alliance all warning about the possible dangers to free speech.
Peter Lynas, UK director of the Evangelical Alliance, has described the proposal as “deeply concerning”, adding, "The proposals fundamentally undermine the role of parents and carers while also ignoring freedom of religion and belief. The definition of abusive practices is entirely subjective and could leave a wide range of people at risk of prosecution even years later.”
Members of the ex-gay community have also spoken out against attempts to introduce a 'conversion therapy' ban, saying "We exist."
