More than one million citizens across the European Union are calling for a ban on conversion practices, intensifying pressure on policymakers to act against what many describe as harmful and abusive interventions targeting LGBTQ individuals.
The demand follows a European Citizens’ Initiative that gathered over 1.25 million signatures, forcing the European Commission to formally consider the proposal. The issue has also sparked debate within the European Parliament, highlighting deep divisions among member states.
Conversion practices—often misleadingly referred to as “therapy”—aim to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity
. Survivors and rights groups warn these practices can lead to severe psychological harm, including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicidal thoughts.
Benoît Berthe Siward, a survivor and activist, recently shared his experience during a parliamentary debate, describing isolation, psychological abuse, and forced participation in intrusive sessions. He said such practices instilled fear, self-hatred, and despair during his youth.
His testimony reflects broader findings. According to data from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, roughly one in four LGBTQ individuals in the EU report having experienced some form of conversion practice. In countries such as Greece, the figure rises to more than one-third.
Despite mounting evidence and public support, introducing an EU-wide ban faces significant legal and political challenges. Health policy largely falls under national jurisdiction, limiting the EU’s direct authority. However, the bloc can act if practices are deemed violations of fundamental rights.
One proposed route is to classify conversion practices as a “eurocrime,” placing them alongside offenses like human trafficking and terrorism. This would allow the EU to set minimum penalties across all member states.
However, such a move requires unanimous approval—an unlikely outcome given opposition from countries like Hungary, which has previously blocked similar initiatives.
Another option involves revising the EU’s equality legislation to explicitly ban conversion practices. Yet this approach also faces obstacles, as earlier attempts to strengthen equality laws have stalled due to lack of consensus among member states.
Even if political agreement were reached, defining conversion practices remains complex. These practices vary widely, ranging from pseudo-therapeutic counseling to religious rituals and, in extreme cases, physical abuse. This diversity complicates efforts to draft comprehensive legislation.
EU Commissioner for Equality Hadja Lahbib has acknowledged that such practices “should not exist,” signaling growing recognition at the highest levels. The European Commission is expected to respond to the citizens’ initiative by mid-May.
In the absence of binding legislation, the Commission could issue a formal recommendation urging member states to ban conversion practices and strengthen protections for victims.
Advocates argue that even non-binding measures would send a strong political message and encourage national reforms.
For survivors like Siward, the urgency is clear. “Too many lives have been damaged,” he warned, emphasizing that behind the political debate are individuals still suffering in silence.
As the EU weighs its next steps, the outcome will test its commitment to protecting fundamental rights and ensuring equality for all citizens.