How should the church respond to the proposed conversion therapy ban?

The Evangelical Alliance supports protections against coercive, abusive and harmful practices. Every person should be treated with dignity and respect. However, we are concerned that the government’s draft legislation on conversion practices goes much further than addressing abuse and could have significant implications for parents, churches and freedom of religion and belief.

The Evangelical Alliance has been engaged on this topic for nearly a decade since suggestions were first made that such a law was required. We support banning coercive or abusive practices and believe current laws do that. We have asked the government to highlight what gaps this law is seeking to address, but they have consistently failed to answer this question.

The proposed legislation applies to conduct carried out towards an individual ​“with the intention of causing that individual to either have or not to have, or to believe that they have or do not have, a particular sexual orientation or transgender identity.” The breadth of the definition raises questions about whether ordinary conversations about sexuality and gender could be brought within its scope.

A criminal offence is committed if the practice is abusive. While abuse refers to violent or coercive behaviour, it also includes psychological or emotional pressure, which is much harder to define. The recipient must be subject to serious harm to their physical or mental health, or the much vaguer category of ​“serious alarm or distress”. We are absolutely committed to the dignity and rights of every person being protected. This includes the rights of parents to raise their children and the right of individuals to choose care and support that matches their beliefs. These proposals undermine that.

Sponsored

If a child tells their parent that they have a transgender identity, it is unclear what a parent can lawfully say. Conversion practices cover encouraging a person to maintain their identity or change it. It becomes abusive, and therefore a criminal offence, if the recipient experiences emotional or psychological harm. A child who is prevented from transitioning, or one who is encouraged to transition, could equally report their parents to the police – even years later. These proposals create uncertainty about what guidance parents can give their children without risking future complaints.

Jayne Ozane has been a leading campaigner for this ban. As an adult, she consented to ​“years of prayer by loving friends who were keen to help me lead a Godly life.” She talks about the emotional toll it took on her. Under this law, those who prayed with her would be guilty of a criminal offence. The proposals also raise questions about whether adults who voluntarily seek prayer or pastoral support consistent with their beliefs would still be free to do so without placing those offering support at legal risk. Someone could voluntarily choose to engage with prayer or pastoral support and, at a later date, claim it was because of emotional pressure and caused them serious alarm or distress. These proposals end up discriminating against the very groups they are designed to protect. 

We are passionately committed to ensuring that the everyday work of churches and of Christians in their day-to-day lives is not affected by such proposals, and have consistently challenged the breadth of proposals which risk doing this. 

The current proposals are wide in their scope, vague in their definition, and weak in the protection against misuse. They fundamentally undermine the role of parents and carers while also ignoring freedom of religion and belief, offering no protection for church leaders and others.

Because these proposals have been published in draft form, they will now be examined by a parliamentary committee. This provides an opportunity for MPs, peers, organisations and experts to raise concerns and propose changes before any legislation is formally introduced. The Evangelical Alliance will be considering the proposals in greater depth and what the implications would be if this were to become law.

The proposals prompt many questions as to the workability of the legislation, and how it would apply, and they certainly do not provide reassurance that the concerns we have raised have been heard, nor that the work of churches and the role of parents will be protected. Can parents guide their children in critical conversations about sexuality and gender or will those be viewed as controlling? Could the refusal to pay for puberty blockers be seen as economic pressure? Can churches teach a biblically orthodox view of sexuality even if it causes a listener serious distress? The proposals also extend to trustee or elder boards – are they at risk of criminalisation if they insist that staff hold to their view of sex and sexuality? 

A lot rides in these proposals on what is meant by sexual orientation, and whether this covers teaching or pastoral practice which encourages individuals to refrain from sexual activity with someone of the same sex. If it does, then a wide range of church practices, employment policies, or questions around church membership might be brought within the scope of the proposals.

After an initial review of the proposals, we can already identify a number of areas where ordinary Christian practice in the home, church and wider society could be affected. As parliament considers these proposals, the Evangelical Alliance will continue to engage constructively, seeking protections for freedom of religion and belief, parental rights and pastoral ministry. We invite Christians across the UK to pray for wisdom for lawmakers and for legislation that protects people from genuine abuse without restricting legitimate parental guidance, prayer and pastoral care.