Labour support for ‘conversion therapy’ ban collapses to just 4% when voters see potential impact on parents & pastors

• Parliamentary Select Committee heard oral evidence on the draft Bill; criminal barrister Dennis Kavanaugh “confident” that if it passes, it will be “struck down on human rights grounds”

• Proposed legislative draft could see parents jailed for refusing to buy “chest-binders” for their daughter

• 73% say people should be free to express non-coercive religious views without fear of prosecution

Following an oral evidence hearing during which experts highlighted troubling flaws in the Government’s “conversion therapy” draft Bill, exclusive new polling reveals the details of the ban could prove grossly unpopular, even amongst Labour’s own voters.

Support for the proposals almost completely disappears when voters are shown what the law could mean in practice.

While 57% of Labour voters initially support extending the law, this falls to just 4% when asked if they would still support the ban if certain scenarios were covered by the legislation and could therefore lead to a police investigation or criminal charges.

The findings come from a major new poll of 4,201 UK adults, conducted by Whitestone Insight between 20 and 23 July 2026. The survey is believed to be the largest nationally representative poll specifically examining attitudes towards conversion practices legislation and its potential scope.

Support amongst all adults falls from 51% to just 3% when that support is tested across all 15 scenarios – all of which lawyers for The Christian Institute confirm are possible under the draft Bill. Over three-quarters would oppose the legislation if just one of the scenarios were included within the Bill’s scope.

Scenarios voters did not support being within the scope of a ban included:

• a father advising his 16-year-old son against sexual intercourse;

• a parent refusing to allow their child to join a Pride march;

• a parent refusing to affirm a child’s preferred sex or pronouns;

• a mother refusing consent for her child to have puberty blockers, testosterone or a mastectomy;

• a father praying with his son to stop watching pornography;

• a minister advising a man not to leave his wife for another man;

• a same-sex attracted person advocating celibacy;and

• someone who regrets transgender surgery discouraging others from following the same path.

The findings come as Labour members appear increasingly divided on the merits of the legislation.

A former health minister and sitting backbencher, Preet Kaur-Gill MP, told the Telegraph she had “serious concerns” about the draft Bill undermining the findings of the Cass Report, which encourages parents to take a “cautious approach” when a child states a desire to “transition”.

At the oral evidence hearing, Naz Shah MP highlighted weaknesses in the draft Bill that meant that reasonable conversations between parents and children could be captured if a child was to feel any “distress” as a result.

Strong public support for religious freedom

The findings are particularly striking regarding religious speech and pastoral counsel.

Three out of four of the public (73%) support freedom to express non-coercive religious views without fear of prosecution, compared with just one in ten who disagree. Over half say that religious groups, such as churches or charities, provide important advice and counsel.

The polling also directly tested the potential criminalisation of pastoral advice. When asked whether they would continue supporting the legislation if it encompassed a minister advising a man not to leave his wife for another man, less than 40% remained supportive – that’s less than one in five of all those polled.

Other forms of censoring religious or personal counsel produce similarly fragile support. When asked about a father praying with his son to stop watching pornography, just 36% of initial supporters continued to support the legislation, that’s just 18% of all respondents.

The public’s underlying views therefore suggest that voters draw a clear distinction between genuine abuse, which is already illegal under existing legislation, and ordinary parental, therapeutic and religious activity.

Expressing more general views, the public remained deeply protective of parental rights when it comes to guiding children through questions of gender and sexuality. 68% believe parents should have freedom to decide how best to raise their children, while 74% reject the idea that Government knows better than parents how to raise children.

The polling also exposes how little the public currently knows about the legislation. Over two-thirds have not heard of it, while only 4% say they know about it in detail.

The Christian Institute says the results highlight the danger of presenting the legislation as a simple measure against coercion when its scope could reach far beyond abusive conduct, potentially placing ordinary parental decisions, personal conversations and religious counsel under the shadow of criminal law.

Simon Calvert, Deputy Director of The Christian Institute, said:

“This polling exposes the enormous gap between support for the words ‘ban conversion therapy’ and support for what the sweeping draft legislation the Government proposes could actually mean in people’s lives.

“Labour voters initially appear supportive, but when asked if they would still support it in 15 concrete situations in which ordinary parental decisions, private conversations, prayer, pastoral advice and personal opinions could potentially become criminal matters, that support melts away.

“The message on religious freedom is particularly clear. Nearly three-quarters of people believe that non-coercive religious views should be capable of being expressed without fear of prosecution. When voters are asked about outlawing a minister giving pastoral advice to a man about his marriage, support for the legislation falls below 20%.

“Christians and other religious believers should not have to wonder whether their leaders could face police investigation because they offered someone advice grounded in their faith. Nor should parents have to fear criminalisation for making ordinary decisions about how to raise their children.

“Across the country, only 3% support a ban once confronted with all 15 scenarios. Of those who initially support the idea of the new law, three-quarters would withdraw that support if just one of the scenarios put to them led to police investigations or criminal charges.

“This is not a partisan reaction. The concern runs across political parties and reflects something much more fundamental: people want protection from coercion and abuse, but they do not want parents, therapists or religious leaders criminalised for having conversations or expressing views that someone else finds unwelcome.

“Before Parliament creates new criminal offences, ministers need to be honest with the public about what those offences could actually cover. This poll shows that when people are faced with the potential consequences, support for a conversion practices law collapses.”

Independent MP for Canterbury, Rosie Duffield, added: 

“The Government’s proposed legislative ban on ‘conversion therapy’ would clearly give rise to a plethora of untenable situations for parents, punishing those who want to take a cautious approach when their vulnerable 13-year-old daughter suddenly declares themselves to be ‘transgender’. 

“Parents shouldn’t feel threatened into buying developmentally stunting chest-binders for their child; nor should they be punished for wanting to call them by their true name, or use accurate pronouns, or refusing them puberty blockers or hormones which could cause long-term harm. 

“The ‘conversion therapy ban’ ensnares the very adults whose job it is to protect children from rushing in to major life-changing decisions at a premature age. It’s clear that the public will not support this reality.”

Experts raise alarm at oral evidence hearing

The Select Committee on the heard oral evidence from subject experts on Thursday 29 October as to the drafting of the legislation.

Director of Gay Men’s Network and criminal barrister Dennis Kavanagh told the Committee: “If you can catch a parent who says ‘Honey, I do not believe you were born in the wrong body. I do not want to pay for you to have cross-sex hormones’… If that can trigger the criminal offence, we’re in a very dangerous situation… This offence is so poorly drafted and so incoherent and spreads the net of criminal liability so widely that it cannot be rescued.”

Helen Joyce of Sex Matters also joined the panel, adding that this draft Bill “is as wide a net as it is possible to imagine casting. It is actually extremely easy the way the law is written for a quite ordinary person in a host of ordinary situations – people with parental responsibility, teachers who have to uphold safeguarding, employers who must enforce same-sex rules for single-sex spaces. All of these people can easily be caught by it.”

Focusing on the impact the draft Bill could have on parent-child relationships, Joyce further commented: “This Bill makes no distinction whatsoever between adults and children. The words adult, child, parent and family do not appear in it. And it is simply inappropriate to say that the way that you act towards a child – that might be to enforce a family rule, to take them away from bad influences – can be compared with coercive control. If my husband takes my phone away from me because he doesn’t want me contacting people, that’s coercive control. If I do that to my child, that may be responsible parenting.”

Supporting the legislation, Galop’s Kai O’Doherty called the draft Bill “a great start” but says it must not be ‘weakened’.

ENDS

Notes to editors

Initial support for extending the law was: Labour 57%, Green 61%, Reform 46%, with Conservative and other voter groups detailed in the full report.

Across the 15 scenarios, among those who initially supported extending the law:

• 3% would still support it after every scenario;

• 76% would oppose it if at least one scenario were included;

• 17% would neither support every scenario nor oppose any.

The strongest resistance concerned advocacy of celibacy, parental advice against teenage sex, participation in Pride, and prayer concerning pornography. In the scenario involving a father advising his 16-year-old son against sexual intercourse, 38% opposed the legislation compared with 36% who continued to support it. For a same-sex attracted person advocating celibacy, 36% opposed compared with 33% supporting.

On religious freedom specifically:

• 73% support freedom to express non-coercive religious views without fear of prosecution;

• 51% say religious groups provide important advice and counsel;

• 44% agree Government should not restrict non-coercive religious conversations;

• when asked about a minister advising a man not to leave his wife for another man, just 39% of initial supporters would continue supporting the legislation, against 35% who would oppose it.