Victoria should amend the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021 to clarify what a conversion practice is, following the guidelines NSW and SA laws, according to a submission by religious leaders to a Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC) inquiry.
The VLRC is conducting a “focused review on how the change or suppression ban is working.” The submission from Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and Sikh representatives argues that the act overreached in its effect on religion, and that legislation in other states achieved similar aims but were better targeted. The representatives include peak leaders such as the Catholic Bishops and peak councils of other faith bodies.
“From the outset, we affirm our opposition to harmful practices of coercion,” the religious leaders submit. “However, as the Catholic Bishops of Victoria and Islamic Council of Victoria (ICV) stated in an open letter to the then Premier in 2021, the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act, extends far beyond addressing these harmful practices.
“In their letter to the Premier, the Bishops and ICV shared concerns that the Bill (now Act) ‘criminalises conversation between children and parents, interferes with sound professional advice, and silences ministers of religion from providing personal attention for individuals freely seeking pastoral care for complex personal situations. It includes ill-conceived concepts of faith and conversation, vague definitions, and scientifically and medically flawed approaches. It places arbitrary limitations on parents, families and people of faith. … the Bill appears to target people of faith in an unprecedented way, puts limits on ordinary conversations in families, and legislates for what prayer is legal and what prayer is not.’ “
It is our belief that in the five years intervening, the Act’s broad overreach, ambiguity and ill-defined concepts of faith has caused confusion in the community. This is particularly evident among people of faith – most particularly religious leaders and parents – who appear to be disproportionately affected by the Act in a manner not observed in other jurisdictions. These jurisdictions, while legislating to ban conversion and suppression practices have done so with far narrower terms.”
The submission includes a reference to the low number of reported conversion or suppression practices, citting 14 instances citing the VLRC consultation paper.
The submission answers to questions raised by the inquiry include:
How clear is the Act’s definition of what is and what is not a change or suppression practice?
“A considerable degree of ambiguity surrounds what constitutes a change or suppression practice, leading to confusion within our communities – particularly as it relates to the ordinary lived experiences of people of faith. The net effect has been a reluctance among religious leaders, parents and other care givers to engage in this area, for fear of falling foul of the law, now or in the future.”
Is greater clarity needed about how people of faith can hold and express their beliefs to support clear understanding and compliance with the Act?
“Greater clarity is clearly needed. There has been a chilling effect, particularly on religious leaders, many of whom feel constrained or unable to provide appropriate pastoral care to those seeking guidance for fear of breaching the law. There are numerous instances in which leaders, parents or care-givers remain uncertain about how they can act due to ambiguities in the legislation. For example, would parents of a minor experiencing gender incongruence be considered to be engaging in a “suppression practice” by adopting a “wait and see” approach?”
The submission calls for the Act to be amended so that “parental guidance, pastoral care, counselling and religious teaching are not unduly and disproportionally restricted.”
Image: VLRC review logo