Euan McColm: Adherence to trans ideology trumps good law making for a troubling number of MSPs

The Cass report must make MSPs pause to consider the implications of future legislation

I wonder what images the words “conversion therapy” bring to your mind.

Perhaps, like me, you think of the code-breaker Alan Turing, a second world war hero persecuted for his homosexuality.

In 1952, Turing was charged with “gross indecency” and compelled – in order to avoid prison – to undergo “chemical castration”. Two years later, he took his own life at the age of just 41.

Or maybe you think of religious fundamentalists trying to exorcise gay identities as if they were demons, forcing people to deny who they are through ritual and fear.

Whatever thoughts come to your mind, I’m confident we can agree conversion therapy is barbaric and has no place in the world.

So, surely Scottish Government plans to outlaw the practice should be supported without question?

I’m afraid, events of the past week should make us wary about leaping to law on this subject.

The publication on Wednesday of a review, under the chairmanship of leading paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, of gender identity services provided for young people by the NHS in England must make MSPs pause to consider the implications of future legislation.

The Cass review revealed that young people struggling with their gender were failed by medics at the Tavistock and Portman gender identity development service (Gids) clinic. Cass identified a lack of research and “remarkably weak” evidence on the impact of serious medical interventions. And she said the “toxicity” of the debate around gender meant medical professionals were afraid to discuss their views, openly.

It’s certainly true that discussion has been toxic. Now would be as good a time as any to clarify what caused that toxic atmosphere.

The discussion around gender identity was not dragged into the gutter by feminists who warned against allowing male-bodied people into women-only spaces but by those – usually men – who responded by threatening concerned women right up until the point the decision to send male rapists to female prisons shamed some of them into silence. Nor was the conversation debased by those who warned against medicalising gender-confused children, sending them on a pathway to life-changing surgery.

Rather, it was made almost impossible by those angry activists who denounced anyone who dared question the wisdom of using drugs to block puberty as a right-wing transphobe who wished nothing less than to drive children to suicide.

The Cass report must put an end to that particular line of attack.

An independent medical expert now reports that “puberty-blockers” were prescribed despite entirely inadequate research into their effects. If, after reading Cass’s report, anyone continues to argue that raising concerns about “puberty-blockers” is a sign of bigotry, then it's for them to square with themselves their continuing support for the performance of medical experiments on confused children.

Of particular interest to anyone following the plans of the Scottish Government are Cass’s findings that some medical professionals involved working within Gids feared accusations they were carrying out conversion practices. There were also fears about how new legislation on such therapies might be interpreted.

A central tenet of trans-activism is that an individual declaring a new gender identity should receive nothing but positive affirmation. Anything less, goes the argument, could be harmful to a vulnerable young person. But what if, quite reasonably, a parent decides that rather than immediately agreeing that their five year old son is now their daughter, they wish to explore the reasons why their child might feel the way they do? What if a therapist, rather than affirming a young patient’s identity, starts by talking about the factors that may have led to his decision?

It is not – given the experiences of those who spoke to Hilary Cass – at all far-fetched to see how conversion therapy legislation might be distorted under the influence of activists.

On January 9, Scottish ministers launched a consultation “Ending conversion practices in Scotland”. The plan is to move forward with legislation that will outlaw any attempt to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. The new consultation paper includes an assurance that exploration of a child’s feelings about their identity would not be considered a conversion practice.

I’m afraid this is little comfort. We saw during the passage of the Scottish Government’s unworkable reform of the Gender Recognition Act - blocked by Scottish Secretary Alister Jack on the grounds it impacted on the UK-wide Equality Act - that adherence to trans ideology trumps good law making when it comes to a troubling number of MSPs.

Organisations pushing for a new law against conversion practices include Stonewall, once a great organisation leading the fight for gay rights and now reduced to peddling such mortifyingly deranged stuff as its recent claim that two-year-olds (who, I know from experience, will run headfirst into a fishpond) can recognise their trans identity. Stonewall and others – including a number of “charities” largely funded by the Scottish Government – have vested interests in pushing the law as far as theycan.

In response, MSPs must be ruthless in their refusal to allow ideologues to shape legislation.

Those who have spent recent years demanding access for children to puberty blockers have enabled what would appear to be a major medical scandal of proportions not yet imagined. This being so, their influence on any kind of legislation must be resisted.

Yes, conversion therapy is horrific and yes, any civilised country should not tolerate it. But as Scotland moves forward to legislation, politicians must ensure their decisions are driven by what’s best for troubled young people rather than any desire to placate an increasingly discredited trans rights movement.