Truss steps in to protect parents over gender law
Consultation period extended after backlash
Liz Truss acted to protect parents, teachers and doctors from the threat of criminalisation last night as she put the brakes on plans to outlaw conversion therapy.
The equalities minister said the proposals would be changed to safeguard free speech and the right of parents to support their children.
She added the move would ensure that children are not ‘channelled into irreversible decisions about their future’.
She was reacting to concerns that the proposed law would have prevented legitimate discussions with young people who want hormone treatment to change their gender.
Miss Truss stepped in to extend the botched consultation on the scheme by eight weeks to ensure there is time for all views to be heard. She made it clear last night that conversations ‘which do not pressurise children down one path’ will not be against the law.
The law will protect free speech and will not interfere with the right of parents to bring up children ‘in the values of their faith’.
The consultation was originally due to end today and the eightweek extension into February is designed to ensure any legislation is proportionate and effective while protecting freedoms.
Miss Truss said: ‘We are determined to stamp out conversion therapy and want to hear all views on the best ways to do that.
‘We are committed to a ban which will make sure LGBT people can live their lives free from the threat of harm or abuse, whilst protecting free speech as well as protecting under18s from being channelled into irreversible decisions.’
Boris Johnson originally planned to legislate against therapy that claims to turn gay people straight. But it was later extended to include a ban on people trying to prevent children from becoming ‘the gender they want to be’.
Campaigners said the plans were badly drafted and could have criminalised teachers who refused to let children use opposite sex changing rooms or parents who declined to use their child’s preferred pronoun.
Last night the Government’s equalities office clarified that the law was not intended to criminalise parents, teachers or doctors.
A spokesman said: ‘Casual conversations and supportive conversations which do not pressure someone down one path or another will not be in scope of our proposed legislation. Clinical practitioners working in line with their professional obligations and within existing regulatory frameworks will not be affected by this legislation.’
Junior equalities minister Mike Freer said: ‘The focus for the ban will be on those who actively seek to change someone’s sexuality or transgender status, with protection for young people a particular priority.’
Maya Forstater, of the group Sex Matters, said: ‘There is now time to unpack the proposal.
‘Being gay and deciding to change your body through hormones and surgery are completely different things. Gender nonconforming children being labelled as “transgender” and rushed into sterilising hormone treatment is a modern form of conversion therapy.
‘Teachers, parents, therapists and others who work with children and vulnerable people should make sure their voices are heard.’
Malcolm Clark, of the LGB Alliance, said: ‘We hope the Government will now focus on splitting the Bill. A ban on gay conversion therapy is uncontroversial. The parts relating to gender identity need detailed clinical research and proper scrutiny.’
But Stonewall’s Nancy Kelly said: ‘Any potential delay to this ban will leave more LGBTQ+ people at risk of lifelong harm.’
Parents’ backlash set to put brakes on new gender law From Wednesday’s Mail
LIZ Truss’s sensible decision to drop anchor on plans to ban conversion therapy will help to safeguard children.
Hijacked by militant trans activists, the legislation risked criminalising parents, teachers and doctors who questioned any youngster wanting to change gender.
Yet such conversations are not transphobic. They stem from a desire to ensure a child is sure before they pursue a course of life-altering drugs and surgery.
This complex bill could inflict inadvertent harm. It is far too important to rush.