The UK government has plans to ban controversial and long-discredited 鈥済ay conversion therapies鈥� that claim to help gay people become straight, and transgender people revert to the gender they were designated at birth. The move follows a nationwide survey of 108,000 LGBT people in the UK, which revealed that 2 per cent of them had undergone conversion therapy, and a further 5 per cent had been offered it.
Such treatments, also known as reparative therapy, have long been denounced as pseudoscience and potentially harmful. As far back as 1997, the stated there is 鈥渘o published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change ones鈥� sexual orientation鈥�. Since then, at least 16 US medical organisations , as did a , including the National 午夜福利1000集合 Service, in 2015.
Several countries have already implemented bans 鈥� Brazil was first in 1999 鈥� and they seem to be having an effect. Starting with California in 2012, 13 US states have banned the practice in under-18s.
Advertisement
A study by the Williams Institute at the University of California in Los Angeles estimated that the US bans have so far spared 6000 teenagers from having the therapy. By contrast, it estimated that 20,000 have received the therapy since 2012 in states still allowing the practice.
US loophole
The study also revealed a loophole: the US bans only apply to registered mental health care providers, not to religious or spiritual advisers. It estimates that because of this, a further 57,000 people across all US states will receive the 鈥渢herapy鈥� from religious of spiritual advisers before the age of 18.
In the UK, it is not yet clear how the government will regulate and enforce a ban. 鈥淲e will look at all the options, and it will be in consultation with LGBT organisations, researchers and the NHS,鈥� a spokesperson for the UK government鈥檚 Equalities Office told New Scientist.
But the government鈥檚 accompanying appears to leave the door open for religious influence. 鈥淲e are not trying to prevent LGBT people from seeking legitimate medical support or spiritual support from their faith leader in the exploration of their sexual orientation or gender identity,鈥� it says.
Nonetheless, it is possible that the simple act of proposing and publicising a ban is itself useful, as it alerts and reinforces awareness among potentially vulnerable people that the procedure doesn鈥檛 work. 鈥淲hen it becomes general knowledge that it doesn鈥檛 work, that鈥檚 the best deterrent,鈥� says of the UK Royal College of Psychiatrists.
鈥淧ublicity around these laws may have some deterrent effect in terms of people seeking the treatment,鈥� says of the Williams Institute, and co-author of its study. 鈥淢ajor healthcare associations like the American Psychological Association have definitely made an impact by coming out publicly against these treatments.鈥�
