Draft Bill to enforce belief in “transgenderism”

Can you please point to some information on this please? I can only find a draft bill relating to abusive conversion practices.

This is the bill;

www.gov.uk/government/publications/draft-conversion-practices-bill/conversion-practices-draft-bill

This is Stonewalls response;

www.stonewall.org.uk/get-involved/campaign-with-us/ban-conversion-practices/everything-you-need-know-about-conversion-practices

Yes, it relates to abusive conversion practices which I can't see parents wishing to protect their children ever engaging with.

I thought that was already outlawed?

These misleading thread titles are so annoying.

Thank you Sago

I'm not sure that beliefs (as opposed to actions) can be enforced or outlawed, but as Smileless says, this is very specifically about abusive conversion, and it applies to those attempting to 'convert' others to or from a belief that they are transgender.

It would make it an offence to encourage children towards hormone or surgical treatments, which, IMO can only be a good thing, as both are abusive. It would also make it an offence to abusively 'convert' someone from their belief that they are 'in the wrong body'. The word 'abusive' is crucial here. It is defined as something that causes:
(a) serious harm to the individual’s physical or mental health, or
(b) serious alarm or distress to the individual which has a substantial adverse effect on their usual day-to-day activities.

Is anyone going to argue that causing serious harm to others is acceptable?

The lgb alliance have some similar concerns to the op, they are opposed to the bill, they believe it will harm gay people ( particularly lesbians) as it poses a risk to those who suggest to young women that rather than being ' born in the wrong body' they may be gay.
I trust the definition of serious harm in the way I trust some people's definition of women.

I mean b) alone is a serious worry to me.

You have a deeper understanding of the issues Galaxy, and I don't understand how lesbians would be adversely affected. They seem to have been shoved aside in any discussions I have seen around this topic.
A bit muddle, my apologies.

Surely ‘belief’ can’t be ‘enforced’.