Debate contribution: Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
Debate contribution by Mrs Diane Dodds on .
- MLA
- Mrs Diane Dodds
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 15 September 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Conversion Practices (Criminalisation) Bill: Second Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5706401
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Member mentions Dr Hilary Cass. There are good things in her review; there are other things that I disagree with. However, regarding puberty blockers, in her review, she said that medical intervention has taken over in treatment provision and that exploration has been made synonymous with conversion therapy when good psychological care is about getting young people the help and the treatment that they need and deserve. That is hugely important. Those who think that the Bill is limited should read the legal opinion, because it is sobering. In it, we are given a long, two-page list of those people who will be caught by the Bill. To Members' relief, I will not read it here this afternoon, but it covers all those things. In summary, what are we dealing with in the Bill? It is a Bill that will be used against ordinary parents, teachers, pastors and leaders. It is a wide-ranging Bill, but, unfortunately, the key terms in it, such as:
"to change or suppress sexual orientation or gender identity ",
are relatively undefined. The issue of the intent to harm required and the issue of suppressing, again, are undefined. Some of this is very subjective, and we are basing law on subjective ideas and some people's changing ideas about gender identity. The Bill also equates advice with abuse, which is an important point. Every good parent should exercise boundaries, teach their child principles and have caution around the things that they may not want their child exposed to, but the Bill potentially criminalises that discipline. Good pastoral care is the bedrock of our schools and our education system, and it should be in our youth groups and wherever we engage with young people, but those who engage with and talk to young people solely with the idea of pastoral care in mind are at risk under the terms of the Bill. I urge the House to consider the Bill carefully. I will vote against it, as I cannot see enough in it to entice me to ever vote for it. I urge Members who flirt with the ideas of gender self-identification etc to carefully consider how they are using the criminal law to install that in our statute book.
373 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Uncertain
Uncertain: this record is excluded from all totals until a person reviews it.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.48 (qualifying needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not qualifying).
- Criteria met: Dog-whistle messaging (0.65).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.79).
- The text adopts the identity-based framing in its own voice (0.56).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The answers did not meet either automatic threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.26 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.25 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.05 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.65 | Yes |
| Controversy escalation | 0.21 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.79 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.48 | Between thresholds |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing | 0.39 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.01 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.04 |
| Adopts it (chosen) | 0.56 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 01:21 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9. This record has been assessed 3 times; the latest assessment is shown.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.