Conversion therapy is opposed on grounds that it implies homosexuality is a mental disorder or a perversion at best, that the practice is steeped in pseudoscience and that sexual orientation can actually be changed.

The fact that it tends to be espoused by fundamentalist Christian groups, who view homosexuality as a sin, does not help its image and neither does its association with treatments of the past – long since discontinued – ranging from aggressive hormonal therapy to electric shocks.

Any attempt to change someone’s sexual orientation is deeply frowned upon by national mental health professional associations in the US, the UK and other countries, which say it is not only ineffective but can do psychological damage as well as promote prejudice.

So it is quite understandable that conversion therapy should be seriously questioned on health and ethical grounds. The government has gone a step further with a Bill, supported by the Opposition, that would make Malta the first country in Europe to criminalise the practice “as a deceptive and harmful act against a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression…”

Conversion therapy is defined in the Bill as a treatment that aims to change, repress or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, though it excludes any counselling related to the exploration of sexual identity. It would become unlawful not only to perform conversion therapy on minors or other vulnerable persons such as those suffering from a mental infirmity but also for a professional to offer it to any person.

The Church has issued a position paper that seeks to leave the door open for people to seek, of their own free will, “appropriate forms of therapy” to change their sexual orientation or gender identity. Taking a mainly human rights perspective, it argues that denial ofthis choice, especially under the guidance of a professional, amounts to discrimination, given that it is “perfectly legitimate to assist a heterosexual to become a homosexual”.

The gay lobby group was outraged and so was the Prime Minister, both essentially arguing that the Church still equates homosexuality with disorder, a charge the authors of the paper have denied.

The position paper appears to gloss over the current scientific consensus on gender identity: that it cannot be changed. The gay and lesbian lobby is, on the other hand, highly sensitive to the suggestion that one should perhaps stay open minded about this – the latter is a reasonable view to take on condition that professional ethics are rigorously adhered to.

Both sides have taken legitimate and well-intentioned stands, coming at the issue from different angles. However, there are fundamental points which are unassailable on which they can agree; the right of adults to make informed choices and the rejection of any notion that homosexuality is a disease.

This would appear to present grounds for a narrowing of the gap between the two positions, complex and well-argued as both may be. It is not unreasonable to propose that the wording of the Bill be tweaked to take cognizance of the Church’s legal concerns while, at the same time, retaining the fundamental objection to conversion therapy under the generally accepted definition of involving deception, imposition and promulgation of unscientific and prejudiced views of homosexuality.

The Bill was, after all, subject to public consultation. And the authors of the position paper are leading experts in law, ethics and psychotherapy. Their paper is certainly not the product of the regressive mentality it has been made out to be.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.