Five years in prison. That is the maximum sentence proposed under the government’s new draft Conversion Practices Bill, which aims to outlaw efforts to change an individual’s sexual orientation or transgender identity. The legislation, laid before Parliament on Thursday, marks a definitive step in a policy journey that began with a government promise in 2018.

The bill creates two distinct criminal offenses: one for conducting practices that cause "serious harm, alarm or distress," and a second for assisting or encouraging such practices to occur outside of England and Wales. Beyond incarceration, offenders could face unlimited fines. The move is intended to address what the Cabinet Office describes as a gap in existing domestic abuse and coercive control laws, which officials argue do not fully capture the specific nature of conversion-based harm.

Defining the Threshold for Criminality

For years, the debate surrounding a potential ban has stalled over fears of unintended consequences. Critics and some professional bodies have long warned that poorly drafted legislation could inadvertently criminalize parents, teachers, or healthcare professionals engaged in exploratory conversations with young people experiencing gender-related distress.

To mitigate these concerns, the government has set a high legal threshold. The bill defines conversion practices as conduct that "aims to change someone's sexual orientation or transgender identity through abusive acts that seriously harm the victim." By centering the definition on "abusive acts," the government is attempting to carve out a space for legitimate medical and therapeutic practice.

Dr. Hilary Cass, whose landmark report on children’s gender identity services has become a touchstone for the current policy debate, expressed cautious support. "I am pleased to see that the government is bringing forward legislation which not only gives a clearer definition of what conversion practices are, compared to previous drafts, but also what they are not," Cass said, emphasizing the need for clinicians to operate without the constant threat of litigation.

The Scale of the Problem

Quantifying the prevalence of conversion practices has historically been difficult. A 2018 government survey found that 5 percent of LGBT+ respondents had been offered some form of conversion therapy, while 2 percent had undergone it. However, those figures lacked specific definitions and context.

New data from the anti-LGBT abuse charity Galop provides a sharper, albeit more harrowing, picture. Between 2022 and 2025, the charity identified more than 300 reports of conversion practices. A sample analysis revealed that more than half of these cases were initiated by parents. The reports included instances of physical and sexual violence, forced marriages, and cases where individuals were taken abroad to undergo practices that would be illegal in the UK.

New Civil Protections

In addition to criminal penalties, the bill introduces "Conversion Practice Protection Orders." These civil powers are designed to be pre-emptive, allowing authorities to intervene when someone is deemed at risk of abuse before a crime is committed.

This dual approach—criminalizing past acts while providing civil tools for prevention—reflects the government's attempt to satisfy both campaigners who have demanded a ban for years and those who remain wary of state overreach.

Key Takeaways

  • Criminal Penalties: The bill proposes up to five years in prison and unlimited fines for those found guilty of conducting abusive conversion practices.
  • Legal Definitions: The legislation specifically targets "abusive acts" intended to change sexual orientation or gender identity, aiming to protect legitimate healthcare and exploratory therapy.
  • Pre-emptive Powers: New civil "Conversion Practice Protection Orders" will allow authorities to intervene in cases where individuals are deemed at risk of being subjected to these practices.

The Road Ahead

The bill now faces a period of intense parliamentary and public scrutiny. While the Equality and Human Rights Commission has welcomed the move, its chair, Mary-Ann Stephenson, noted that the legislation must maintain "clear definitions and boundaries" to ensure religious freedoms are not disproportionately restricted.

With the draft now laid, the focus shifts to the legislative committee stage. The government’s challenge will be to shepherd the bill through the Commons without the U-turns that characterized previous attempts. For the thousands of individuals who have reported being subjected to these practices, the question is no longer whether the government will act, but how quickly the bill can become law.