Conversion Therapy Laws Dataset Tracks 12 Years of U.S. State Policy
A new dataset published Oct. 29 by Saint Louis University School of Law researchers, in partnership with colleagues from Pacific University School of Social Work and Wayne State University College of Education and support from the Center for Public Health Law Research (CPHLR) at Temple University Beasley School of Law and the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) collects, analyzes and shares 12 years of state laws governing conversion therapy.
This dataset builds on the work of others who have tracked laws impacting LGBTQIA+ populations by adding a longitudinal component. It comprehensively tracks state-level statutes, regulations, and executive orders from all 50 US states and the District of Columbia from January 1, 2013, through July 31, 2025, and includes enforcement mechanisms, populations impacted, exemptions and preemption.
In the current climate, LGBTQIA+ populations are the targets of an unprecedented number of enacted or proposed state laws that stigmatize and harm them, including leaving dangerous practices purporting to be health care unregulated (e.g., allowing “conversion therapy”) or restricting access to care (e.g., gender-affirming care bans). The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule by spring 2026 on three cases directly addressing these state actions — including the constitutionality of state bans on conversion therapy — making it more critical than ever to understand the evolving legal landscape.
Conversion therapy (also known as reparation therapy) is a collection of practices intended to change an individual’s sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Approximately 698,000 LGBT adults have received conversion therapy in the United States, 350,000 of whom received it as a minor, according to the Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law. Conversion therapy has been denounced by established national organizations like the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, National Association of School Psychologists, and the American Academy of Pediatrics based on evidence of harm to those receiving such treatments.
Initial analysis of the dataset found differences in the way states enforced conversion therapy bans: The majority of states (26 of 28) with conversion therapy bans enforce the bans through various professional sanctions, which may include license removal. However, six states also provide options for civil penalties, including injunctive relief and monetary fees or fines. In addition to the impact on individual practitioners, seven states restrict statewide funding through public insurance programs.
The remaining two states use law to ensure conversion therapy is not banned. One state uses restrictions on funding to disallow localities from creating conversion therapy bans. The other specifically disallows local government regulation of behavioral health and human services, which are governed by behavioral health licensing boards.
“Legislatures and related court decisions are reshaping the legal landscape for LGBTQIA+ people,” said Heather Walter-McCabe, J.D., M.S.W., associate professor, Saint Louis University School of Law, Center for Health Law Studies. “Health outcomes researchers have long called for detailed, accessible legal datasets to study how laws and policies affect access to care, protection from discrimination, and experiences of stigma. This dataset answers that call and allows us to examine not only where conversion therapy laws exist but how they are enforced or restricted. Those details matter when we talk about how policy shapes stigma and health outcomes.”
Existing research on health outcomes consistently shows longstanding social and health inequities for people in LGBTQIA+ populations, as well as widespread health harms, including disproportionate rates of self-injury and suicidality. Laws contribute to, and create the conditions for, these inequities by affecting social norms, access to care, and protection from discrimination. However, comparing legal changes to health outcomes is challenging, and this project seeks to make that easier.
This study is the first in a series from the Policy Impacting Public Health (PIPH) for LGBTQ project examining laws that may serve as structural determinants of health for LGBTQIA+ populations. Future datasets will focus on medical care bans for transgender youth and medical shield laws. Together, these studies will expand opportunities to measure the impact of policy variables and supply the data needed to inform efforts that improve public health and reduce disparities among LGBTQIA+ populations.
The researchers used policy surveillance to systematically and scientifically identify and code the legal text from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Explore the data by visiting the PIPH Project site.