The Evangelical Alliance and The Christian Institute have raised concerns over proposed legislation to ban so-called “conversion therapy” in the United Kingdom, warning that the measures could infringe on free speech and criminalize ordinary conversations between parents, pastors, and professionals. The U.K. government’s draft proposals aim to prohibit practices intended to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. While supporters of the legislation say it is necessary to protect vulnerable individuals, several religious and free speech advocacy groups argue the proposals are too broadly defined and risk unintended consequences.
The Evangelical Alliance said it opposes any attempt to change a person’s sexuality through force or coercion but emphasized that existing laws already make such actions illegal. The group warned the current draft lacks clarity, leaving room for interpretation that could extend beyond harmful practices. In a statement, the organization said the proposals could potentially criminalize parents who discuss matters of sexuality or gender identity with their children, as well as conversations that take place in church contexts. Without clearer legal boundaries, individuals could face prosecution for legitimate, good-faith interactions.
Similar concerns were expressed by The Christian Institute, which has long opposed efforts to ban conversion therapy. The group has previously argued that such legislation would be difficult to implement without infringing on fundamental rights, particularly freedom of speech. Simon Calvert, deputy director of The Christian Institute, criticized the latest draft: “The bill would see parents, professionals and pastors having to answer to the police for innocent conversations that activists claim is ‘abusive.’ It’s wide open to misuse.”
The Free Speech Union also weighed in, warning the proposals could have a chilling effect on open discussion. The organization said a ban could prevent medical professionals and parents from engaging in “good-faith, exploratory conversations” with young people experiencing gender-related questions.
Peter Lynas, U.K. director of the Evangelical Alliance, described the proposed legislation as “deeply concerning,” noting that it includes the possibility of criminal penalties of up to five years in prison. He argued the measures could undermine the role of parents and caregivers while failing to adequately safeguard religious freedom. “The definition of abusive practices is entirely subjective,” Lynas said. “It could leave a wide range of people at risk of prosecution—even years after the fact ... the concerns we have consistently raised have been ignored.”
Political opposition has also emerged. Conservative Member of Parliament Suella Braverman criticized the proposals, suggesting they could penalize families seeking to support their children. In comments posted on social media, she said the legislation would criminalize “desperate parents” who are trying to guide their children through complex identity issues. Braverman cited cases of individuals who later expressed regret over medical transitions, arguing families should not face legal consequences for attempting to intervene. “A conversion therapy ban will criminalize those who love their children,” she said. “Just for loving their children.”
The issue of conversion therapy has been debated in the U.K. for several years, with multiple governments pledging to introduce a ban while struggling to define its scope. Previous attempts were delayed or dropped amid disagreements over how to balance protection for vulnerable individuals with rights related to free expression and religious belief. Supporters maintain legislation is necessary to prevent harmful practices and ensure individuals are not subjected to coercive or abusive efforts to alter their identity. Critics, however, argue poorly defined laws could overreach, creating legal risks for individuals engaged in lawful, personal, or pastoral conversations.
As the government moves forward, the debate is expected to intensify, with lawmakers, advocacy groups, and religious organizations continuing to weigh the balance between safeguarding individuals and protecting fundamental freedoms.
PRAY: Pray sanity would return and that basic things like answering a child’s questions would not be viewed as some kind of legal issue.