The Homeland Party affirms that the traditional family constitutes the cornerstone of society, fostering high-trust and interconnected communities and nations. We advocate for policies that ensure the safety and security necessary for families to nurture and raise children and will implement them through the legislative process. To that end, we have written this policy, which will soon be followed by an additional Women’s & Children Safeguarding policy.

In recent times, a climate of fear has been created, and this must be banished. What we set out in this policy is the truth, and no one should fear speaking, reading, or acknowledging the truth. The Homeland Party recognises two immutable biological sexes: male and female. All policies should be interpreted accordingly:

• Sex: Defined by biological classification as male or female, determined at conception, and unchangeable. It is distinct from “gender identity”.
• Women & Girls: Women are adult human females; girls are child human females.
• Men & Boys: Men are adult human males; boys are child human males.
• Female: An individual whose sex, from conception, produces, or is expected to produce, large reproductive cells (ova).
• Male: An individual whose sex, from conception, produces, or is expected to produce, small reproductive cells (sperm).
• Gender Ideology: The replacement of biological sex with self-declared “gender identity”, falsely asserting that sex can change and requires legal recognition to reinforce the fallacy. It is inconsistent, dismissing sex as a category while claiming people can be “born in the wrong body”. Sometimes referred to colloquially as “Trans Ideology”.
• “gender identity”: A self-declared, subjective sense of identity loosely based on sex stereotypes, disconnected from biological reality, existing on an undefined continuum, not a valid basis for legal recognition over sex if natural law is applied.

Gender Ideology History

Gender Ideology gained academic and medical prominence from the 1950’s, with discredited psychologist John Money introducing the concept of “gender identity” to differentiate it from biological sex. His work, particularly the case of David Reimer (a boy raised as a girl after a botched circumcision), was later discredited. Despite Money’s misleading claims of success, Reimer suffered severe psychological distress, eventually discarding the female identity placed upon him, before his suicide.⁽¹⁾ This case, along with many others, highlights the dominance of biological factors over “gender identity” and raises serious concerns about trans-affirmative interventions.

John Colapinto’s biography of Reimer details Money’s unethical practices, including exposing Reimer and his twin brother to pornography, forcing them into sexualised acts, and conducting invasive “genital inspections”.⁽²⁾ Money defended child sexual “play”, and testified that pornography was not harmful to minors, and was endorsed by the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), which still cites his support for ‘adult-child relationships’.⁽³⁾

Volkmar Sigusch, who coined the terms “cisgender” and “cissexual” in the early 1990s, expressed support for paedophilic relationships and claimed that exposure to pornography was not harmful to children. These views are documented in his published writings⁽⁴⁾ and have been highlighted by critics in journalism.⁽⁵⁾ As a former charter member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), the organisation that most notably influenced the removal of “gender identity disorder” from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), Volkmar Sigusch’s views and theories would undoubtedly have influenced the classification of “Gender Dysphoria” in the DSM-5. “Gender dysphoria” focuses on the distress rather than the identity itself, meaning that being “transgender” is not considered a mental disorder, but the distress some people experience may require medical support.

Given the disturbing foundations Gender Ideology is built upon, we acknowledge it is inappropriate and even dangerous to introduce “transgender” ideology and queer theory to children. Schools and institutions should prioritise safeguarding over promoting theories rooted in unethical practices.

Integration into Education, Institutions, and Law

The concepts of “gender identity” and Gender Ideology began influencing educational curricula in the 1990’s and 2000’s, particularly through “Gender Studies” (which replaced women’s studies), intersectionality, and Marxist diversity & inclusion programmes. Policies promoting “gender inclusivity” have been adopted in schools with a means to support supposed “transgender” and “non-binary” students, including changes to language use, such as the demand to be referred to with incorrect sex pronouns and access to facilities for the opposite sex.

In state institutions, Gender Ideology implementations have swamped healthcare guidelines, workplace policies, and legal frameworks. The legal recognition of “gender identity” has further led to safety, dignity, and sex discrimination complications for women in areas such as anti-discrimination laws, identification documents, and family law. Notably, the UK’s Gender Recognition Act 2004 allows individuals to legally change their sex, undermining women’s right to female-only facilities, services and opportunities.

UK Political Party Support for Gender Ideology Policies

Policy / Party	Green	SNP	Labour	Lib Dems	Plaid Cymru	Conservatives
Gender Self-ID	Active	Active	Divided	Active	Active	Against
Trans Healthcare	Active	Active	Divided	Active	Active	Indifferent
“Anti-Discrimination” Laws	Active	Active	Active	Active	Active	Active
“Trans” Education	Active	Active	Divided	Active	Active	Indifferent
Banning “Conversion Therapy”	Active	Active	Divided	Active	Active	Indifferent
Notes	‘Deranged’ Maggie Chapman expressed support for exploring transition for children as young as 8.(7)	Tried to remove requirement for medical evidence to gain a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC)8	Conflicted between activist influence and public backlash.	Have stated that therapy supporting detransition should be restricted.	Actively campaigns to embed Gender Identity into public services in Wales.	Passed the Equality Act 2010. Enabled Gender Ideology for 14 years. Reduced the cost of a GRC to £59. MPs: “trans women are women”.

Despite increasing evidence of harm caused by Gender Ideology, no major party has called for the repeal of the Gender Recognition Act or the removal of “gender reassignment” from the Equality Act 2010. Instead, political efforts have focused on embedding Gender Ideology across law, healthcare, and education, while sex-based rights are either actively undermined or passively abandoned, as “trans” activists advance their agenda within the public sector.

“Gender Identity” as a Social Trend

The concept of “gender identity” is shown to be a social phenomenon/trend. Since 1990, there has been a notable increase in individuals identifying as “transgender” and seeking “sex reassignment” surgeries in the UK.

• A study analysing anonymised general practice records from 2000 to 2018 found that the number of individuals identifying as “transgender” in the UK increased five-fold during this period. In 2000, approximately 1 in 15,000 individuals were recorded as “transgender”. By 2018, this had risen to just over 1 in 2,500.
• The highest rates of “transgender” identification were observed among 16 to 29-year-olds, the age group most present within the education system. In 2018, around 1 in 2,200 individuals in this age group were identified as “transgender”.⁽¹⁰⁾

As the data only extends to 2018, it is reasonable to assume that rates between 2018 and 2025 have increased further.

Banning NHS Funding for ‘Gender Transition’ Procedures

It is now asserted, through the DSM-5, and the UK equivalent, the International Classification of Diseases, 11th Revision (ICD-11) that “Gender Dysphoria” is not a disorder in and of itself, but rather, can produce forms of psychological distress.

Accordingly, we maintain that it should not be treated as a condition warranting NHS-funded pharmaceutical intervention, or worse, surgery to alter a patient’s appearance to resemble that of the opposite sex. The Homeland Party will ensure that NHS policies are revised to prohibit the use of public funds for any such procedures.

Furthermore, the NHS must cease the practice of offering only “gender-affirmative” care while suppressing alternative therapeutic approaches. Options must be available for individuals to learn to live with or overcome their difficulties without being directed toward medical transition. This approach is particularly vital for safeguarding children and young people, many of whom may be experiencing temporary confusion, social pressure, or deeper unresolved mental health issues. By offering real therapeutic support rather than pushing irreversible interventions, we can help prevent future trauma, rising cases of detransition, and cases of suicide.

Those experiencing distress related to their body or sexuality will continue to receive appropriate psychological care. However, they will not be misled into believing they are something they are not, or that they can become something they never will be, in service of a harmful ideology.

A Climate of Fear Promoting Gender Ideology

Requiring individuals to use pronouns and language that contradict a person’s biological sex (such as “they/them”, “she/her”, or “he/him” used inappropriately) poses a serious threat to freedom of expression by compelling the use of language many do not accept.

• Compelled Speech – Free speech protections exist to prevent state interference in personal expression. Mandating the use of inaccurate pronouns forces individuals to speak in a way that contradicts material reality.
• Freedom of Conscience – Just as individuals are free to express their beliefs in matters of religion or politics, they must not be coerced into adopting ideological language that contradicts their understanding of biological truth.
• Social Pressure & Self-Censorship – A climate of fear in workplaces, schools, and public institutions leads many to suppress what they know to be factually and biologically correct for fear of repercussion and exclusion.
• Imposing Social Norms – Forcing the use of incorrect pronouns enforces ideological conformity and punishes dissent from a belief system that is disconnected from biology and exists on an undefined continuum.

Compelled incorrect pronoun and sexed language usage not only undermines free speech but also forces alignment with Gender Ideology, raising grave concerns about personal liberty, institutional overreach, and the erosion of open debate.

Over the past decade, we have seen courageous women, vanguard activists, refuse to bow to the radical enforcement of Gender Ideology. For speaking the truth and raising safeguarding concerns for women and children, they have been dragged from their homes in front of their children⁽¹¹⁾, arrested, criminalised⁽¹²⁾, ostracised⁽¹³⁾, and even physically assaulted^(14,15) for refusing to state that men are, or can become, women.

Police forces have understaffed political demonstrations and, in some cases, refused to attend at all, as law enforcement institutions increasingly fall under ideological capture. This has left women to fend for themselves against violent “trans” activist men, some of whom have publicly incited violence against them, with no legal repercussions⁽¹⁶⁾.

We recognise the great work these women have undertaken through grassroots activism and public campaigning, particularly through Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull’s Let Women Speak movement. We wholly condemn the persecution and legal harassment these women have endured while seeking to protect our society from a dangerous and pernicious ideology, one that seeks to undermine reality and compromise the safety of some of our most vulnerable: women and children.

Restrictions on Gender-Ideological language by Public Officials

The language used by public officials carries significant weight, setting the tone for public discourse, shaping institutional culture, and influencing public trust. The promotion of incorrectly sexed pronouns and language usage and gender ideological terms by state employees leads to confusion in formal communications, unnecessary politicisation of government messaging, and alienates a public that overwhelmingly values reality and common sense.

When ordinary citizens receive an official email from someone labeling themselves “she/her”, “he/him, or “they/them”, they are right to question the judgement and priorities of the institution behind it. Such displays signal ideology over service and give rise to a perception of incompetence or unseriousness.

Public language must prioritise clarity, consistency, and universality to ensure effective governance. Accordingly, the Homeland Party will introduce the following restrictions across all public bodies, including central and devolved government departments such as civil service roles, NHS bodies, local councils, public education institutions, and law enforcement agencies:

• Employees acting in an official capacity must use the term “sex” and not “gender”, when administering or enforcing policies, in all documents, policies, communications, and workplace settings.
• The use of “preferred pronouns”, such as “she/her” or “they/them”, in email signatures, name badges, or introductions, will be prohibited in official correspondence and presentations.
• Public sector communication must remain neutral, factual, and apolitical. Language that aligns with ideological trends (including concepts of “gender fluidity” or “self-identification”) has no place in impartial public services.

This policy will restore professional standards and help reverse the erosion of public confidence.

Freedom from Pronoun Compulsion in Public and Professional Life

The Homeland Party affirms the fundamental right to freedom of speech and thought. No person shall be compelled to use pronouns that conflict with biological reality or to express an ideological position they do not believe.

We recognise that the imposition of so-called “preferred pronouns”, including “neo-pronouns”, serves to obscure truth and destabilise social order by undermining shared reality. This is not a matter of politeness, it is a question of conscience, clarity, and the right to reject compelled speech.

Under UK law, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and any future Bill of Rights, no individual should be legally obliged to speak or affirm beliefs they do not hold. While anti-discrimination laws exist to protect against harassment and mistreatment, they do not override the right to freedom of expression.

This principle is especially relevant in workplace settings. No employer, institution, or business shall compel employees to use pronouns or gendered language that contradicts sex-based reality.

Emancipation from Ideological Abuse

The Homeland Party will seek justice for those who have already suffered under the institutional enforcement of Gender Ideology. Across the UK, individuals have been criminalised, lost their jobs, been disciplined by professional bodies, silenced in tribunals, harassed by police, or driven out of education, all for refusing to comply with compelled speech, or gendered dogma. These people have stood for truth and conscience, often alone and at great personal cost.

The Homeland Party will work to vindicate those individuals and protect others from similar abuse. Public service must be rooted in fact and fairness, not ideological coercion.

Ban on Publicly Funded Queer Theory and Gender Ideology Propaganda

The Homeland Party will implement a clear rule prohibiting the positive promotion of Queer Theory and Gender Ideology in all publicly funded or regulated services. Public money must not be used to advance harmful, divisive, or ideologically driven narratives under the guise of education, culture, or equality.

This measure will involve the removal from circulation of all related material (books, literature, films, media, paraphernalia) and event content, wherever it promotes gender ideological content. Particular attention will be given to instances where “culture” is used as cover for activism or indoctrination. This policy will apply across the public sector, including:

• Schools and universities
• Public libraries and community centres
• The NHS and social services
• The military, police, and emergency services
• State-funded or subsidised broadcasters and media

We must reiterate that this is not a mode of censorship. Freedom of expression in private life, privately funded media, and political debate remains fully protected. However, public services must be neutral, factual, and in service of the whole population, not vehicles for “minority” individualistic radical ideology.

This policy does not require a censorship body. Instead, responsibility will rest with each institution’s management. Breaches will result in proportionate consequences: disciplinary hearings, withdrawal of public funds, and in education, Ofsted or QAA intervention.

Crackdown on Inappropriate Dress in Schools and Public Spaces

The Homeland Party will enforce a clear separation between personal identity and public or institutional representation. Government-funded schools, workplaces, and services must be neutral, professional, and free of political or sexual expression. This will include:

• A ban on politicised symbols such as pin badges, lanyards or flags in state-funded work environments
• A requirement for neutral, sex-appropriate uniforms in public roles (giving females the option of trousers or skirts to avoid sexist mandates)
• Ofsted and other regulators will assess compliance in schools and institutions

We will also enforce stricter policing of lewd public displays, especially at events such as “Pride” festivals which are increasingly used to promote fetishwear, sexualised performance, and inappropriate conduct in the presence of children. Public funding for such events will be withdrawn, and offenders will be prosecuted.

The Deconstruction of Man & Woman

The belief that individuals can change sex or possess multiple “sex identities” is deconstructionist and directly contradicts reality. Sex is immutable, determined by genetics and reproductive function, not by self-identification, medical intervention, or ideological belief. Gender Ideology seeks to deny this truth, disrupting human procreation, family structure, and societal stability.

• Biological Foundations & Parenthood – Male and female distinctions are essential for reproduction and form the basis of the family. Parenthood has always been grounded in biological roles: mother and father. Claims of “sex change” create ambiguity in these roles, weakening the basic framework of family life.
• Impact on Children – Clear, biologically grounded parental roles provide children with stability, security, and identity. When the definitions of mother and father become fluid, children are left confused about family structure, undermining their psychological and social development.
• Broader Societal Consequences – Society depends on a shared understanding of biological kinship and generational continuity. Replacing these facts with subjective self-identification weakens this understanding, erodes legal protections, distorts healthcare, and education policy.

Introducing State Definitions

Redefining sex with “gender” and “gender identity” not only affects the natural order of societal function, it undermines the foundations of the family, confuses children, and destabilises society at large. Where truth is replaced by ideology, confusion and long-term harm follow.

To restore clarity and order, the Homeland Party will implement official state definitions of male, female, man, woman, and mother and father, as outlined in this policy’s definitions section. When administering or enforcing sex-based distinctions, every government agency and all public officials acting in an official capacity shall use the term “sex” and not “gender” in all legal policies, documents, data collection, and communications.

These definitions will ensure legal consistency, uphold biological truth, and re-establish a shared foundation for law, healthcare, education, and family policy.

Sex Falsification on Legal Documents

It is currently legal in the UK to change sex markers on official documents such as birth certificates, driving licences, passports, and medical records, to that of the incorrect sex. This practice amounts to the legal falsification and fraudulent recording of one’s true data.

The UK Home Office has allowed sex marker changes on passports since at least the 1960s, as seen in the case of ‘April Ashley’, born George Jamieson (a male model and lover to Aristocrat Arthur Corbett, the 3rd Baron Rowallan), who updated his documents after undergoing sex reassignment surgery⁽¹⁷⁾ . Today, individuals may change the sex marker on a driving licence or passport without a Gender Recognition Certificate, without hormone treatment, surgical procedures, or any attempt at opposite-sex social performance.

Allowing the falsification of sex in official records has wide-reaching consequences. It:

• Undermines the integrity of single-sex provisions, crucial for safeguarding;
• Obstructs the collection of sex-based data, essential for informed policymaking;
• Forces institutions and services to operate on false information, eroding public trust and endangering society at large.

Leaving the ECHR and Repealing the Gender Recognition Act

The UK remains a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which imposes legal restrictions that make it harder to uphold sex-based protections and repeal Gender Ideology legislation. Relevant articles include:

• Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life
• Article 12 – Right to marry
• Article 14 – Prohibition of discrimination

In the landmark case Goodwin v UK (2002)¹⁸, the ECHR ruled that the UK’s refusal to legally recognise Christine Goodwin’s “gender” violated his rights under Articles 8 and 12. This judgment directly led to the introduction of the Gender Recognition Act 2004, which legalised so-called “gender identity”. Leaving the ECHR would remove the UK from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, making it legally possible to:

• Repeal the Gender Recognition Act 2004
• Restore sex-based legal clarity
• Avoid future ideological impositions by international courts

We expand on the case for leaving the ECHR in our Remigration policy and will outline it further in a dedicated policy document.

Equality Reform Act: Restoring Biological Reality and Legal Clarity

The Homeland Party will replace the ideology-laden elements of the Equality Act 2010 with a new Equality Reform Act, grounded in biological truth, natural law, and the equal protection of all citizens, free from ideological distortion.

While the 2010 Act consolidated earlier anti-discrimination laws into a single legal framework, it also embedded radical concepts such as “gender reassignment” as a protected characteristic (with no medical transition required), along with provisions for “indirect discrimination” and “positive action” that undermined fairness and neutrality. These ideological additions have fuelled institutional capture, legal confusion, and the erosion of sex-based rights.

Our Equality Reform Act will preserve what is structurally useful while removing what is socially corrosive. It will protect against genuine unfair treatment while restoring truth, clarity, and equal treatment before the law.

Key provisions of the Equality Reform Act, relevant to this policy, will include:

• Removal of “gender reassignment” and all references to “gender identity” as protected characteristics;
• Restoration of biological sex as the legal basis for single-sex spaces, data collection, and service provision;
• Legal protection for individuals and organisations who uphold sex-based distinctions in all settings where they are relevant, such as education, employment, healthcare, the provision of services, sports, voluntary organisations, and public institutions.

We have also addressed the principle of re-establishing equality before the law in our Remigration Policy and will develop this further in our forthcoming proposal for a New Bill of Rights, which will set out a constitutional foundation for biological reality, natural law, and true legal equality.

Criminalising Sex Falsification

A cornerstone of the Equality Reform Act will be the criminalisation of sex falsification, i.e. the act of altering or misrepresenting biological sex on official documentation. This will apply to:

• Birth certificates, passports, driving licences, medical records, and all legal identification;
• Any public or private entity facilitating such falsification, including clinics, registrars, public officials and educational establishments.

These actions will be treated as serious offences, with penalties aligned to identity fraud and falsification of public records. This measure follows the example of nations such as Hungary, which have enshrined biological truth in law and prohibited the legal falsification of sex.

By embedding biological reality into the heart of UK law, the Equality Reform Act will protect women’s rights, safeguard children, and restore consistency across every branch of government and public service.

The Impact of Gender Ideology on Society

The rise of Gender Ideology, which prioritises “gender identity” over sex, has had a profound impact on the rights, safety, and opportunities of women and girls, particularly in sport, single-sex spaces, education, employment opportunities, and same-sex provisions.

• Sports – Allowing males to compete in female sports creates unfair competition due to inherent physiological advantages, even after hormone therapy. Cases in track and field, rugby, football, weightlifting, boxing, and MMA⁽¹⁹⁾ have demonstrated male dominance and caused serious injuries to female athletes, threatening their safety and undermining the integrity of women’s sports.^(20,21,22)
• Single-Sex Spaces – Policies that grant males access to women’s refuges, prisons, toilets, and changing rooms based on “gender identity” raise major safeguarding concerns. Evidence shows that male presence in female-only spaces can re-traumatise survivors of abuse and pose disturbing risks within custodial settings, due to the fact that research has shown 58.9% of imprisoned “trans women” have at least 1 conviction of a sexual offence .^(23,24,25)
• Scholarships & Awards – Programs created to advance women in education and professional development are undermined when awards are based on “gender identity” rather than biological sex, reducing chances for actual women in education and professional fields.^{(26,27,28,29,30,31)}
• Workplace Opportunities – Initiatives aimed at increasing women’s representation, have been diluted with men (claiming to be women) who are included in schemes and programs originally designed to support women.
• Gay and Lesbian Provisions & Spaces – The basis of homosexuality is biological sex. Gender Ideology has allowed individuals to co-opt and infiltrate these spaces by claiming “gender identities” that misrepresent reality, such as men identifying as lesbians or women identifying as gay men. This erodes the original purpose of these spaces and undermines the rights of gay men and lesbian women.

Reinstating Sex-Based Spaces and Protections

The Homeland Party will take appropriate and proportionate measures to restore clarity, safety, dignity, and fairness in all sex-based provisions. These measures will ensure that intimate spaces, services, and programmes intended for women, girls, men, boys, and same-sex attracted people are protected based on biological sex, not self-declared “gender identity”.

• Intimate spaces, including toilets, changing rooms, and shelters, designated for women and girls, or for men and boys, will be legally restricted by biological sex.
• Women and girls’ sports and related programmes will be exclusively for females. No exceptions.
• Workplace and Scholarship opportunities created for specific sexes shall be awarded based on sex and not “gender identity”.
• Gay & lesbian spaces and provisions will be available on the basis of same-sex attracted people.
• Males will not be housed in women’s prisons, youth facilities, or detention centres. This will be enforced through the new Equality Reform Act, as outlined above.
• All existing policies will be reviewed and amended to ensure that single-sex services, such as rape crisis centres and refuges, are based on sex. This includes rescinding any guidance that mandates access based on “gender identity”.
• A full public consultation will be conducted to assess and implement further measures necessary to protect women’s single-sex spaces.

Note: Nothing in this policy should be interpreted as preventing individuals with “gender identity” issues from receiving appropriate care in settings aligned with their biological sex.

Child Consent & Competence in “Gender Transition”

Gillick competence, established in the 1985 UK case Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority³², assesses whether minors under 16 can consent to medical treatment without parental involvement. This principle is now central to debates over whether children can meaningfully consent to “gender transition”. Medical transition involves puberty blockers, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and in some cases surgery to remove healthy genitalia or breasts. These interventions have long-term and often irreversible effects on:

• Fertility
• Sexual function
• Bone density
• Mental health
• Neurological development

A deep and mature understanding of these risks is essential, yet children are being placed on such pathways with insufficient assessment and no ability to foresee the consequences.

Although Gillick competence requires a child to grasp the risks and benefits of medical treatment, “gender transition” raises questions far beyond routine care. It involves social identity, psychological health, legal status, and often permanent bodily change. These are complex areas that no child can be reasonably expected to understand in full.

Scientific research confirms that children’s and adolescents’ brains (especially the prefrontal cortex, which governs risk evaluation and judgment) do not fully develop until their mid-20s. This makes the notion of informed consent at age 12, 14, or even 16, particularly in states of distress, dangerously misleading.

A growing number of “detransitioners” (individuals who regret undergoing “gender transition” and seek to reverse it), are now coming forward to expose the damaging ideology they were captured by. Many began their transition as children and report being placed on a medical pathway after brief consultations, without adequate psychological assessment. They speak of deep regret, lasting confusion, and irreversible physical and emotional harm.

• Approximately 80% of children diagnosed with gender dysphoria desist by adolescence⁽³³⁾
• Social transition, including changes in name, pronouns and clothing, strongly correlates with persistence into medicalisation, effectively locking children into an ideological pathway.

These cases demonstrate that children are being funnelled toward permanent, life-altering interventions in response to what is often a temporary stage of distress, or identity confusion or questioning.

The Cass Review was an independent UK study, conducted by House of Lords member, Dr Hilary Cass, into child “gender identity” services commissioned by the NHS. The study delivered a highly critical assessment of clinical practices in this area. Its findings include:

• Weak or absent long-term data on the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones;
• Insufficient long-term research into the outcomes of medical interventions;
• Inconsistent clinical practices across services and a lack of standardisation;
• A lack of psychological and developmental assessments.

These conclusions reinforce that Gender Ideology is not evidence-based. Despite the rigour of the Cass Review, the independently funded British Medical Association (BMA) raised concerns about its findings and their impact on “transgender” healthcare.

• In July 2024, the BMA Council voted to formally critique the review and launched a group to evaluate its conclusions.
• While initially critical, the BMA later changed their stance to a neutral position, stating its evaluation was ongoing.
• The debate within the BMA triggered internal resignations and public backlash, exposing deep divisions within the organisation.
• Dr Cass defended the integrity of the review, stating that the BMA had provided no evidence to justify their objections.

The divided response between medical professionals and organisations, particularly the conflict between the BMA and Dr Hilary Cass, makes one fact unmistakably clear: There is no cohesive or credible medical consensus supporting “gender transition” for children. What exists is confusion, coercion, and ideological capture across key sectors.

Although Gillick competence remains a legal mechanism for assessing a minor’s capacity to consent, its application in authorising “gender transition” has become increasingly untenable. The irreversible nature of these treatments, the lack of reliable medical evidence, and the cognitive immaturity of adolescents all point to the same conclusion: child “gender transition” must cease.

The Homeland Party affirms that the safety, dignity, and bodily integrity of children must come before activist demands or passing political trends. We reject the ideological medicalisation of children and will act decisively to bring such practices to an end throughout the United Kingdom.

Redefine Child “Gender Transition” as Child Abuse

The Homeland Party will legislate to define all forms of child “gender transition” (whether social, medical, or surgical) as a form of child abuse or neglect. This will be reflected in child protection and family law, requiring mandatory safeguarding action from professionals.

Children cannot knowingly consent to actions that may permanently alter their bodies or identity. Gillick competence, when correctly applied, recognises that children lack the developmental capacity for such life-altering decisions. By reframing these interventions as abuse, we affirm that no child can legally consent to being harmed, and that all institutions must act accordingly to prevent such abuse.

Classifying Child “Gender Transition” as a Universal Crime

We will define child “gender transition” as a universal crime under UK law. This will criminalise the facilitation, funding, referral, or performance of any form of child “gender transition”, including abroad.

This law will ensure that those who take children outside the UK to bypass domestic protections will still face prosecution. The case of Susie Green, former CEO of Mermaids, who took her 15-year-old son abroad to receive genital castration, would fall clearly under this offence. We will ensure such acts are no longer tolerated under the guise of parental choice or cultural relativism.

Ban on Puberty Blocker Clinical Trials

Although the UK has, as of December 2024, indefinitely banned puberty blockers for children outside of research settings, clinical trials are now being prepared to continue these interventions under the NHS. The Homeland Party will end this loophole. We will:

• Prohibit all puberty blocker prescriptions for children under the diagnosis, or for the research of, “gender dysphoria”, “gender identity”, distress, or any other gender related purposes
• Assert that children cannot be used as experimental subjects for ideological medicine
• By redefining child “gender transition” as child abuse, trials must cease

Trials that seek to bypass the law to continue harmful gender practices must be halted without exception.

Revoke the Licences of Doctors Facilitating Child “Gender Transition“

We will revoke the medical licences of any clinician who participates in the medicalisation of children for the purpose of “gender transition”. This includes:

• Prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones
• Referring for or performing surgeries
• Facilitating social transition in clinical settings

These actions constitute a breach of duty and a violation of medical ethics and will be treated accordingly.

Ban on “Affirming” Therapy for Minors

We will revoke the licences of psychologists, therapists, and counsellors who engage in so-called “gender-affirming” practices for children. Such therapy does not treat distress, it confirms delusion, encourages harm, and accelerates a path to irreversible outcomes.

Instead, mental health professionals working with children will be required to adopt an exploratory, open-ended approach focused on resolving underlying issues, trauma, and confusion. No professional should be permitted to reinforce an identity that denies biological reality and leads to medicalisation.

Prosecution of Child “Gender Transition” Facilitators

By acknowledging that child “gender transition” is and always has been a form of child abuse, we will move to redefine child “gender transition” practices as child abuse, in law. In light of the Cass Review’s findings, both those who wrote and endorsed institutional policies at the Tavistock Clinic and those who carried out experimental medical interventions (including irreversible damage to children’s bodies and minds) must face full legal scrutiny.

This is not a call for retrospective justice. It is a demand that the laws which already existed at the time of these actions be applied with rigour. These include well-established common law offences, as well as statutory provisions that were fully in force during the period in question:

The Cass Review makes it clear that, far from being an innocent mistake or evolving area of care, there was ample evidence available at the time that these treatments were poorly evidenced, high-risk, and being applied without the proper safeguards. Internal concerns were raised. Whistleblowers were ignored. Children were placed on irreversible medical pathways with inadequate assessment, follow-up, or understanding of long-term effects.

The law does not excuse those who ignore foreseeable potential harm, especially where vulnerable children are involved. Where suicide occurred, and it can be shown that the actions or inactions of clinicians were a significant contributing factor, then charges of gross negligence manslaughter must be considered.

Ultimately, both those who crafted the policy, and those who implemented it, bear responsibility. The Homeland Party believes there must be a full and open legal reckoning, not based on today’s values, but on laws, standards, and duties that were already clear and binding at the time. Anything less would be a failure of justice.

Establishing a Medical Malpractice Whistleblower Service

We will introduce a protected national service for whistleblowers in the healthcare and education sectors. This will include:

• Secure, anonymous reporting platforms
• Legal protection against retaliation
• An independent investigative body with statutory powers
• Legal and psychological support for those who waive their anonymity

This system will expose malpractice, protect conscientious professionals, and rebuild trust in safeguarding institutions.

Endnotes:

1. Milton Diamond and H. Keith Sigmundson, Sex Reassignment at Birth: A Long-Term Review and Clinical Implications, Pacific Center for Sex and Society, 1997. ↩︎
2. John Colapinto, As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl, HarperCollins, 2012. ↩︎
3. John Money, quoted in Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia, Spring 1991, via North American Man/Boy Love Association, archived at Wayback Machine. ↩︎
4. Volkmar Sigusch, Neosexualities: On the Cultural Shift of Love and Perversion, Campus Verlag, 2005. ↩︎
5. Volkmar Sigusch, Transsexuals and our Nosomorphic View, 1991, as cited in Genevieve Gluck, “Cis” Coined by “Pedosexual” Physician, 4W, 2^nd June 2021. ↩︎
6. Genevieve Gluck, commentary on More Than Just a Flag and Tales from a Two-Gendered Mind by Monica Helms (formerly Robert Hogge), X (formerly Twitter), 6th July 2023. Unrolled at ThreadReaderApp. Archived at Wayback Machine. ↩︎
7. Jessica North, ‘Deranged’ Green MSP blasted after claiming children as young as EIGHT could change gender, Scottish Daily Express, 10th January 2023. ↩︎
8. What’s happening with Scotland’s gender reform plans? , BBC News, 8^th December 2023 ↩︎
9. Hazel Shearing, Gender recognition certificate cost cut to £5, BBC News, 4^th May 2021 ↩︎
10. Five-fold rise in UK rates of transgender identity since 2000, medical records suggest, BMJ Group, 2^nd December 2023. ↩︎
11. Martin Beckford, Mother, 38, is arrested in front of her children and locked in a cell for seven HOURS after calling a transgender woman a man on Twitter, Daily Mail Online, 10^th February 2019. ↩︎
12. Tom Gordon, Feminist campaigner charged with ‘hate crime’, The Herald, 3^rd June 2021. ↩︎
13. Changing room row nurse faces disciplinary hearing, BBC News, 17^th February 2025. ↩︎
14. Tess McClure and Charlotte Graham-McLay, Anti-trans activist Posie Parker leaves New Zealand after chaotic protests, The Guardian, 26^th March 2023. ↩︎
15. Activist pleads guilty to punching woman at Posie Parker protest, Otago Daily Times, 10^th August 2023. ↩︎
16. Sam Montgomery, Trans activist arrested after telling rally of supporters to ‘punch’ feminists, GB News, 13^th July 2023. ↩︎
17. April Ashley: Model, actress and trans trailblazer dies aged 86, BBC News, 29^th December 2021. ↩︎
18. Christine Goodwin v. The United Kingdom, HUDOC, European Court of Human Rights, 2002 ↩︎
19. Ewan Somerville, BBC apologises after interviewing “trans woman” athlete who boasted of violence against women, The Telegraph, 16^th July 2022. ↩︎
20. WND Staff, Female athletes crushed by ‘women who were once men’, World Net Daily, March 2^6th 2017. ↩︎
21. Ray Hacke, Mismatched athletes, WORLD, November 16^th 2023. ↩︎
22. Rod Liddle, Shouldn’t The BBC Women’s Footballer of the Year be… a woman?, The Sun, 27^th November, 2024. ↩︎
23. Karen Ingala Smith,Why do we keep banging on about the importance of single sex spaces for women who have been subjected to men’s violence?, Woman’s Place UK, 25^th November 2019. ↩︎
24. Matilda Gosling, Women’s services: a sector silenced, Sex Matters, 15^th January, 2024. ↩︎
25. Prof Rosa Freedom, Prof Kathleen Stock, Prof Alice Sullivan, Evidence and Data on Trans Women’s Offending Rates., Parliament UK, 2021. ↩︎
26. Tom Cotterill, Fury as BBC includes transgender Colombian scientist in annual list of 100 inspiring women, Daily Mail, 3^rd December 2024. ↩︎
27. Maureen Sugden, ”Trans” teen Brian wins a Miss America title, The Herald, 12^th November 2022. ↩︎
28. Alison Flood, First “trans woman” makes Women’s prize longlist| Women’s prize for fiction, The Guardian, 10^th March 2021. ↩︎
29. Carlos Garcia, “Transgender” activist Dylan Mulvaney given ‘Woman of the Year’, Blaze Media, October 12^th 2023. ↩︎
30. Jack Butler, USA Today Decides That a Man Is a ‘Woman of the Year’, National Review, March 18^th 2022. ↩︎
31. Olivia Blair, Husband of 9/11 victim returns Glamour Woman of the Year award after Caitlyn Jenner wins this year’s accolade, Independent, 16^th November 2015. ↩︎
32. Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA (1985), House of Lords, 17^th October 1985. ↩︎
33. 80% of pre-teen children with gender dysphoria will not remain gender dysphoric once they become teenagers, Stats for Gender, 2025. ↩︎