Reading time: 5 minutes

 

Brussels, 2 March 2026

Ahead of today's  European Parliament hearing on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) calling for a ban on so-called “conversion practices,” MCC Brussels today cautioned that sweeping legislative action at EU level risks criminalising legitimate therapeutic engagement, undermining parental responsibility, and narrowing public debate on complex issues relating to gender identity.

MCC Brussels expressed concern that the language surrounding the initiative conflates extreme historical abuses with a far broader and undefined range of behaviours, potentially including ordinary therapeutic exploration, parental hesitation, and open discussion.

“Public debate understandably focuses on disturbing historical cases involving coercion or degrading treatment,” said Ashley Frawley, Visiting Research Fellow at MCC Brussels. “But the definitions now being advanced go much further. There is a real risk that broad, ambiguous legislation could suppress lawful therapeutic practice and penalise families acting in good faith.”

Misleading Use of Data

MCC Brussels also challenged what it described as selective and misleading interpretations of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency’s (FRA) 2023 LGBTIQ Survey III.

ILGA-Europe has cited the survey as evidence of a growing crisis of “conversion therapy” across Europe. However, the FRA survey did not ask respondents about “conversion therapy” as traditionally understood. Instead, it referred to “conversion practices,” without defining the term.

Respondents were therefore left to interpret the phrase themselves. In a highly polarised public climate-where young people are frequently told that anything short of immediate affirmation may constitute “conversion therapy”-the absence of a clear definition raises serious methodological concerns.

According to the survey results:

Trans-identifying respondents reported exposure to “conversion practices” at roughly twice the rate of gay and lesbian respondents.

The most frequently cited source of such experiences was “verbal abuse or humiliation.”

Medical professionals were among the least commonly reported sources.

MCC Brussels argues that without clarity about what respondents understood by “conversion practices,” it is impossible to conclude that the survey demonstrates the prevalence of coercive therapeutic interventions.

“The survey collapses a wide spectrum of experiences into a single category,” Frawley said. “It may include everything from serious misconduct to family disagreement or therapeutic questioning. Presenting this as evidence of organised abuse risks profoundly distorting public debate and policymaking.”

From Abuse to Disagreement

MCC Brussels emphasised that genuine coercion, degrading treatment, or physical abuse should be unequivocally condemned and, where appropriate, prosecuted under existing law.

However, the think tank warned that proposed bans at EU level could blur the distinction between abuse and legitimate therapeutic or parental engagement.

In practice, concerns include the possibility that:

Exploratory psychotherapy aimed at understanding the roots of gender-related distress could be prohibited.

Clinicians exercising professional caution could face legal or reputational risk.

Parents who seek time, second opinions, or alternative approaches for their minor children could be treated as acting abusively.

The 2024 Cass Review in the United Kingdom highlighted a professional climate in which some clinicians felt unable to depart from an “affirmation-only” model for fear of professional consequences. MCC Brussels cautioned that legislation framed too broadly could reinforce such pressures across the EU.

“When anything other than immediate affirmation can be interpreted as ‘conversion therapy,’ clinical judgment risks being replaced by legal risk management,” Frawley noted.

Chilling Effects on Public Discussion

The ECI also raises concerns regarding potential restrictions on speech. In some Member States with existing laws, individuals have faced investigation or prosecution not for conducting therapy, but for expressing views interpreted as promoting prohibited practices.

MCC Brussels warned that poorly drafted EU legislation could extend such chilling effects to academic research, clinical debate, parental guidance, and even private conversation.

“Lawmakers must be careful not to equate discussion with harm,” Frawley said. “Open inquiry and responsible disagreement are essential features of democratic societies and of sound medical practice.”

International Developments and Reassessment

Across Europe and beyond, several countries and professional bodies have begun reassessing aspects of the gender-affirmative model for minors, citing concerns about evidence quality, long-term outcomes, and safeguarding.

At the same time, individuals who have detransitioned have increasingly spoken publicly about their experiences, including dissatisfaction with clinical pathways that they feel did not sufficiently explore underlying issues before medical intervention.

MCC Brussels argues that these developments demonstrate the need for caution, further research, and nuanced policy-not sweeping legal prohibitions that may foreclose legitimate clinical approaches.

A Call for Precision and Proportionality

MCC Brussels stressed that the European Parliament hearing, organised by the LIBE Committee and involving the European Commission, should prioritise clarity of definitions and proportionality of response.

The think tank also questioned whether the EU has clear competence in this domain, given that healthcare regulation and family law primarily fall within Member State authority.

“Citizens and policymakers deserve precision,” Frawley concluded. “Blurring the line between abuse and disagreement may serve activist narratives, but it does not protect vulnerable people. On the contrary, it risks silencing families, narrowing therapeutic options, and entrenching one contested approach as the only legally permissible one. The EU must proceed with caution.”

Event Information

European Parliament Public Hearing on the European Citizens’ Initiative “Ban Conversion Practices”

Date: Monday, 2 March 2026

Time: 15:00–16:45 CET

Committees involved: LIBE, PETI, FEMM

Commission representative: Hadja Lahbib, Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness and Crisis Management

Further Reading and Media

Ashley Frawley’s research on the LGBTI lobby:

Video interview on the funding of the LGBTIQ lobby:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_6lYfTOJkQ