Home › Questions, drafting and method
Supporting material
Questions, drafting and method
·
·
Questions for the Government
The Committee could put these questions to ministers and witnesses. Each answer would show how the Bill is meant to work.
1. Schools (concerns 12, 1). Does the Government consider that a school which socially transitions a same-sex-attracted child, without parental involvement, carries out conduct intended to cause that child to have a transgender identity under cl. 1(2)(b)(i)? If not, why does the Bill treat conduct in that direction differently?
2. Coercive control (concern 4). The Bill adopts the harm threshold of s.76 Serious Crime Act 2015. Why does it omit the repetition requirement, fault requirement, its best-interests defence and its exclusion for parents of children under 16?
3. Unregulated providers (concern 7). Against what standard is an unregulated provider's conduct to be judged under cl. 1(3), where no professional standard exists?
4. Parents (concerns 1, 10). Would a parent who declines to consent to social transition for a 13-year-old, and tells the child why, meet cl. 1(2)? If not, which provision protects them?
5. Comparable laws (concern 15). What data has the Government obtained on prosecutions, complaints and protection orders under the conversion practices laws of Victoria, New South Wales and New Zealand?
6. Parents acting on NHS policy (concerns 1, 4, 6). A 14-year-old obtains testosterone without a prescription, and her parents destroy it, consistent with NHS policy following the Cass Review. She is distressed and complains to the police. Does the Bill provide any defence for conduct that is consistent with the law and NHS policy but takes place outside health care?
7. Article 8 (concerns 1, 4, 5, 6, 10). Has the Government assessed whether the offence, as it applies to parents, is a proportionate interference with the right to respect for family life under Article 8 ECHR? Will it publish that assessment?
8. Pronouns (concerns 13, 14, 17). Would an individual who declines to use a person's preferred pronouns in direct dealings with them meet cl. 1(2)? If not, why does the Bill not say so?
9. Definitions (concern 11). The impact assessment says the Bill will use existing legislative definitions of transgender identity. The existing definition in England and Wales (Sentencing Act 2020 s.66(6)) does not include identifying as neither male nor female. Why does cl. 1(8) depart from it?
10. Evidence Base and Unproven Need (concern 15).
-
Which conduct within cl. 1(6) is not already a criminal offence?
-
Which conduct, not already a criminal offence, does the Bill make criminal? Please give examples.
-
How would that conduct be distinguished from a parent’s ordinary conversations with their child about sex, identity or treatment?
-
How will the Government ensure that “corrective” sexual assault or electroshock is charged as rape, sexual assault or GBH, not as an offence with a five-year maximum?
-
What is the estimated cost of additional care proceedings, foster placements and non-means-tested legal aid?
Annex A: Illustrative drafting for concerns 1 and 3
This drafting is illustrative only. It shows that open, non-directive work with children and young people can be protected by a clarifying provision that creates no exemption for abusive conduct. It is not put forward as settled wording.
(2A) For the purposes of subsection (2), a person does not have the intention mentioned in that subsection by reason only that the person—
(a) declines to proceed on the basis that an individual has, or does not have, a particular sexual orientation or a particular transgender identity;
(b) provides support to an individual who is experiencing distress, including distress relating to sexual orientation, sex or transgender identity, without seeking to cause the individual to have, or not to have, a particular sexual orientation or transgender identity; or
(c) explores, in an open and non-directive way, the factors that may be relevant to any such distress.
(2B) Nothing in subsection (2A) applies to conduct which amounts to an abuse of the individual (see subsections (4) to (6)).
A SHORTER ALTERNATIVE
(2A) A person does not carry out a conversion practice by reason only of declining to affirm an individual's sexual orientation or transgender identity, or of providing open and non-directive support, or exploring the reasons for an individual's distress; but this subsection does not apply to conduct which amounts to an abuse of the individual.
HOW THE PROVISION WORKS
- 'By reason only that' is the key. The provision does not create a protected category of therapy or a healthcare-style exemption. It clarifies that the listed facts, standing alone, do not establish the prohibited intention. Any other evidence that a person was in fact seeking to change an individual's orientation or identity remains available.
- The provision is symmetrical. Limb (b) withholds protection from direction towards any predetermined outcome, whether transgender, cisgender or heterosexual. It does not shelter suppression dressed as exploration.
- It applies to parents as well as clinicians. Subsection (2A) refers to 'a person', not a practitioner. A parent, teacher or social worker who explores what may lie behind a young person's distress is within it on the same terms as a clinician.
- Abuse is never protected. Subsection (2B) puts the point beyond doubt: conduct that amounts to abuse is outside the provision, however it is described.
Methodology
SCOPE
This archive collects first-hand accounts and documents about the effects of conversion practices laws in Australia and New Zealand on parents, families, health practitioners, lesbian, gay and bisexual people, and detransitioners. It is not a survey of experiences of gender transition. Accounts that do not concern the operation or effects of these laws fall outside its scope. The contributing organisations hold the view that these laws have had serious unintended consequences. We present the evidence so readers can judge it for themselves.
HOW ACCOUNTS ARE COLLECTED
Most material in this archive comes through the contributing organisations, who have supported many of the people concerned directly, in some cases for years. Much of it is already on the public record: in parliamentary and inquiry submissions, published research, regulatory decisions, podcasts and media coverage. Each item is listed with its source, date and jurisdiction. Individuals can also submit accounts directly through the form on this site. If you are unsure whether describing your situation could expose you to legal or professional risk, please seek legal advice before submitting.
WHAT IS CHECKED AND WHAT IS EDITED
Accounts submitted by a contributing organisation come from people known to that organisation, which confirms them before they are sent. Accounts submitted directly through this site are read by [a moderator] and, where possible, followed up with the contributor. Contact details are kept confidential and never published. Every item is checked to make sure it falls within the archive's scope. Material already on the public record is linked or attributed to its original source.
Children are never identifiable. Where an account involves a child, we remove or generalise their age, school, name and any distinguishing details. Where an account cannot be made safe even after editing, we do not publish it. For accounts published here for the first time, we also remove names, workplaces, clinics and specific locations that could identify the contributor or anyone else, and dates may be reduced to the year.
Otherwise, we edit only for length and clarity. Contributors may ask for their account to be withdrawn at any time.
WHO COORDINATES THE ARCHIVE
Already Law is a joint project of the Australian and New Zealand organisations listed on this site. It does not belong to any single one of them. Each contributes its own experience, research and contacts, and each remains responsible for its own published work. The archive is coordinated by Active Watchful Waiting Inc. (AWW), an Australian health advocacy and child protection organisation. Questions about the archive can be sent to AlreadyLaw@proton.me