Western Australia
WA Government's
"Conversion therapy" ban
The WA Government has been running a consultation on “conversion therapy” legislation that has included many LGBTIQ activist groups and some Christian denominations, but has excluded many other denominations and faith groups.
What do we know about the Government’s plans?
Government announcement
In 2022, the Western Australian Government announced that they were planning to ban “LGBTIQA+ conversion practices”.
Attorney General john Quigly’s statement was particularly concerning, as he seems to see religious communities as the problem, and only committed to consulting with health professionals, and not faith leaders:
Conversion therapy remains a problem in some Australian religious communities.
Evidence from survivors and advocacy organisations has demonstrated ongoing harm and trauma caused by these practices, including long term mental illness and suicidality.
Whilst our reforms will prohibit conversion and suppression practices, the ban will not interfere with health professionals’ ability to provide suitable therapy and counselling to LGBTIQA+ patients without fear of being prosecuted.
It is appropriate that people are professionally supported when they explore their own concepts of self, others, and sexuality, and that they receive expert assessment, treatment and care when seeking to affirm gender through medical treatments such as hormone blocking therapies or surgical procedures.
We will consult with the LGBTIQA+ community and the medical profession as we draft the new laws.
Confidential Consultation Paper
On December, The LGBTIQ newspaper “Out In Perth” published an article revealing the existence of a secret consultation paper on banning “conversion practices”. The paper had been provided to GLBTI Rights in Ageing Inc. (GRAI) for feedback. Consultation with faith leaders reveals that some denominations were provided the paper on a confidential basis, but many were not. Following that, Government MPs have stated that the paper is no longer confidential.
What is in the paper?
The paper proposes a model of “conversion therapy” ban that is a very close copy of the legislation in Victoria. There are many problems with the paper. The most significant concerns are:
Conflates sexual orientation and gender identity
The paper tries to cover both sexual orientation and gender identity with the same legislation. Sexual orientation is about who a person finds sexually attractive – members of the opposite sex, members of the same sex, both or neither. Gender identity is about whether a person feels like they are a male, female or neither.
These two concepts are very different and need to be treated differently. There has been a lot of controversy around medical treatment of gender identity or ‘gender dysphoria’. The use of puberty blockers and sex-change (or ‘gender-affirming’) surgery has been heavily criticised by medical practitioners around the world, with the UK and European countries stepping back from ‘affirmation only’ treatment and banning the use of puberty blockers in under 18s.
'Change or Suppress'
The paper uses a definition of a “conversion practice” modelled on the Victorian legislation:
any practice or conduct directed towards a person or group of persons, the purpose, or purported purpose of which is to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
The use of the term “suppress” causes significant problems. “Suppress” includes simply not doing something. In Victoria, “suppress” includes celibacy, or simply encouraging someone not to act on a sexual desire.
Sexual orientation means 'sexual activity'
The paper also uses the Victorian definition of ‘sexual orientation’, which is dangerously broad:
having, or not having, a sexual attraction to, or sexual relations with, persons of a different sex; or persons of the same sex; or persons of a different sex and persons of the same sex; or all persons irrespective of their sex.
In Federal legislation, as well as most other states, sexual orientation refers to who a person is attracted to. In contrast, the paper’s definition not only includes attraction but sexual activity.
This means that it would be illegal to “suppress” (by teaching, encouragement or prayer) any person’s “sexual relations” for any reason. Any kind of “suppression” would be an illegal “conversion practice”. This would even include teaching teenagers to have sexual restraint, or telling a married man not to cheat on his wife.
No protections for families or faith communities
The consultation paper suggests strong protections for medical practitioners, but very weak protections for parents guiding their children and religious teaching. The only protection is for “a mere expression of belief or religious principle which is not intended to change or suppress an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity”.
However, because of the definitions of “suppress” and “sexual orientation”, any kind of teaching encouraging a person to restrain their sexual activity would be “suppression”, and so not protected. This even includes parents teaching their children.
The time to speak up is NOW!
Search for your MP to find their contact details and a guide to writing or meeting with them. You can search by MP name, electorate, suburb or postcode.
