Protection orders give family disputes a new lever 

What it does

A court can make an order to protect a person from an abusive conversion practice that is “likely” to cause harm, wherever it is performed. The individual, including a child, can apply, and so can a local authority (in family proceedings) or the police (in criminal proceedings) without leave. Anyone else can apply with the court’s leave. Family and criminal courts can also make an order without any application, and a criminal court can do so without any conviction.

​

Orders can be made without notice, where the court considers it “just and convenient” (Sch. para 4). The respondent can make representations at a later hearing, but the order takes effect first. An order can contain “such prohibitions, restrictions or requirements” and “such other terms” as the court “considers appropriate” (Sch. para 3). On its face, that could require a parent to use particular pronouns, stop a writer from publishing, or prevent an organisation from holding a meeting. Breach carries up to two years’ imprisonment (Sch. para 9).

No standard of proof is specified. In R (McCann) v Manchester Crown Court [2002] UKHL 39, the House of Lords held that ASBO proceedings, although civil, required the criminal standard in substance because of their consequences. Here the Bill leaves the courts to decide.

​

These orders resemble forced marriage and FGM protection orders, but those address clearly defined and serious harms. These would apply to contested conversations within families, with a threshold that can be met by distress.

​

Effects: In separated families, one parent’s position on transition can become a court order against the other, and a lever in child-arrangement or divorce proceedings. A parent can lose contact with a child, or a spouse face an order, before being heard.

At a minimum