WHY SOCIAL WORKERS SHOULD OPPOSE WESTMINSTER'S CONVERSION THERAPY BILL

Social workers should be concerned about the impact of this Bill. The draft Conversion Therapy Bill proposes to criminalise “abusive practices that aim to change someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity in England and Wales.” 

Bill Assumes Existence Of Gender Identity

A key assumption in the Bill is that everyone, including children, possesses a “gender identity” which may be different to their actual sex. 

While “gender reassignment”, medically and socially, is recognised as a protected characteristic in the Equality Act, there is no legal definition anywhere of gender identity.   The right to deny the existence of gender identity, and to hold and express beliefs that sex is immutable and binary has been established in law. That right will be undermined if this Bill is passed.

Subjective Definition Of Abuse

The impact assessment published with the Bill states that abusive acts “can include psychological abuse which degrades or manipulates an individual, and coercive control over an individual’s everyday movements and finances. Such acts can occur as both singular activities, and in combination.”  This definition is subjective and vague and seems designed to encourage complaints against parents and professionals who do not accept that gender identity must be affirmed.

Intention To Create A Cascading Impact

The impact assessment for the Bill states that the legislation is expected to have “a cascading effect across multiple agencies and professions. As a criminal offence, police, local authorities, social workers, teachers, will have a duty of care to identify and intervene in instances of suspected abusive conversion practices, providing new protection to ‘at risk’ individuals that is presently not captured under existing legislation or guidelines.”

No Evidence Of Need For This Bill

The Bill's supporters have been unable to produce any convincing evidence of the existence of abusive conversion practices not already covered by existing legislation. A key target of the Bill therefore seems to be to cement belief in gender identity in families, schools and children's services.

There is increasing evidence of the harm of encouraging children to believe that they do have a gender identity, and of the practice of “affirming” children as “transgender”.   Not because this approach causes any harm to children, but because it does not.  Threatening to criminalise social workers and teachers who do not support affirmation is a direct attack on professional judgment.

Coercion Of Parents And Professionals

 It seems clear then that the Bill proposes to engage the entire public sector in enforcing not only belief in “gender identity” but to criminalise any opposition.  The aim as stated is to force parents and other adults to accept the existence of the “trans child”.  Because without the myth of the “trans child”, the claims of trans identified adults are put into question. 

The reference to financial or other coercion points to the risks to vulnerable women in abusive relationships with men that Trans Widows and other groups have raised. Will trans-identified men use this law to allege they are victims of coercive control if they object to household income being spent on make-up, clothing, hair removal, private prescriptions and cosmetic surgeries for him rather than food and necessities for the family? And what of the children of these relationships? Will mothers and children be criminalised for refusing to accept that their father is suddenly a woman?  “Children of Transitioners” (COTS) gives a voice to children’s experiences of abuse and coercion by parents who have “transitioned”. 

Far from protecting children or vulnerable adults, the Bill threatens to turn teachers and social workers along with the entire police force into enforcers of minority ideological beliefs and practices.

Unacceptable Costs

The costs of forcing the public sector into investigating any and every allegation of “suspected abusive conversion practices” would be enormous, socially and financially. Turning the public sector into an enforcer of the trans-lobby’s beliefs will demand enormous resources in education, social work, police, courts, criminal justice. This impact alone should have a sobering effect on politicians who are supporting this Bill.

Follow the Evidence

EBSWA recently published “12 Rebuttals to Transgender Ideology – Evidence from Child Development “by an EBSWA member who writes as @prof_curiosity1. This points to the complete lack of evidence for belief in gender identity and is expected to be published as a book later this year by Transgender Trend.

Any social worker working with children and their families or any parent struggling with understanding a child who is confused or distressed about their sex will find that the “12 Rebuttals” are compelling well-founded reasons not to affirm a child’s mistaken belief in gender identity. Instead, we should respond with necessary professional curiosity. What is the cause of the child’s distress or confusion? What are the factors in their own lives, their family’s lives, their wider environment which can help make sense of the child’s feelings? What is that the child, or their parent, hope will happen if their wishes, or the parents’ wishes, that they should ‘transition” are followed?

Childhood

Childhood is understood and accepted in law to be a special state in which children have the right to protection by adults from harm. Children do not have the same rights as adults. They cannot get married, have sex, or live independently. They are not automatically assumed to have capacity to make important decisions. They can be made subject to compulsory measures of care and treatment precisely because they are children in need of protection.  Why should a child who believes that they are “trans” be encouraged to make life changing decisions and thus be treated less favourably than a child with an eating disorder, or self-harming or otherwise putting him or herself at risk in some way?

Affirmation Does Not Help Children

If the evidence is that “affirmation” does not help children, and on the contrary threatens to cause them long term harm, physically and mentally, then it is counter to common sense and a breach of parental and professional responsibilities to promote practices based on belief in gender identity. 

The Bill’s demand that social workers and other professionals should treat gender identity as being an unchallengeable material reality and act to enforce this belief on children and their families is contrary to everything that we know about safeguarding children - and vulnerable adults - from harm.

It is the duty of social work and other professions to oppose these proposals.  We in EBSWA will work with the growing number of organisations and interests including TGT, Genspect and other organisations to defeat the Bill.