Labour accused of ‘conversion therapy’: will it back off on a new law?

By James Kennedy

The NHS is forcibly carrying out ‘conversion therapy’ on young people at the behest of the new Government, several LGBT activists claim.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting has also had the same accusation made personally against him.

It is obviously a ludicrous claim, but why is it being made? Because the Government has sensibly maintained a legal ban on ‘puberty-blocking’ medication used on children. The powerful drugs have not been formally tested for use in gender medicine, but activists argue that preventing young people from accessing them is somehow abusive.

It is well-known that these drugs may have horrendous side-effects. Time and again, studies have shown that most childhood confusion around gender subsides in time – if, that is, puberty is allowed to take place normally.

Will the Labour Party now recognise that the push for a ‘conversion therapy’ law is driven by activists who want to shut down voices they disagree with? Can it admit that the campaign is seeking to criminalise those who won’t automatically affirm, even if they believe it is not in someone’s best interests? It must surely see the claims of ‘conversion therapy’ are so often divorced from any actual harm or abuse.

Contradictory position

When Labour was fighting its election campaign, many of us were struck by what appeared to be a contradictory position.

It claimed, on the one hand:

“So-called conversion therapy is abuse – there is no other word for it – so Labour will finally deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices, while protecting the freedom for people to explore their sexual orientation and gender identity.”

Yet, in the same document, it promised:

“We will work to implement the expert recommendations of the Cass Review to ensure that young people presenting to the NHS with gender dysphoria are receiving appropriate and high-quality care.”

That might not immediately strike you as an inconsistent position to take. But, firstly, many of those advocating a ‘conversion therapy’ law have said that the Cass recommendations are a form of conversion therapy: that seeking not to automatically affirm children as another gender is an abusive ‘treatment’ that should be criminalised.

Secondly, the Cass Review itself made clear how dangerous a ‘conversion therapy’ law would be. It warned that a new law in this area could have a profound impact on vital support for children struggling with their gender. It said that clinicians are already terrified of being accused of carrying out ‘conversion therapy’ when they follow the most medically appropriate protocol.

Speaking to The Guardian, Dr Cass said she had been “really clear with the Government that any legislation would have to take inordinate care to not make workforce problems worse than they are”.

Sign up to the Let Us Pray campaign for updates - join the campaign.

See also: Swedish Govt lawyers advise against 'conversion therapy' law