Dear UKCP,
We are writing in response to your recently published statement on the law regarding so-called ‘gender-critical’ views and its implications for the practice of psychotherapy and psychotherapeutic counselling. We are a group of over 100 registered therapists and trainee therapists, some of whom are trans, non-binary and/or gender-expansive people and some of whom are allies. We note that trans voices are palpably absent from UKCP’s statement and hope that this letter goes some way towards correcting the balance of discourse in the psychotherapy and counselling profession, which routinely discusses trans lives without centring the voices and lived experiences of trans people themselves.
Introduction
We were concerned by the publication of UKCP’s statement, which has created confusion and fear within both the profession and trans communities. We wonder why the statement was published at this time, with no explanation of its place within or alongside the UKCP Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (2019) and the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (2022), of which UKCP is a signatory.
Although not all of our members are registered to practise with UKCP, many are, and our stance outlined in the above paragraph is consistent with several points in UCKP’s Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (2019), specifically:
Point 3: Respect your client’s autonomy (p.1).
Point 24: Understand the limits of your competence and stay within them in all your professional activity, referring clients to another professional when appropriate. This includes recognising that particular client groups, such as children and families, have needs which not all practitioners are equipped to address (p.3).
We believe that therapy which affirms trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients has the power to save lives. There is overwhelming evidence that gender-affirming care can improve mental health and general wellbeing, whilst decreasing risk of suicide (Lawson et al, 2023). We advocate for an affirmative approach, in which the therapist supports the client’s right to define themselves. Affirmative therapy is exploratory in nature. However we are concerned that the term ‘exploratory therapy’ is increasingly being used to justify therapy undertaken by those with so-called ‘gender-critical’ beliefs. We believe that unless a therapist holds the view that being trans is one of many potentially favourable and healthy outcomes, they are not competent to work with gender in the therapy room. Any ‘exploratory’ approach that does not consider transness to be as good as any other state of being, and which seeks to uncover and possibly ‘fix’ the ‘reason’ for the client’s gender identity is conversion therapy.
As with any marginalised client group, therapists have the task of unlearning preconceptions or pre-decided theoretical ideas regarding a client’s identity in order to work safely and effectively. Consider, for example, the similarities with lesbian, gay or bisexual affirming practice, where therapists are asked to examine and unlearn unconscious biases about sexuality, and to refer clients on if this is not possible (point q, section 5, UKCP, no date). It should be no different for gender identity and gender-expansive experiences.
Simply put, we consider it exceedingly difficult for therapists to hold the dual position of having ‘gender-critical’ beliefs whilst offering genuinely ‘exploratory therapy’ with trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients. We are concerned that this is not the view UKCP presents to its members and the general public with its new statement. To position therapists with ‘gender-critical’ beliefs as the main proponents of 'exploratory therapy' is highly misleading.
Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy
TACTT wishes to understand why UKCP has published this statement now and what purpose it is intended to achieve. We would like to remind UKCP that, as a signatory of the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (MoU, 2022), you are already bound to an ethical stance on working with gender diversity:
Ethical practice in these cases requires the practitioner to have adequate knowledge and understanding of gender and sexual diversity and to be free from any agenda that favours one gender identity or sexual orientation as preferable over other gender and sexual diversities. For this reason, it is essential for clinicians to acknowledge the broad spectrum of sexual orientations and gender identities and gender expressions. (MoU, 2022, p2; emphasis added)
Indeed, point 36 of the UKCP Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (2019, p.4) specifically highlights that practitioners should be familiar with the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (MoU) (2022). We are concerned by the stark omission of the MoU in this statement. We are also concerned to find a discrepancy in point 30 of UKCP’s own Code of Ethics and Professional Practice:
'Not allow prejudice about a client’s sex, age, colour, race, disability, communication skills, sexuality, lifestyle, religious, cultural or political beliefs, social economic or immigration status to adversely affect the way you relate to them.' (UKCP, 2019, p.4)
We notice that gender is not included in these protections and wonder why? As a signatory of the MoU, UKCP is committed to the protection of gender diverse people. May we remind UKCP that ‘gender reassignment’ is still a protected characteristic under the Equality Act (2010).
We request more clarity on how UKCP members should act on the information provided in the statement - is it guidance, or policy? How should this statement be observed and put into practice with clients whilst UKCP’s members abide by the UKCP Code of Ethics and Professional Practice and the Memorandum of Understanding?
An exploratory approach?
We disagree that an ‘exploratory’ psychotherapeutic approach is likely to be taken if a practitioner has sympathy with ‘gender-critical’ views (Ashley, 2023). We also find UKCP’s definition of ‘exploratory therapy’ to be unclear. It has already, in the short time since the publication of its statement, created confusion and distress for clients and the wider trans community.
Whilst case law has confirmed that ‘gender-critical’ beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010, the expression of such beliefs is not protected if it causes harm or distress to another. The ‘gender-critical’ belief that sex is binary and immutable translates into a belief that trans identities are not valid. We agree with the MoU (2022, p.2) that ethical practice when working with gender requires clinicians ‘to be free from any agenda that favours one gender identity […] as preferable over other gender […] diversities.’ Thus, when therapists work from the starting point that being trans is not a favourable outcome and are constantly looking for an ‘explanation’ for someone’s identity, this can easily tip into conversion practices. How can a therapist, who does not believe that a trans person is who they define themselves to be, conduct therapy ‘without any preconceptions or pre-decided theoretical framework regarding the person’s gender identity’ (UKCP statement)?
To work with gender ethically and competently, therapists must accept that being trans is a good state of being and a good outcome - one of many possible, valid outcomes, none of which is preferable to another. Furthermore, any movement towards one of many possible, valid outcomes should always be determined by the client.
While we agree that practitioners will often hold differing views on what approach is in the best interests of our clients, what is missing from this statement is any acknowledgement of what the client wants, needs or feels. Clients who are trans, non-binary and gender-questioning do not always present with ‘dysphoria’ and when they do this term means different things to different people. It is vital that we follow our clients’ lead and explore what they want to talk about. In general, therapists are not medical gatekeepers and, outside of gender services, we do not play a role in whether or not clients can or should access medical care. It is our role to support clients’ sense of agency in defining themselves. It is not our job to greenlight our clients’ gender journeys but to be with them as they figure out where they go.
Research by Hunt (2014) found that therapists’ lack of awareness and competence in working with gender can be a barrier to trans people accessing the support and space for exploration they may require from therapy. Indeed, therapists may not actually be someone their clients choose to share their gender journeys with. But the chances of this are more likely if clients feel able to bring all of themselves. Again, we emphasise that trans voices are noticeably absent from UKCP’s statement, which appears to prioritise the right of the therapist to assert an approach that ‘is in the best interest of their clients’ over the actual needs and desires of their clients.
Misleading and contradictory
We found UKCP’s statement to be misleading and contradictory in several ways. First, we are concerned that by leading with a reference to the interim Cass Review and its implications for UKCP members, and then continuing to reference medical interventions for children and young people, it replicates a hyperfocus on trans children and young people which excludes their voices whilst contributing to public hysteria. Furthermore, therapists who are not informed about the Cass Review and its specific emphasis on children and young people may, having read UKCP’s statement, now take this as direction to hold a particular stance in relation to providing psychotherapeutic support to adult clients.
Secondly, we find that overall UKCP’s statement conflates working psychotherapeutically with being directly involved in any medical care trans clients may wish to consider and access. Psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors are not medical professionals. Outside of specific Gender Identity Clinics, therapists are not involved in any decision-making about gender-affirming medical care. This is the case regardless of whether we find ourselves supporting children, young people, or adults. This continues to be the case even if a client self-defines as experiencing gender dysphoria (in whatever language they may use), has a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria, or may be seeking a gender dysphoria diagnosis for any number of reasons.
However, thirdly, this statement unnecessarily centres the concepts of gender dysphoria and medical intervention, as though these are the only experiences of being trans in the world. It is incorrect, disrespectful, and reductionist to regard all trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients as experiencing gender dysphoria and/or seeking gender-affirming medical intervention. Doing so dismisses the incredible diversity of what it means to be trans, non-binary or gender-expansive, and to experience oneself authentically and euphorically. This statement reads as though it has been written by people who have never worked with trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people. As per point 29 of UKCP’s Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (2019, p.4), we urge you to expand your knowledge of transness, to honour the diverse narratives of trans people, and to make space for other experiences, such as gender euphoria and trans joy.
Reductive and pathologising
We find the UKCP Chair’s use of the term ‘gender issues’ in this statement to be reductive. By placing this alongside ‘mental health conditions and emotional issues such as depression, eating disorders and relationship difficulties’, UKCP treats gender diversity as problematic and pathological and ignores the creativity, potentiality and joy that can be found in working with trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients. The Chair further reduces working with gender to ‘questioning’, which in our experience is only ever part of a vast, kaleidoscopic landscape of what it means to work with gender in therapy. Many trans people in therapy already know what their gender is; it is living in a world which denies their existence and does violence to their bodies which causes them psychological distress and harm.
We also wish to remind UKCP that trans people may seek therapy for all the reasons anyone seeks therapy and it is important that therapists do not assume clients are only seeking support for gender identity or transition. We work with clients on family issues, sex and relationships, work, bereavement, isolation, anxiety, depression - all the things any client may bring to therapy.
The Chair’s assertion that a ‘thorough exploration’ of gender ‘can take time, and sometimes a very long time’ is highly alarming, and redolent of the potentially harmful concept of ‘watchful waiting’. It suggests that therapists have the power to decide how long a ‘thorough exploration’ should take, all the while clients are held in a place of discomfort and dis-ease. How will the therapist know when enough time has passed? What will tell them that any exploration is ‘sufficiently thorough’? Again, this argument appears to prioritise the approach of the therapist over the agency of the client. As Saketopoulou (Acast, 2022) suggests, “This seems to have more to do with the person who wants to do the watching, rather than the person that is doing the waiting.”
We believe the Chair’s reference to medical interventions has no place in guidance published by a UK psychotherapy body. As we have stated, in the UK, psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors are not medical gatekeepers; it is not our responsibility to determine ‘risk’ in seeking gender-affirming medical care. UKCP’s statement risks generating panic amongst practitioners and clients by suggesting that it is the therapist’s place to sanction a client’s access to gender-affirming care.
For UKCP therapists who are interested but inexperienced in supporting trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients, such panic prevents them from learning and offering appropriate psychotherapeutic services. Thus, the pool of competent, safe therapists available to such clients becomes ever smaller.
Furthermore, medical intervention is not the only choice open to trans and non-binary clients, and this reductionist statement does nothing to help wider public understanding of the complexity and nuance of what it means to explore gender or to be trans in the world.
We find the Chair’s closing argument troubling. It creates further concern about UKCP’s stance on how its members should work with gender diverse clients:
Regardless of viewpoints, all professional psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors who work with gender dysphoria or gender-identity want the best for the person who is struggling and needs help. If this is always kept in mind, these vitally important conversations, however difficult, can take place in a healthy and supportive manner, allowing us to ensure our clients’ and the public’s best interest and safety remain paramount. (UKCP statement)
Can UKCP clarify why safety is a concern for the public in relation to transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people seeking therapy? How will psychotherapists and counsellors know what is ‘best’ for clients? Who defines ‘best interest’? Does this mean respecting our clients’ autonomy? How will UKCP act to protect trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients from therapists whose ‘gender-critical’ beliefs cannot be bracketed and unduly influence what they believe is in the best interest of the client?
It cannot be said with any certainty that all psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors who work with gender dysphoria or gender identity want the best for those who are struggling and need help. By definition, therapists who hold ‘gender-critical’ beliefs already disagree on what trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people define as best for themselves.
Overall, UKCP’s statement grossly misunderstands the reality of working with trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients who seek psychotherapeutic support. There is nothing ‘difficult’ about being allied with our clients’ views on how they feel about themselves, or their expressions of identity in ways that are fulfilling and meaningful. Doing so is simply part of offering psychotherapeutic support in an ethical manner, making space for difference and diversity along the way.
Conclusion
We ask that UKCP clarifies its original guidance and responds to the questions and points we have raised throughout this letter.
We invite you to further your own education on trans experiences and centre trans voices in any future public commentary on trans lives. This can be achieved by consulting with trans and non-binary therapists, as well as practitioners who are undertaking affirmative therapy with trans, non-binary and gender-questioning clients. There are many practitioners in TACTT and beyond who would generously share their experiences in the interest of making emotional and mental wellness a human right for trans people.
Finally, we urge UKCP to reflect on how a ‘gender-critical’ therapist could reasonably, ethically, and legally be able to offer psychotherapeutic support to trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people. We see nothing but risk of harm in this approach.
We fear that if UKCP continues down this path, the council and its members will be considered by clients to be synonymous with being 'gender-critical'. Indeed even in the short space of time since this statement was published, we are already seeing this fear shared amongst trans people. Many practitioners train for a long time to achieve UKCP membership and registration; it is disappointing that those of us who are trans-affirmative are starting to question our place in the organisation.
We invite other psychotherapists and psychotherapeutic counsellors who support this letter to sign below.
Yours sincerely,
Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia (TACTT)
—
References
Acast. (2022). ‘Exposing Transphobic Legacies, Embracing Trans Life.’ Couched (Podcast) 24 June. Available at: Episode 3, Season 3. iPlayer, 17 February 2023. Available at: couchedpodcast.org/exposing-transphobic-legacies-e...
Ashley, F. (2023). ‘Interrogating Gender-Exploratory Therapy’. Perspect Psychol Sci. 18(2): 472–481. Available at: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10018052/...
Bachman, C. L., & Gooch, B. (2018). LGBT in Britain: Health Report. Stonewall. https://www.stonewall.org.uk/lgbt-britain-health
Hunt, J. (2014). ‘An initial study of transgender people's experiences of seeking and receiving counselling or psychotherapy in the UK.’ Counselling and Psychotherapy Research Journal. 14 (4): 288-296. Available at: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1080/14733145.2013....
Lawson, Z., Davies, S., Harmon, S., Williams, M., Billawa, S., Holmes, R., Huckridge, J., Kelly, P., MacIntyre-Harrison, J., Neill, S., Song-Chase, A., Ward, H., & Yates, M. (2023). ‘A human rights based approach to transgender and gender expansive health.’ Clinical Psychology Forum 369.
Available at: https://explore.bps.org.uk/content/bpscpf/1/369/91
Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy in the UK: Version 2 - Update March 2022. (2022). Available at: bacp.co.uk/media/14985/memorandum-of-understanding...
UKCP. (2019). Code of Ethics and Professional Practice. Available at: psychotherapy.org.uk/media/bkjdm33f/ukcp-code-of-e...
UKCP. (no date). Guidance on the Practice of Psychological Therapies that Pathologies and/or Seek to Eliminate or Reduce Same Sex Attraction. Available at: psychotherapy.org.uk/media/hhxle33g/guidance-on-ps...
Over 750 of you have signed the open letter to UKCP so far - thank you! We sent the letter to UKCP last Monday, 13th November, but they have yet to respond or acknowledge it. We will contact them again and let you know about any response.
If you have signed the leter but your name has not yet appeared on the web page, please check your email for the verification link and make sure you click this, thank you.
Last week the CEO of UKCP replied to us to say that UKCP is working on a substantive response to this open letter. We have not yet had any further details but will share any as we receive them. In the meantime please keep sharing the letter - it's fantastic that we now have over 800 signatures.
We also wanted to draw your attention to an updated reference:
Acast. (2022). ‘Exposing Transphobic Legacies, Embracing Trans Life’ with Dr Jules Gill-Peterson & Dr Avgi Saketopoulou. Couched (Podcast) 24 June. Available at: Episode 3, Season 3. iPlayer, 17 February 2023. Available at: couchedpodcast.org/exposing-transphobic-legacies-e...
This is the same reference used throughout the letter but we have updated it to fully credit Dr Jules Gill-Peterson and Dr Avgi Saketopoulou. We canot edit the text of the letter above but have done so on our website at therapistsagainsttransphobia.org/2023/11/13/open-l... If you haven't yet, we highly recommend listening to this podcast.
It is now one month since TACTT published our open letter to UKCP about their guidance (A) regarding so-called ‘gender-critical’ views, which has been signed by over 900 people. We are still waiting for UKCP to respond to our concerns.
TACTT was dismayed to see the statement (B) published on Monday 11th December regarding ‘Litigation pursued by James Esses – Gender critical beliefs’, which raises fresh concerns about the protection of trans clients as well as trans psychotherapists, counsellors and students training in UKCP-accredited institutions.
We now ask UKCP to respond to these additional concerns and remind UKCP of our original concerns about their guidance regarding so-called ‘gender-critical’ views, published on 2nd November 2023, to which we are still waiting for an answer.
In our open letter dated 12th November 2023, we expressed concern that:
UKCP’s statement contradicts its own Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (C).
UKCP is a signatory to the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (D) and thus bound to an ethical stance on working with gender diversity, which is contravened by its statement.
It is unethical for any practitioner to offer therapy to trans and gender-expansive people when they do not have adequate knowledge and indeed hold an agenda that favours one outcome over another.
There is a lack of clarity on how UKCP members should act on the information provided in its statement.
The statement replicates the public hyperfocus on trans children and young people, which excludes their voices whilst contributing to public hysteria. It is dangerous rhetoric to position conversations about gender alongside questions of public ‘safety’.
UKCP positions psychotherapists and counsellors as medical gatekeepers, when practitioners outside of gender services hold no such power. It is vital that the therapist follows the client’s lead and explores what they want to talk about, without being influenced by the therapist’s own agenda or beliefs. This statement risks generating panic amongst practitioners and clients by suggesting that it is the therapist’s place to sanction a client’s access to gender-affirming care.
UKCP misrepresents the trans experience by focussing predominantly on gender dysphoria and medical intervention, as though these are the only experiences of being trans in the world. Trans people may seek therapy for all the reasons anyone seeks therapy, without transition being a focal point at all.
UKCP is proposing that a ‘gender-critical’ therapist could reasonably, ethically, and legally be able to offer psychotherapeutic support to trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people. We see nothing but risk of harm in this approach.
Following UKCP’s publication of its latest statement on 11th December 2023, TACTT would now like to highlight additional concerns and emphasise that:
UKCP misrepresents trans-affirmative therapy, of which exploration has always been a feature. We argue that affirmative therapy means the therapist supports the client’s right to define themselves.
The splitting of ‘exploratory therapy’ from affirmative therapy is now being used to justify a form of therapy based on so-called ‘gender-critical’ beliefs. To position therapists with ‘gender-critical’ beliefs as the main proponents of 'exploratory therapy' risks harm to trans and gender-questioning clients.
UKCP fails to acknowledge that the holding of ‘gender-critical’ beliefs does not give licence to a person to harm or discriminate against trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people.
By failing to make clear that gender reassignment is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act (2010), UKCP’s latest statement leaves trans, non-binary and gender-questioning psychotherapists and counsellors, including those in UKCP-accredited training organisations, vulnerable to harm and discrimination.
We ended our open letter by stating that those of us who are UKCP members or training in UKCP-accredited organisations are starting to question our place in the organisation. UKCP is fast losing the trust of its members who work in a trans-affirmative way.
We urge UKCP to respond to the concerns raised in our original letter and the additional points raised in this update.
We want our clients to know that access to safe, ethical, affirmative therapy is possible, and we will continue to advocate for their autonomy. We encourage anyone accessing therapy to seek help with their gender to seek clarification on their therapist’s position on trans-affirmative therapy, and be sure that they feel comfortable and safe before proceeding.
We are grateful to the 900+ professionals who have signed our open letter. Please continue to share our updates and encourage others to sign. We will continue to use this platform to update and expand our commentary on UKCP’s actions.
Yours sincerely,
Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia (TACTT)
(A) psychotherapy.org.uk/news/ukcp-guidance-regarding-...
(B) psychotherapy.org.uk/news/litigation-pursued-by-ja...
UKCP has now published a response to our open letter, which is published on their website: psychotherapy.org.uk/news/response-to-tactt-open-l...
TACTT will respond in full in the new year. We are publishing this holding response to let everyone who has signed the letter know about UKCP’s response, and also to make clear that we are disappointed with this response and do not believe it satisfactorily engages with the concerns we have raised.
Yet again, any mention of trans, non-binary and gender-expansive clients and therapists are absent from UKCP’s writing. We are still unaware as to whether any therapists with lived and/or working experiences of gender expansiveness were consulted in the process.
We also reject the framing of ‘affirmative’ therapy as somehow lacking in exploration, as opposed to being an approach in which the therapist supports the client’s right to define themselves and continue to explore with and alongside them.
We are confused about UKCP’s confirmation that their original guidance, which prompted TACTT to write its open letter, should not be taken as a change in policy nor position. It is still unclear what members are supposed to do with the information outlined in this guidance, outside of UKCP’s members being permitted to hold gender critical views whilst carrying out their work.
We continue to view UKCP’s guidance (along with their most recent response) as sitting dangerously close to permitting conversion therapy. This not only puts clients at risk of harm, as this goes against UKCP’s Code of Ethics & Professional Practice, but also negates UKCP’s position as a signatory of the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy.
We will expand upon these points in our full statement in the new year. We will continue to press for the centering of trans, non-binary and gender-expansive voices in conversations about working with gender.
We believe that no gender or sexuality is inherently better than or preferable to any other.
We believe that any place across the spectrum of gender identity and expression is as good an outcome as any other. We believe that everyone should be able to explore their gender and sexuality in an open, non-judgemental space when accessing therapy services.
On 2nd November 2023, UKCP published “guidance regarding gender critical views” for their members. We were very concerned by this guidance and wrote this open letter detailing our concerns, which has been signed by over 1,000 therapists, trainees and other professionals. There followed an exchange of statements with UKCP, which you can read on our blog (1) and as updates to this open letter. We are now publishing this as our final update, inviting UKCP into dialogue in the hope that the Council may yet find understanding, compassion and empathy for trans life, and that we can work together to protect and support trans clients. At the end, we also address all psychotherapists and counsellors; trans and gender-expansive therapists and trainees; and our current and future trans and gender-expansive clients.
Dear UKCP,
Thank you for your response (2), published on 15th December 2023, to our open letter (3) about your guidance regarding so-called ‘gender-critical’ views. This will be our final written response in this series of communications, although we otherwise remain open to dialogue with UKCP on this matter. We are using this written response to expand upon points made in our holding statement (4) published in early December, as they were not adequately addressed in your response to us.
We do not wish to volley written statements back-and-forth with UKCP; our concern is making therapy safe for our trans and gender-expansive clients. We would welcome an opportunity to meet with UKCP and discuss how the Council too can support this work.
At this stage, we would like to highlight our continuing concerns with the statements published by UKCP, both in your original statement and in your response to our open letter, before addressing other therapists and any clients who may be reading:
Once again, this latest response from UKCP entirely fails to explain how it will protect trans and queer therapists, trainees and clients. Indeed, any mention of what trans clients might want from therapy is entirely absent. UKCP is speaking over the people who are most impacted by their statements and creating an atmosphere of fear and confusion. There appears to have been no consultation with trans and queer therapists or clients. This is regrettable given UKCP has shown some effort in the past to include and listen to marginalised groups.
TACTT is concerned that this statement either doesn’t understand or misrepresents what affirmative therapy actually is. Affirmative therapy means the therapist supports the client’s right to define themselves. The splitting of ‘exploratory therapy’ from affirmative therapy is now being used to justify a form of therapy based on so-called ‘gender-critical’ beliefs. We cannot stress enough that all good therapy should be exploratory in nature, but weaponising affirmative therapy to make way for so-called ‘gender-critical’ praxis is blatantly unethical and, we believe, amounts to discriminatory practice. The play on language does not hide the unethical attempt at trans-erasure.
We note UKCP’s imperative to remind us that so-called ‘gender-critical’ beliefs are protected under the Equality Act 2010; we remind UKCP that trans people are also protected under the same legislation. We are not seeking to discriminate against people who hold so-called ‘gender-critical’ beliefs. However, if a practising member of UKCP does not believe in the legitimacy of trans life then, according to UKCP’s own Code of Ethics and Professional Practice (5) and the MOU on conversion therapy in the UK (6), said practitioner would be ethically bound to refer on to competent colleagues.
As practitioners committed to trans-affirmative therapy, we now find ourselves in an uncertain and increasingly unsafe professional environment, where anti-trans activism is emboldened. Those of us who are trans and queer professionals and trainees find ourselves isolated and left to advocate for ourselves against institutions with far more power. The available pool of truly competent and safe therapists for trans and non-binary clients is already small. UKCP’s guidance does nothing to help this.
As stated, we do not want to get into an interminable correspondence with UKCP. Rather, we would like to invite UKCP to a roundtable discussion with members of TACTT to address our concerns. We seek dialogue, not to call out our colleagues, but to invite you to join us in finding understanding, compassion and empathy for an extremely vulnerable client group.
Alongside this, we will continue to work to improve therapy for trans and gender-expansive people through advocacy, education and campaigning. We ended our open letter by stating that those of us who are UKCP members or training in UKCP-accredited organisations are starting to question our place within the Council. If UKCP is unwilling to engage on these questions, you are likely to continue losing the trust of your members who work in a trans-affirmative way, as well as the trust of clients.
Yours sincerely,
TACTT
We now turn our attention to the different audiences reading this letter.
To all psychotherapists and counsellors:
We urge you to expand your knowledge and learning on trans-affirmative therapy, and specifically, seek training and education from trans and non-binary practitioners.
We encourage self-reflection on your own process around gender, transness and affirmative therapy. We further encourage you to seek out appropriate supervisory guidance if you are unsure about any aspect of your work. If you do not feel comfortable or equipped to work supportively and openly with trans and non-binary clients, it is ethical to refer them on to competent colleagues. We suggest a search on the Pink Therapy and Gendered Intelligence therapist directories for such practitioners.
We encourage you to examine your culturally inculcated reactions and responses to this topic and invite you to begin to challenge and work on them, in just the same way you may work on unconscious bias across all the other axes of oppression.
We also remind you that trans and gender-expansive clients seek therapy for all the reasons anyone of any gender might come to therapy. By engaging in these processes of reflection, you will be better placed to support these clients with matters such as depression, anxiety, bereavement, relationship issues etc. without bringing an unwanted and unnecessary pathologising focus to their gender.
For those who are allies and who have already spoken out on behalf of trans clients, thank you. Any therapist who would like to use their voice for change is welcome to join TACTT.
To trans, non-binary and gender expansive therapists and trainees:
We see you. We know that the continued attacks on trans rights – both within and outside the therapy profession – create an emotional burden which you are shouldering while helping your clients to navigate the same environment. We oppose transphobia across the therapy profession and will continue to work to ensure the voices of trans, non-binary and gender expansive therapists and trainees are heard.
To our current and future trans and gender-expansive clients:
We want you to know that you are welcome in the therapeutic space, that you belong here. We want you to feel safe accessing therapy, no matter what you come to therapy for - whether that is support through transition, gender questioning or indeed any other issue not related to your gender. We want you to have competent, supportive, knowledgeable and, above all, safe therapists to work with.
We want you to feel empowered to question a prospective therapist about their stance on trans life to ascertain if they are safe for you to work with.
Guidance such as the Pink Therapy guidance on how to choose a therapist (7) is likely to be helpful. We also suggest asking a therapist if they have experience in working with trans and non-binary people and whether they have either lived experience or extra training in the subject. You can state you are looking for an explicitly trans-affirmative therapist and ask if they consider themselves to be so.
Remember, exploration is an important part of any therapy. But the term 'exploratory therapy' is being increasingly weaponised by those who hold anti-trans beliefs, so ask your therapist what they mean by any terms they use.
Ask for word-of-mouth referrals from trans and non-binary communities. We also suggest searches on directories that are explicitly trans-inclusive, such as Pink Therapy (8) and Gendered Intelligence (9), and to use trans-affirmative or inclusive search terms when seeking a therapist.
References
Yesterday the UKCP announced its withdrawal from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (MOU2).
TACTT has published its response here:
openletter.earth/ukcps-recent-withdrawal-from-the-...
This letter also serves as a petition calling for the UKCP to rejoin the MOU2 and for the Board to be removed. Please sign it and if you are a member of UKCP make a note of this in your signature. And please share it far and wide - we invite interested stakeholders as well as therapists and trainees to sign.
TACTT has also published a blog which shares actions we can all take to oppose conversion therapy:
therapistsagainsttransphobia.org/2024/04/06/how-to...
Thank you.
Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia
Yesterday the UKCP announced its withdrawal from the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (MOU2).
TACTT has published its response here:
openletter.earth/ukcps-recent-withdrawal-from-the-...
This letter also serves as a petition calling for the UKCP to rejoin the MOU2 and for the Board to be removed. Please sign it and if you are a member of UKCP make a note of this in your signature. And please share it far and wide - we invite interested stakeholders as well as therapists and trainees to sign.
TACTT has also published a blog which shares actions we can all take to oppose conversion therapy:
therapistsagainsttransphobia.org/2024/04/06/how-to...
Thank you.
Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia