The crisis over conversion therapy at the top of UK mental health care

Urgent July 3 deadline for a key vote

By a guest contributor

One of the UK’s leading organisations for psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors is currently experiencing the biggest ever test of its leadership, with profound consequences for the delivery of nationwide mental health services.  

But despite the boiling nature of controversy over child ‘transition’ and the Cass Review, little media attention has been paid to the intense internal campaigning at the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy by gender identity activists to gain control of future policy in relation to ‘conversion therapy’.

The dispute at the heart of the UKCP is over the Memorandum of Understanding against Conversion Therapy (MoU).  It’s been brewing for some time. Last November the UKCP Board issued a key statement on exploratory therapy - which ultimately led to its decision to exit the MoU in April this year. 

That statement explicitly recognised that exploratory therapy is not equivalent to conversion therapy, and that gender critical (sex realist) therapist beliefs were specifically protected by case law. When UKCP eventually pulled out of the MoU, it cited child safeguarding concerns. 

Now, gender identity campaigners are trying to force UKCP to return as a signatory to the problematic agreement - by triggering an election for the removal of its Board. 

Here’s the UKCP statement on its exit from the Memorandum of Understanding.

‘The UKCP Board of Trustees reached this decision following concerns it held regarding whether the MoU applies exclusively to adults, or if children and young people are included in its scope. UKCP has received clarification that the MoU does indeed relate to all ages. 

Upon investigation, it became evident that there are historical concerns held by a number of UKCP colleges that regulate psychotherapeutic work with children and young people relating to this subject, and which have yet to be addressed – hence our decision to withdraw at this time.’

The activist group Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia (TACTT) then created a petition - demanding that the MoU be rejoined, and that an election must be held so that members could vote on whether to remove the UKCP Board. 

That’s despite the fact that some of the original supporters of the MoU - such as Pink Therapy and The Albany Trust - are no longer signatories to the MoU.

The UKCP’s internal rules meant that an election had to be called, in which all UKCP registered therapists were invited to vote.  Voting opened on 20 June and closes on July 3. 

Some background.

The importance of the MoU can’t be overstated. Together with Stonewall's Diversity Champions Program, it forms the basis for some of the most contentious, divisive and damaging debates euphemistically described as a ‘culture war’ by the media. 

The MoU was originally drafted by the Coalition Against Conversion Therapy (CACT) based on Queer Theory – on which much transgender ideology is based. CACT is the main organisation currently advising the Labour Party on this issue.  

It’s thought to be behind the Labour push for an outright ban on conversion therapy in Labour’s election manifesto. 

Queer Theory posits that children are no different to adults when it comes to ideas about what it means to be trans, and so therefore should be treated in the same way as adults. Gender identity activists believe that it is the responsibility of therapists to ‘affirm’ a ‘trans identity’. They frame standard exploratory talking therapy as ‘conversion therapy’, because it does not automatically affirm. 

This goes against established child and adolescent ethical practice, which treats children differently to adults. This is why it raised significant safeguarding concerns for the UKCP Board. 

The previous UKCP Chair, Martin Pollecoff, said: 

‘This was understood within the UKCP as for adults only. We have ten colleges, including a  child’s college and a family and systemic college. If we were going to deal with children, both of those would have to be involved. No one on that original [CACT] group were child or family therapists.’

The UKCP held a webinar for therapists on June 17, to explain in detail its reasoning behind its withdrawal as an MoU signatory. It advised that in addition to its child safeguarding concerns, the MoU had been cited in two legal cases that have been brought against them. 

The case of James Esses, the student who sued his training provider for not supporting his ‘gender critical’ views, is one of those cases. 

In effect UKCP has confirmed that as the MoU was originally intended only as a campaign document - not a legally robust policy - the MoU’s inclusion in court cases is an unintended consequence that’s led to insurance premiums for UKCP skyrocketing.  

The annual premium has gone up from £3,000 to £90,000 a year.  Martin Pollecoff warns: ‘At the end of the day the MoU group has no funds, and it is all the UKCP members that will have to pay up.’

A commitment has been made by UKCP to the LGBTQ community that it would like to draw up a more detailed document to address any issues surrounding ‘conversion therapy’. It’s inviting all interested therapists to take part and contribute.

In addition, the author of the widely accepted Cass Review, Dr Hilary Cass, has previously made public comments about the generic fear amongst many mental health professionals, including psychotherapists, that they will face accusations based on the MoU of providing ‘conversion therapy’ to trans clients, both children under 18 and adults, when using standard exploratory therapy approaches.

Peter Jenkins of Thoughtful Therapists, who has worked on the UKCP ethics committee, advises:  

‘A decision to remove the entire UKCP Board, and for the UKCP to return to the MoU, will do nothing to stem professional anxiety about this fear, or current flight from the field, and is likely to significantly deepen the current malaise within the mental health professions on this issue.’

This is confirmed by Student Academics For Academic Freedom (SAFAF) who say that it’s impacting current trainees of counselling, psychotherapy and psychology who are working towards UKCP registration. Many feel they are unable to put forward any dissenting views against Queer or trans ideology in their training programs - for fear of reprisal from either the teachers or other students. This is having a chilling effect on university campuses.

A SAFAF spokesperson, who needs to remain anonymous, said:  

‘A number of our members have highlighted concerns around their continued training. With complaints made against them for simply asking questions on coursework which include trans and gender ideology. The very fact questions are being shut down, in what is a profession which needs to ask questions of its patients, means many others are fearful of speaking up when watching the consequences faced by their fellow trainees.’

The UKCP has advised that if the Board is removed, then normal operations will be interrupted for up to six months whilst new Trustees are recruited. This will potentially affect the registration of new students at the end of their training and could have a knock-on effect for the mental health services in this country over the coming year.

All UKCP registered therapists should have received an email from Civica Election Services (CES) with instructions on voting procedures. The option is to either keep or remove the entire UKCP Board. The election will run from 20^th June to 3^rd July when voting closes. Any therapist who has not received an email should contact the UKCP and advise them.