UK: Conversion therapy ban without trans and non-binary people is 'not a real ban'

In response to news of the UK government’s ban on ‘conversion therapy’ to go ahead but not cover trans or non-binary people, Lydia Parker, Amnesty International UK’s Programme Director, said:

“Conversion therapy is an abhorrent practice which tells LGBTI+ people they are ‘sick’ and ‘broken’.

“Such so-called ‘therapy’ can constitute torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and should be stamped out now with no excuses.

“A ban on conversion therapy that is not LGBTI+ inclusive is not a real ban on conversion therapy. Trans and non-binary people also need to be protected from this dangerous practice.

“Conversion therapy has no place anywhere in our society and we will continue to press for comprehensive bans in all parts of the UK.”

Minister met lobbyists ahead of conversion therapy U-turn, documents reveal

Revealed: Groups linked to anti-trans lobbying met Kemi Badenoch after privately urging equalities minister to drop conversion therapy ban

Adam Ramsay

Adam Bychawski
1 April 2022

Activists hand in a letter to the Cabinet Office calling for a ban on conversion therapy, 2021 |
ZUMA Press Inc / Alamy Stock Photo

A group that campaigns against trans rights has claimed credit for a government U-turn on ‘conversion therapy’ – as documents released to openDemocracy reveal its behind-the-scenes lobbying.

The LGB Alliance says it met with government ministers Mike Freer and Baroness Stedman-Scott in January this year to express “concerns” about the outlawing of the practice. Ministers had been pledging to ban it since 2018 – but, last night, ITV News revealed that the government now intends to exempt transgender people from protections.

Papers released to openDemocracy under the Freedom of Information Act show the LGB Alliance had earlier met with the equalities minister Kemi Badenoch in July 2020 after writing to her to argue against a ban on conversion therapy. But the government refused to disclose who was there, say what was discussed, or provide papers from the meeting.

Addressing Badenoch ahead of the meeting, the charity claimed that educational material relating to gender identity was “confusing” and said allowing trans people to self-identify was “harmful”.

In a separate briefing two months later, the organisation suggested to Badenoch that it should not be considered “conversion therapy” for psychotherapists to “examine” the “reasons” for young people being trans – an apparent precursor to the government’s decision to exempt anti-trans conversion therapy from its ban.

The LGB Alliance was founded in 2019 to oppose what it calls “gender ideology”, and has been called a ‘hate group’ by figures including Pride in London, Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer and the gay commentator Owen Jones. The organisation denies being transphobic but it has referred to trans women as “males identifying as females”. It was condemned by other LGBTIQ+ charities as “divisive and polarising”, and came under fire last year for apparently comparing LGBTIQ+ inclusion to bestiality.

Its founder Bev Jackson said in 2020 that she was “building an organisation to challenge the dominance of those who promote the damaging theory of gender identity”, while the organisation has similarly claimed that lesbian, gay and bisexual people’s “interests” are “under threat” from “attempts to introduce confusion between biological sex and the notion of gender”.

openDemocracy analysis of data released by the government additionally shows that the equalities minister had at least three further meetings with people or groups linked to anti-trans campaigning in the two years preceding the U-turn.

NHS England, in line with other expert bodies, has described all forms of conversion ‘therapy’ as ‘harmful’

Badenoch also met with Keira Bell and Paul Conrathe in May 2021 “to discuss how the proposed conversion therapy bill will effect [sic] under 18s questioning their gender,” according to government documents. Bell has made headlines as a rare example of someone who has ‘detransitioned’, and has campaigned to restrict the ability of other young people to access puberty blocking drugs. Conrathe is a lawyer and as well as working on Bell’s case against the clinic that treated her has also previously worked for anti-abortion groups. Twenty years ago, he opposed the equalisation of the age of consent for homosexual activity.

Finally, data released by the government also shows that ministers met with academic Anastassis Spiliadis last summer to discuss the impact of a ban on conversion therapy. Spiliadis’ research has been endorsed by the group Transgender Trend, which today hailed the conversion therapy U-turn and has previously been criticised by LGBTIQ+ charity Stonewall for “trying to spread damaging myths, panic and confusion” among young people.

Ministers also met with groups supportive of trans rights and the banning of conversion therapy, including Stonewall, the Conversion Therapy Surivors Group and the UK Council for Psychotherapy.

NHS England, in line with other expert bodies, has described all forms of conversion ‘therapy’ as ‘harmful’. The practice (also called ‘reparative therapy’ or ‘gay cure therapy’) refers to any therapeutic approach or view that assumes one sexual orientation or gender identity is innately preferable to another, and attempts to change someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity on that basis. In practice, this means changing people’s orientation or identity to cisgender heterosexuality.
Trans people twice as likely to be targeted

Stonewall CEO Nancy Kelley said: “After years of delay, in which LGBTQIA+ people across the UK have continued to suffer as a consequence of conversion practices, it is devastating that the UK government is breaking its promise to implement an inclusive ban that protects all our communities from abuse. Trans people are nearly twice as likely to be targeted by conversion practices and any ban that is not trans-inclusive abandons those that are most at risk.

“Countries around the world are acting to ban this homophobic, biphobic and transphobic abuse, and it is shameful that the UK government is choosing which LGBTQIA+ people deserve protection. We call on the governments of Wales and Scotland to protect all our communities and make good on their promise to end conversion practices in their own jurisdictions, and on the government of the UK to change its stance on protecting trans people.”

LGBTQ rights campaigner Peter Tatchell told openDemocracy: “It seems very likely that the government was influenced by these trans-hostile lobbyists to abandon its original intention for a comprehensive trans-inclusive prohibition on conversion practices.”

He added: “10 Downing Street has been captured by the anti-trans lobby. This calls into question the prime minister’s commitment to the equality laws that explicitly protect trans people.”

Explainer: What is ‘conversion therapy’?

The UK government has reportedly stepped back from including protections for trans people in its banning of conversion therapy.

 Here's what you need to know

Kerry CullinanKhatondi Soita Wepukhulu
1 April 2022, 

Illustration: Inge Snip


'Conversion therapy’ claims to change a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

The UK had pledged to outlaw it in England and Wales – but, on 31 March 2022, was reported to have stepped back from including protections for trans people. Elsewhere, Brazil, Ecuador, Germany and Malta have banned these practices, which range from ‘talk therapy’ to physical ‘treatments’. Several US states have done the same.

International health and human rights experts have condemned these treatments as “harmful” and “ineffective”. But they remain common in many places globally. A six-month investigation by openDemocracy in 2021 revealed that health centres in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania – including some funded by foreign aid money – had offered or referred undercover reporters to providers of such anti-gay ‘therapy’.

If you haven’t heard of ‘conversion therapy’ before, here’s what you need to know.

What is conversion therapy?

The phrase ‘conversion therapy’ – sometimes also called ‘reparative therapy’ or ‘gay cure’ – is used to describe a range of practices to change, suppress or divert a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Medical experts say the basic concept is meaningless: LGBTIQ identities are not diseases, and cannot be ‘changed’ via any psychological or physical ‘therapy’.

The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry says there is “no evidence to support the application of any ‘therapeutic intervention’ operating under the premise that a specific sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression is pathological”, and ‘conversion therapies’ “lack scientific credibility and clinical utility”.
Is it always physically violent?

No. You might have heard about the use of electric shocks, but ‘conversion therapy’ practices vary widely. They range from ‘talk therapy’, involving counselling, psychotherapy and faith-based interventions such as prayer, to physical ‘aversion therapy’, where the person is simultaneously subjected to a distressing sensation and a stimulus they associate with their sexuality or gender identity. Torture is also used, including so-called corrective rape.
Is it new?

While homosexuality has been stigmatised over time in many societies, Western scientists began to see it as a medical ‘disorder’ that could be ‘reversed’ in the late 19th century. Since then, LGBTIQ people have been subjected to many experiments. In the 1940s, homosexuality and ‘gender incongruence’ were classified as mental illnesses by Western medical associations, which spurred more efforts to find ‘cures’.

The rise of the gay rights movement in the 1960s and ’70s challenged these notions and practices, and the American Psychiatric Association (APA) removed homosexuality from its lists of mental illnesses in 1973. According to a 2020 report by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA), more than 60 medical associations globally have condemned ‘conversion therapy’.
Does it work?

No. Numerous medical groups, including the APA, have questioned the efficacy and evidence for such ‘treatments’. The APA says that attempts to change an individual’s sexual orientation “may occasionally result in temporary behavioural changes for some […] for limited periods of time, but that such changes are often accompanied by depression, anxiety, and other symptoms”. For others, no changes happen.
Who provides ‘conversion therapy’?

In some countries, public and private medical establishments still provide ‘conversion therapy’ – as evidenced by openDemocracy’s investigation. In others, religious organisations have largely taken over this role, offering ‘therapy’ that usually involves prayer – often in publicly humiliating ways – as well as ‘counselling’.
Who undergoes ‘conversion therapy’?

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) people undergo ‘conversion therapy’ practices in an attempt to modify, suppress or change their sexual orientation or gender identity to cis gender heterosexuality.
Are people forced to undergo this?

LGBTIQ people are often encouraged or pressured to undergo ‘conversion therapy’ by family members. We interviewed, in collaboration with local researchers, more than 50 survivors of these ‘treatments’ in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania. Some said that their families threatened their safety, threatened to denounce them publicly or to stop paying their school fees if they did not agree to having this ‘therapy’.

Some LGBTIQ people choose to undergo ‘conversion therapy’ themselves, which is a “manifestation of the scourge of both societal and internalised homophobia and transphobia”, according to the human rights group OutRight Action International.
What are the consequences of ‘conversion therapy’?

Practices to change one’s gender and sexuality are “inherently degrading and discriminatory” said Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Africa director at the human rights NGO the International Commission of Jurists.

Research has shown that these practices have lasting psychological effects. A 2018 US study found that young LGBTIQ people who reported undergoing 'conversion therapy' were “more than twice as likely to report having attempted suicide”.
Do any organisations support survivors of ‘conversion therapy’?

LGBTIQ people in East Africa who have undergone ‘conversion therapy’ and are seeking support can contact The Taala Foundation (Uganda), The Gay and Lesbian Coalition of Kenya (GALCK) and LGBT Voice (Tanzania).

Editor's note: This explainer on conversion therapy was originally published in July 2021. In the wake of news about the UK government's partial U-turn on banning the practice in England and Wales, we have republished it with minor amendments.

UK
What is conversion 'therapy' and why do people want it banned?

CATCHING UP TO CANADA

Ross McGuinness
Updated Tue, 5 December 2023 

There have been sustained calls for conversion 'therapy' to be banned in the UK. (Alamy) (Vuk Valcic)

MPs are reportedly set to introduce a bill this week that would ban so-called conversion "therapy".

Backbench MPs have drafted legislation to outlaw the controversial practice after the government - which has previously committed to banning the practice - did not include it in its legislative agenda in the King's Speech last month.

ITV News said the private members' bill (bills introduced by MPs and Lords who are not government ministers) would be aimed at banning all forms of conversion therapy and will be tabled in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

It has been drafted by Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle and has the support of nine Conservative MPs, including Caroline Nokes, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, and Alicia Kearns, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

The legislation will not be subjected to a vote until March 2024 at the earliest, ITV News said.
Recommended reading

Government accused of ‘frightful negligence’ over lack of conversion 'therapy' ban (PA Media)


Government kicks conversion 'therapy' ban down the road (The Conversation)


Government slammed for ‘total moral failure’ over ‘conversion therapy’ ban (Attitude)

"Some of the biggest social reforms in this country have happened via private members' bills," Russell-Moyle told ITV News.

"I was overwhelmed with support from all sides of the House for this reform.

"Too many have suffered for too long; we have a responsibility to ensure no one else must suffer from this practice."

Yahoo News UK examines the controversial practice and what the government has promised in the past.
What is conversion 'therapy'?

According to the British Psychological Society (BPS), so-called conversion "therapy" refers to "attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, based on the assumption that being LGBT+ should be ‘cured’".

The practice isn't considered to be an actual "therapy" by health professionals.

A number of organisations, including the BPS, NHS England and the Royal College of Psychiatrists, have signed the 2017 Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK.

It reads: "Conversion therapy is the term for therapy that assumes certain sexual orientations or gender identities are inferior to others and seeks to change or suppress them on that basis.

"Conversion therapy in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation (including asexuality) is unethical, potentially harmful and is not supported by evidence."

The practice may include prayer, but in its most extreme forms also features physical violence, food deprivation and even exorcism.

Campaigners are frustrated with the government's failure to ban conversion 'therapy'. (PA) (Avpics)
When will conversion therapy be banned?

The bill to be tabled by MPs this week will not be voted on until next March, meaning any ban is some time away.

According to LGBTQ+ charity Stonewall, conversion "therapy" is already banned in countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Canada, France and New Zealand.
What has the UK government said about conversion 'therapy'?

A ban was first proposed by then prime minister Theresa May in 2018, before it was downgraded to not include transgender people by her successor, Boris Johnson.

Rishi Sunak’s government said in January it would ban conversion therapy for “everyone”, including transgender people.

Watch: Then prime minister Theresa May calls conversion 'therapy' an 'abhorrent practice'


However, despite being laid out in two Queen's speeches, the ban was dropped from last month's King's Speech, sparking a wave of criticism of the government, which said it needed more time to draft the appropriate legislation.

Commons leader Penny Mordaunt said last month: “Bringing an end to these practices is a manifesto commitment, it remains a manifesto commitment."

Downing Street has maintained that the practice is “abhorrent”, but said time is needed to work out a policy on the “complex” area in order to avoid unintended consequences.

Labour has pledged to introduce a “no loopholes” trans-inclusive ban on conversion therapy if it wins the next general election.

A proposal to ban conversion 'therapy' is set to go before the House of Commons. (PA) (Avpics)
What has been the reaction?

The government has been criticised for its failure to fulfil its pledge to ban conversion "therapy".

The Bishop of London, the Rt Rev Dame Sarah Mullally, said she was disappointed that legislation was not included in the King's Speech.

“The General Synod of the Church of England voted to call on the government to ban conversion therapies in 2017," she said.

"It remains firm that abuse of power in this way must be prevented.”

Speaking after the King's Speech, Robbie de Santos, director of external affairs at Stonewall, said: The UK government’s failure to deliver a ban on conversion practices after five years of promises is an act of frightful negligence – in doing so, it has given the green light for the abuse against LGBTQ+ people to continue unchecked."

NHS Providers said it was “deeply concerned by the omission of a ban on conversion therapy”.

The Royal College of Nursing's chief nurse, Professor Nicola Ranger, said: “It’s been five wasted years of hollow promises to ban these abhorrent practices that nursing staff know have no medical basis.”

Conversion therapy is now illegal in Canada

Rachel Aiello

CTVNews.ca Online Politics Producer
 Friday, January 7, 2022 

OTTAWA -- Conversion therapy is now illegal in Canada, marking a major milestone in LGBTQ2S+ rights in this country.

After parliamentarians came together to unanimously pass legislation to eradicate the harmful practice in late 2021, the Criminal Code sanctions came into force on Jan. 7.

That means that now, anyone who looks to subject someone of any age, consenting or not, to so-called conversion therapy could face up to five years in prison.

As well, if someone is found to be promoting, advertising, or profiting from providing the practice, they could face up to two years in prison.

Conversion “therapy,” as it has been called, seeks to change a person's sexual orientation to heterosexual or gender identity to cisgender. It can include seeking to repress someone’s non-heterosexual attraction, or repressing a person’s gender expression or non-cis gender identity.

These practices can take various forms, including counselling and behavioural modification, and they have been opposed by numerous health and human rights groups. There continue to be calls for further mental health and educational supports for those who have survived conversion therapy.

After years of calls for action and past failed attempts to pass a bill to ban conversion therapy, the accelerated all-party effort—despite some after-the-fact concerns raised by a few Conservative MPs—has been praised by political leaders as well as by LGBTQ2S+ advocates both in Canada and abroad.

Few countries have criminalized conversion therapy, and Canada now has what the federal Liberal government has described as “among the most comprehensive” protections in the world.

Related Stories
Conversion therapy to be illegal in Canada in 30 days
Here are some of the new laws coming in 2022
New data suggests conversion therapy practices are still common across Canada
Senate passes bill to ban conversion therapy
House of Commons unanimously agrees to pass bill to ban conversion therapy
Feds table broadened bill to ban conversion therapy in Canada
Trudeau vows conversion therapy bill his government failed to pass will be priority if re-elected

Canada Bans ‘Conversion Therapy’

The law, which takes effect on Friday, puts Canada in the company of more than a dozen countries that have banned the widely discredited practice.


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada, right, shook hands with Erin O’Toole, the Conservative leader, after the unanimous adoption of legislation banning so-called conversion therapy last month.

Credit...Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press, via Associated Press

By Christine Hauser

NEW YORK TIMES
Jan. 6, 2022

A Canadian law banning so-called conversion therapy is poised to go into effect on Friday, making it a crime to provide or promote services intended to change or repress a person’s sexual orientation or gender expression.

With the new law, Canada’s criminal code will prohibit forcing someone to undergo conversion therapy; taking a minor abroad to take part; and profiting from, promoting or advertising the practice. Violations can draw sentences of up to five years’ imprisonment.

“This is an incredibly important step to making sure queer and trans people in Canada feel valid and deserving of full protection,” said Michael Kwag, a policy director at the Community-Based Research Center in Toronto, which researches the health of people of diverse sexualities and genders.

“It also sends a strong message to the entire country that any attempt to change, deny or suppress the identity of queer and trans people is wrong,” he said in an interview.

The law was the Canadian government’s second attempt last year to bring an end to the widely discredited practice and its third since 2020. The previous bill was set aside in August after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who has described conversion therapy as “harmful” and “degrading,” called an election.

In November, David Lametti, Canada’s justice minister, and Marci Ien, the minister for women, gender equality and youth, resurrected the effort, introducing amendments that they said would make Canada’s protections against conversion therapy among the most comprehensive in the world.

Travis Salway, an assistant professor at Simon Fraser University who has researched the controversial practice, said some of the debate over the bill included concerns about religious freedom, such as whether a pastor could be charged if asked to speak to a person about gender identity.

The law goes further than the previous two bills because it broadens the consent issue to protect both adults and minors, said Nicholas Schiavo, the executive director of No Conversion Canada, a nonprofit organization that lobbied to support the bill.

“The intention behind the first two were good, but they left a loophole for adults to undergo conversion therapy,” he said. “They can’t consent to something fraudulent.”

The bill was passed through a unanimous consent motion by the House of Commons on Dec. 1 and the Senate on Dec. 7, after Conservatives who had opposed previous legislation on the subject embraced it. On Dec. 8 it was given royal assent, a procedural stamp that started a 30-day clock until it will take effect on Friday.

But some legislators were dismayed. Ted Falk, a Conservative member of Parliament from Manitoba, said he and other conservatives were “blindsided” by the fast-tracked bill that disregarded written viewpoints and concerns.

Sign up for the Canada Letter Newsletter Back stories and analysis from our Canadian correspondents, plus a handpicked selection of our recent Canada-related coverage. Get it sent to your inbox.

In a Facebook post on Dec. 17, he said there was no sign a consensus or final decision had been reached before the motion was unexpectedly presented just as everyone was rising, giving no time for objections.

“There were about four seconds in which any one of us could have voiced an objection and, in all honesty, before I could process what was happening, the motion had been passed,” he wrote on Facebook.

“What was repeatedly requested by many of those making submissions, was the government’s guarantee — included in the legislation itself — that conversations with a religious leader, counselor or parent continued to be protected and possible,” the lawmaker added. “Sadly, these requests were not considered.”

Canada is among the latest countries to ban conversion therapy. The French Parliament voted on Dec. 14 to ban the practice. At least a dozen countries have also adopted some form of legislative protections against it, including India, Malta, Ecuador and Germany.

In the United States, 20 states and Washington, D.C., have passed laws banning conversion therapy, according to Born Perfect, a group seeking to outlaw the practice.

In Canada, the federal law joins a patchwork of municipal and provincial laws that have banned conversion therapy — in Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton and in provinces including Ontario and Nova Scotia.

Some practitioners have avoided detection. The names of programs are sometimes changed, Professor Salway said. In health care settings, physicians have acted as gatekeepers, declining to provide trans people access to hormones, he said.

“The benefit of the federal law is it covers the whole country at once, so we don’t have to rely on local politics,” he said.

Mr. Schiavo said local regulation was still relevant because it could be easier to use bylaws than to go through courts. “We are still in favor of cities stepping up,” he added.

Professor Salway and others said the federal law needed to be paired with localized education campaigns. “That’s why we should celebrate the bill, but not be so naïve that it is going to remove all these practices,” he said.

Mr. Kwag said his research organization found that 10 percent of the 9,214 L.G.B.T.Q. participants in its 2019-20 Sex Now survey had received the so-called therapy, with 67 percent in a faith-based setting and the rest through licensed health care providers, which are regulated by provinces.

Mr. Kwag, who is now 37, said he was 19 when his family referred him to an “ex-gay Christian therapist” for telephone counseling and talk therapy about his “homosexual urges.”

In sessions of 45 minutes to an hour, he was asked to recount homosexual thoughts or behavior, and was given “Scripture and strategies to manage” urges to act on those feelings.

After four sessions, Mr. Kwag said, he got in a heated argument with his family about making him attend them, and then he tried to take his own life.

“It was all very dehumanizing,” he said.

British Columbia
'It's a milestone, I'm thrilled': B.C. survivor of conversion therapy applauds federal commitment to ban it
Peter Gajdics says 6 years of conversion therapy in Victoria almost killed him


CBC News · Posted: Dec 15, 2019














Peter Gajdics spent six years in Victoria B.C. undergoing conversion therapy from a psychiatrist who prescribed drugs which Gajdics says almost killed him. (Jon Hernandez/CBC)


A B.C. man who says he is still recovering from an attempt to change his sexual orientation through a practice known as conversion therapy is applauding a federal commitment to ban it in Canada.


This week, a mandate letter sent from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti asked that the Criminal Code be amended "to ban the practice of conversion therapy and take other steps required with the provinces and territories to end conversion therapy in Canada."


Conversion therapy is a practice that aims to change an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity, aiming to "convert" them from gay, lesbian or bisexual to heterosexual, or from transgender to cisgender, which means identifying with the sex assigned to them at birth.


Peter Gajdics, author of the book The Inheritance of Shame, spent six years in conversion therapy with a licensed psychiatrist in Victoria.


"It's a milestone, I'm thrilled, I think it will be a journey to actually have it passed," he said about the federal move to end its practice in Canada.


He described his years in conversion therapy as painful.


"I just felt completely distorted and cut up inside by the drugs, by the primal scream, by the shame, by this effort to change myself into something that I wasn't," he said. "At one point the medications were at a fatal level, and I overdosed, and by all accounts I should have died."


He says a psychiatrist prescribed several antidepressants and a sedative in hopes that it would help Gajdic become heterosexual.


"I fell for these tactics because I wanted to believe what my family wanted me to be, that I could heal somehow," he said.


WATCH Peter Gajdics talk to the CBC's Jon Hernandez about his experience with conversion therapy

Watch
'Such long term-pain'
1 day ago
0:36

B.C. Conversion therapy survivor Peter Gajdics talks about his troubling experience. 0:36


Gajdics says he grew up ashamed of his sexuality because his parents didn't approve of it, and was cut off from his friends and family.
No proof it works


Conversion therapy employs various approaches, including talk therapy, medication and aversion therapy, which attempts to condition a person's behaviour by causing them discomfort through things like electric shocks when they're exposed to specific stimuli.


It is believed conversion therapy has existed for more than a century, with German psychiatrist Albert von Schrenck-Notzing being one of the first to use the practice on patients.


Conversion therapy has been widely condemned by health experts as having no scientific proof that it works. It is also described as being unethical and unprofessional.


Elizabeth Saewyc, a UBC nursing professor, says people who have gone through the therapy have a greater chance of developing depression and anxiety.


"It has created challenges around their ability to actually have caring relationships with others," she said.
Conversion therapy: What you need to know


In 2018, the City of Vancouver passed a bylaw that bans any business from providing conversion therapy.


Gajdics said he will watch how the federal government develops its amendments to the Criminal Code to ban conversion therapy. He's worried that loopholes will remain for the practice to carry on underground.


"Delineating exactly what conversion therapy is or maybe isn't in the Criminal Code will be vital," he said. "Practitioners, organizations, sidestep the issue. Immediately they say we don't practise that."


With files from Jon Hernandez and Alvin Yu


SEE https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=LGBTQ


SEE https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=CONVERSION

UK

Trans conversion therapy not being banned, despite Government's U-Turn on gay conversion therapy

"Leaving trans & non-binary people out of a conversion therapy ban is completely unacceptable"


By Adam Maidment

Reporter
Gavin Cordon
1 APR 2022

Gay conversion therapy is set to be banned following a U-Turn from Boris Johnson (Image: Joel Goodman)

In the space of less than 24 hours, Boris Johnson has staged a ‘hasty retreat’ after previously announcing that ministers were abandoning plans to ban gay conversion therapy - but plans to outlaw trans conversion therapy still remain a grey area.

On Thursday evening (March 31), Downing Street briefing papers were leaked by ITV News revealing “the PM has agreed we should not move forward with legislation” to outlaw the practice. A Government spokesman had said they were looking instead at ways of preventing it through existing law and “other non-legislative measures”.

Conversion therapy is the idea that someone's sexual or gender identity can be changed or 'cured'. The government first announced plans to move forward on the ban of the practice in the UK in July 2018 under Theresa May’s government but despite numerous consultations, little progress has been made.

READ MORE: Government pledged gay conversion therapy ban in 2018, so why does it still exist?

Within hours of Thursday evening’s announcement, a senior Government source was quoted as saying that legislation would, in fact, be included in the Queen’s Speech in May. The Prime Minister was said to have “changed his mind” after seeing the reaction to the earlier announcement.

Stephen Fry was one of those to criticise the earlier move. The author and actor tweeted: “Just when I thought my contempt for this disgusting government couldn’t sink lower. A curse upon the whole lying, stinking lot of them.”


But the Government source has said the legislation set to be announced in May would cover “only gay conversion therapy, not trans”. There was no immediate official response from Downing Street – although there was no attempt to suggest the latest report was incorrect.

Leaks suggested Boris Johnson was set to announce there would be no bans to conversion therapy in the UK. (Image: Tim Rooke/REX/Shutterstock)

Campaigners working for the ban of conversion therapy for all LGBT people said they welcomed the renewed commitment to a ban for some, but expressed disappointment that the Government failed to uphold its promises to the full LGBT community. Jayne Ozanne, a former government LGBT adviser who survived 20 years of conversion therapy, said vulnerable people were being “thrown under the bus” by the move.

"This is the Prime Minister’s decision and the Prime Minister has shown his true colours with regard to the LGBT community,” she told the PA news agency. “I think he thought he could get away with it, but this will horrify, I am sure, people right across the country who have believed frankly for years that this should have been banned.”

RELATED ARTICLES

Pride In Trafford returns for five days of 'queer joy and fun' featuring powerful trans portraits, goth comedy and pop-up flower shows

Dr Paul Martin OBE, Chief Executive of Manchester-based LGBT Foundation, tweeted: "Leaving trans & non-binary people out of a conversion therapy ban is completely unacceptable. We are completely #LGBWithTheT & will not cease in our campaigning to ensure that #TransRightsAreHumanRights."

A spokesperson for LGBT Foundation added: "LGBT Foundation condemns the Prime Minister’s appalling decision to backpedal on his promise to ban so-called 'conversion therapy,’ including continuing to leave trans and non-binary people out after his latest u-turn. Conversion therapy’ is a repulsive practice, which the Government’s own research shows causes harm to LGBTQ+ people. This is supported by NHS England and other major bodies in the UK who have all warned that all forms of ‘conversion therapy’ are “unethical and potentially harmful”.


"This is the latest in a long line of betrayals by the Prime Minister and his Government, proving that we cannot trust them to safeguard LGBTQ+ rights. The lack of protection for trans and non-binary people in this latest round of legislation effectively says that their pain and suffering are acceptable. To be very clear, the rights of marginalised groups facing oppression should never be pitted against each other for political gain. The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary made personal pledges to ban ‘conversion therapy’; seemingly, they are happy to go against their word.

"We demand that the Prime Minister make a full apology for his decisions and make a full reversal of the current position, to explicitly include trans and non-binary people within the proposed legislation to ban conversion practices. We ask our supporters and allies to stand with us and other human rights organisations in making these demands. LGBT Foundation will continue to campaign for a full and unconditional ban on conversion therapy. We are proud to say #LGBWithTheT.

"Leaving trans & non-binary people out of a conversion therapy ban is completely unacceptable"

Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of social and political change charity Humanists UK, said: “We are glad that the Government has after all heeded public opinion and will ban these practices targeted at gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. The process has already taken too long and the Government has failed to produce draft legislation in a timely manner.

EVANGELICAL EXCORCISM
Wisconsin poses latest setback for conversion therapy opponents


Brooke Migdon
Sun, January 22, 2023

Wisconsin LGBTQ advocates and lawmakers are recalibrating after state GOP legislators last week voted for a second time to block a ban on conversion therapy from taking effect.

“I’m very concerned about young people in Wisconsin who live in communities where it is once again allowed, being subjected to this really cruel and unscientific form of therapy,” state Rep. Greta Neubauer (D), one of six openly LGBTQ members of Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled legislature, told The Hill.

“Conversion” or “reparative therapy” is a blanket term that refers to a host of interventions designed to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. It’s been denounced by major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Psychological Association, in part because such practices are underpinned by a belief that LGBTQ identities are pathologies that need to be cured.

Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia have laws or policies in place that ban conversion therapy for minors, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a think tank that tracks state legislation impacting the LGBTQ community. Five states, including Wisconsin through a 2021 executive order issued by Gov. Tony Evers (D), have partial bans.

Three states — Alabama, Georgia and Florida — are unable to enforce bans on conversion therapy because of an injunction in the 11th Circuit that prevents them from doing so.

“Professional consensus rejects pathologizing sexual and gender identities,” the AMA wrote in an issue brief last year. “In addition, empirical evidence has demonstrated a diversity of sexual and gender identities that are normal variations of human identity and expression, and not inherently linked to mental illness.”

While members of the religious right have posited that conversion therapy — often administered by religious leaders or institutions — can be beneficial to individuals struggling with their identities, Wisconsin Republicans claim their decision to block the state’s ban had nothing to do with the practice itself but whether the state Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS) could legally enforce the ban under Wisconsin law.

A DSPS examining board responsible for licensing counselors, social workers, and marriage and family therapists in 2020 developed a rule that classified conversion therapy as unprofessional conduct. State GOP lawmakers suspended that rule during the 2021 legislative session, calling it government overreach.

The rule briefly went back into effect in December, at the end of last year’s legislative session, prompting last week’s vote.

Neubauer said she’s expecting GOP lawmakers to introduce legislation this year to permanently strike down the DSPS rule — despite the high likelihood of a veto by Evers — “effectively reopening the opportunity for people to perform conversion therapy in Wisconsin for the next two years.”

Neubauer, who serves as Wisconsin’s House minority leader, said the legislature has hit a dead end in terms of passing a statewide ban on conversion therapy, and Democrats will likely have to wait until the next election cycle to make any meaningful strides.

“We do not have another option right now,” she said.

Still, several communities within Wisconsin, including the city of Racine, which Neubauer represents, have instituted bans on conversion therapy within their own boundaries, and more are coming down the pike.

In the absence of legislation prohibiting conversion therapy in states such as Wisconsin, advocacy groups are working behind the scenes to stop the practice, even if it means taking on health care providers one by one.

Mathew Shurka, the co-founder and chief strategist of Born Perfect, a civil rights group working to end conversion therapy nationwide, said his organization frequently encourages conversion therapy survivors to file complaints against their health care providers with their state licensing board, in multiple instances resulting in the revocation of the provider’s license.

“These people hide behind their licensure to make themselves credible,” Shurka, who was sent to conversion therapy from 16 to 21 years old, told The Hill. “They know they’re not supposed to be doing these things.”

As a teenager, Shurka said, his own therapist prescribed Viagra to help him have sex with women, among other unethical practices. At the time, he didn’t understand that what was happening to him was wrong and trusted his health care provider to make decisions with his best interests in mind.

“I loved my therapist. I thought he was a great guy,” he said. “That’s what’s so dangerous about a professional creating a safe space and inviting you into something that’s completely discredited and shaming you and giving you no option out.”

Multiple inquiries have found that the effects of conversion therapy are damaging and long-lasting.

A 2020 report from the Williams Institute, a public policy think tank, found that lesbian, gay and bisexual people in the U.S. were nearly twice as likely to report having suicidal thoughts when they were exposed to conversion therapy.

The same study found that 7 percent of lesbian, gay and bisexual 18- to 59-year-olds had experienced conversion therapy at some point in their lives, most of them from religious leaders but approximately one-third from a health care provider.

A 2022 study from The Trevor Project, a national LGBTQ youth suicide prevention group, found that around 17 percent of LGBTQ youth had been threatened with or subjected to conversion therapy.

UK
Liz Truss sets out plan to ban ‘abhorrent’ conversion therapy

Government wants to ban all ‘coercive’ practices – but experts have warned some victims can appear to have consented

Adam Forrest

Minister for women and equalities minister
(AFP via Getty Images)

Cabinet minister Liz Truss has vowed to protect LGBT+ people from “abhorrent” conversion therapy, as the government finally sets out its long-awaited plan to ban the practice.

The Conservatives promised in 2018 to bring forward legislation to end conversion therapies which seek to change someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity.

In March, three of the government’s LGBT+ advisers quit their posts and issued damning criticism over the failure of Boris Johnson’s government to fulfil the long-standing pledge.

Ms Truss, the minister for women and equalities, is now launching a six-week consultation process on the legislative plan to make “coercive” conversion therapies illegal in England and Wales.

The government wants create a new offence for so-called talking conversion therapies, as well as making sure violent conversion therapy acts are sentenced appropriately under existing laws.

“There should be no place for the abhorrent practice of coercive conversion therapy in our society,” said Ms Truss as she launched the consultation.

“Today we are publishing detailed proposals that will stop appalling conversion therapies and make sure LGBT people can live their lives free from the threat of harm or abuse.”

The minister added: “I want everyone to be able to love who they want and be themselves. Today’s announcement sets out how we will ban an archaic practice that has no place in modern life.”

The government said individuals would remain “free to seek out professional help and guidance” – saying legislative efforts would be focused on practices which people have not willingly agreed to undertake.

But campaigners have warned that there should be no defence that a victim appears to have consented to conversion therapy if the government hopes to introduce a truly comprehensive ban.

A recent report by the Forum group of human rights lawyers and experts warned: “Individuals who seek out conversion practices in the hope of being ‘cured’ are not made aware of the severe psychological harm to which they are exposed, and so cannot give informed consent.”

Officials in Northern Ireland have already start preliminary work on drafting a bill after politicians at Stormont passed a motion calling for a ban on conversion therapy in April.

In Scotland, the SNP administration has vowed to end conversion therapy – but said it would wait to see if Mr Johnson’s government follows through on its pledge to “eradicate” the practice and how extensive any proposed ban might be.

The government has made clear its legislative plan is aimed at changing the law in only England and Wales.

The Government Equalities Office (GEO) also said ministers were particularly keen safeguard under 18s – saying legislation would place a strong emphasis on preventing children undergoing any conversion therapies.

Ministers are also preparing to bring in Conversion Therapy Protection Orders to protect potential victims from undergoing the practice. This could include removing passports of those at risk of being taken overseas for conversion therapy.

The government is launching its six-week consultation at 9am on Friday. The GEO is seeking input from charities, and is urging those with experience of conversion therapy to come forward to give their views.

Lessening the cost of strategies to reach the Paris Agreement

Balancing CO2 and methane mitigation actions progressively along the way

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

Research News

 

IMAGE: TEMPERATURE STABILIZATION AND OVERSHOOT PATHWAYS AND BEST AVAILABLE CONVERSION FACTORS FOR METHANE UNDER EACH ILLUSTRATIVE PATHWAY. view more 

CREDIT: NIES

Five researchers shed new light on a key argument to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG): they provided the first economic analysis of conversion factors of other GHG like methane into their CO2 equivalent in overshoot scenarios. Although the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) considers settling for one value of reference (known as "Common Metric") to make this conversion among the Paris Agreement, the models presented here show the economic advantage of flexibility between various factors of conversion. "A key notion in the UNFCCC is to reduce GHG emissions in the least costly way so as to ensure global benefits" highlights Katsumasa Tanaka, primary author of the Science Advances study.

The research provides series of dynamic variations of conversion factors depending on possible trajectories of global warming to lessen the economic cost while maintaining some stability to anticipate the implementation of policies. They took into consideration different scenarios, one in which we reach the Paris Agreement's objectives of stabilization at 2°C and 1.5°C and others in which we would overshoot these objectives and need to strengthen efforts later on. These overshoot scenarios are a violation of the Paris Agreement, but the authors argued that such possibilities cannot be ruled out, in view of the near-term climate policies currently. They further noted that the feasibility of these scenarios still depends on very deep mitigation needed later in this century. They applied conversion factors in the numerical model and simulated the additional mitigation costs in all these scenarios to target the most favourable values.

The choice of a common conversion factor

A conversion system into CO2 equivalent is used to determine the participation of different GHG on a given time to prioritize actions. A well-known example is the global warming potential (GWP). To enable comparison among the parties of the Paris Agreement, the 100-year global warming potential (GWP100) was chosen as a reference. Greenhouse gases having very different lifespan and radiative impact, this conversion system is dependent on the choice of a time horizon.

"With GWP100 we look at the cumulative greenhouse effect on a 100-year period, which for methane gives a conversion factor of 28. This means 1 kilogram of methane is 28 times more potent than a kilogram of CO2" explains Johannes Morfeldt, a collaborator of this study joined from Sweden. Yet, since methane has a shorter lifespan and a higher radiative impact than CO2, the cumulative effect on 20 years (GWP20) is much more significant: 84 times more than 1 kilogram of CO2.

Changing the time horizon changes the conversion factor, and therefore influences which gas gets high on the agenda. If a kilogram of methane is 84 times more important than one of CO2, it will be more efficient to lower the global emissions by reducing methane. A debate is in motion since the nineties regarding which conversion factor should be used, and this team of researchers meant to bring additional information on their economic cost in light of possible pathways of global warming.

"We realized with our model that GWP100 is good for the coming decades, but is far from ideal in the long run" says Philippe Ciais, one of the co-authors of the study. "We don't see much variation in an optimal scenario of stabilization at 2°C. But in the event of an overshoot scenario we observe a high discrepancy among ideal conversion factors for today and when we reach 2°C of global warming. If we do not have a dynamic approach to change these values along the way, then society will bear an additional cost to mitigate climate change" adds Olivier Boucher, another co-author.

An optimal agenda

The researchers then modelled these additional costs to estimate which conversion factor would be ideal at a given time for different temperature trajectories. They showed that setting in stone GWP100 would bring about additional mitigation costs that could be avoided by switching to a dynamic factor. In a scenario of stabilization at 2°C these additional costs round up near 2%, but in high overshoot scenarios it goes up to 5%. "This shows that the ideal factors of conversion depend on a time horizon but are also primarily determined by the pathway, and strongly influenced by a temperature overshoot" underlines Daniel Johansson, a Swedish co-author.

This study shows that adapting to possible trajectories by switching from GWP100 to shorter time-horizons in the future could spare additional mitigation costs compared to the sole use of GWP100. The researchers also understand that these values cannot continuously change to enable policies to be anticipated and implemented. Thus, they put forward series of simple combinations of cost-effective conversion factors depending on the possible pathways. The authors suggest that "the UNFCCC and Parties to the Paris Agreement consider adapting the choice of conversion factors to the future pathway as it unfolds, to implement the cheapest options to reduce greenhouse gases emissions."

As we do not know yet the long-term pathway, the matter of the cost-effectiveness could be included in the technical assessment supporting the global stocktake within the UNFCCC. This key element of the Paris Agreement evaluates every five years the countries' collective progress toward long-term goals and aims at increasing the level of ambition of national policies. An inclusion of cost-effectiveness of factors of conversion on this recurring stocktaking process could allow the necessary assessment in time to inform following sessions as the long-term pathway unfolds.

###

The Political Ideology Behind Anti-Conversion Laws in India

As Congress vows to amend the controversial law in Karnataka, a look at the motivations underpinning such legislation.

By Rashad Khan

THE DIPLOMAT
June 30, 2023

Credit: Deposit photos

Prior to the Karnataka State Assembly elections, India’s Congress party had promised that if elected, it would repeal the anti-conversion legislation passed during the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s tenure. Officially known as “Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act,” the Congress leadership viewed the act as controversial and divisive.

Upon forming the Karnataka state government after the declaration of the election results on May 13, Congress leaders announced that they would be removing the clauses added by the BJP government that had given the legislation its divisive characteristics. The rationale behind this move is that legislation against forced conversions has always been present, but that the bill introduced by the BJP government needs to be scrutinized and tweaked.

This moves away from Congress’ earlier promise to repeal the legislation completely. We will have to wait and see the nature of amendments that are made.

India has 12 states in which anti-conversion legislation has been passed, with circumstances that vary from state to state. The laws in all states share three common aspects: prohibitions on conversions, notification requirements to the government, and burden-shifting provisions that automatically presume guilt. All three violate protections for freedom of religion or belief under international human rights law. Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides that everyone has the right to freedom of religion or belief, including the “freedom to have or adopt a religion or belief.” This is violated by the anti-conversion laws, as they prohibit conversions for the purpose of marriage.

The state’s interference in citizens’ personal matters is also disconcerting. As per the anti-conversion legislation in Karnataka, the individual is to convey to the district magistrate their intention to convert, after which a public call will be made to check if any objections are raised by the public. In case of an objection, an investigation is organized. If it is found that the conversion is not “legitimate” and violates the anti-conversion legislation, the findings are provided to the police, who then initiate a criminal investigation.

According to the United Nations Human Rights Committee’s interpretation of ICCPR’s Article 18, the state cannot compel an individual to reveal their adherence to a belief and international human rights law prohibits the state from interfering in an individual’s right to convert and requiring the issuing of notifications regarding the same.

Another contentious element present in the anti-conversion legislation is the shift of the burden of proof onto the accused. Article 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that those charged with a penal offense have a right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The presumption of innocence of the accused is echoed by Article 14 of the ICCPR, which states that the burden of proving the charge must be imposed on the prosecution and the defendant does not share the burden of proving their innocence.

Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and the free profession, practice, and propagation of religion. However, due to religion being a matter that concerns the state and central governments, both have the capacity to make laws regarding the same. The Supreme Court of India has ruled that anti-conversion laws are valid and constitutional as long as they do not infringe upon an individual’s right to freedom of religion. The crux of the matter lies in the intention behind the laws and whether their implementation is detrimental to the prospect of communal harmony.

The United State Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recently published a report on India’s state-level conversion laws and came to the conclusion that the laws have been framed to prevent conversions to religions that the state finds unfavorable (Christianity and Islam, as per the report) and not to protect individuals against forced conversions, which was its stated purpose.

The USCIRF report also highlights how the law is used to target interfaith marriages between Hindu women and Muslim men, derogatorily referred to as “Love Jihad.” Indeed, in the campaigns by BJP representatives to enact an anti-conversion law in a given state, the term “Love Jihad” is mentioned multiple times to justify anti-conversion legislation. In many cases, BJP representatives refer to the anti-conversion laws as “Love Jihad Law.”

Through the enactment and propagation of the anti-conversion laws, the ulterior motive of the BJP is to create fear in the minds of the Hindu population that a demographic war is ongoing. In this war, the “outsider” religions are engaging in various methods to reduce the native Hindu population, including through conversions. The mass hysteria that is created translates into political capital for the BJP, which is seen as a conservative party that fights for the interests of the Hindu population. The “Love Jihad” campaign has been weaponized in order to raise support for the Hindu cause, which the BJP represents.

The anti-conversion laws have also made marriages between individuals of different faiths more difficult. The legislation is used to identify and monitor those who would wish to engage in inter-faith marriages, with the police and local vigilante groups of the right-wing interfering in personal matters between consenting individuals, sometimes with the threat of violence. The cases that are filed under sections of the anti-conversion laws are often coupled with criminal charges of kidnapping, abduction, or inducing women to compel marriage. This displays the misogynist viewpoint of those engaging in the making and enactment of the legislation, as women are not seen as able individuals who can choose their partners. Instead, the final decision of marriage rests with the community and must be within the community. The anti-conversion laws show the status quo that the BJP wishes to establish, one where inter-faith marriages are to be prevented in order to preserve the Hindu identity of the country.

The amendments made by the Congress government in Karnataka can act as a way forward to break the myths that have been propagated by the BJP. As per the Supreme Court, no individual’s right to freedom of religion can be denied. Now we must wait and see the extent of changes that will be made by the Congress in the state’s anti-conversion legislation in the face of the protests that are being planned by BJP against the changes.

GUEST AUTHOR
Rashad Khan is currently an academic associate at the Kautilya School of Public Policy. He completed his Master’s in Women’s Studies from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai. His interests lie in religiosity, social movements, and gender.

SEE

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for HINDUISM IS FASCISM