Sure, I'll try to answer that.
In science, we have a term called “operational definition”, meaning that we have a particular term and then we have to define it in a way so everybody can agree on what one is actually measuring.
My point about Bill C-6—it's very similar to all prior legislation, including Bill 77 in Ontario—is that there's this “does not apply” clause, which I read out to you. It does not include practices, etc. that relate to a person's exploration of their identity.
That is a completely vague descriptor. It does not give clinicians clear guidance on what is considered acceptable in terms of exploration. I think that is a fundamental problem. It's frightening to parents, because they worry that they're going to be accused of taking their kids for conversion therapy, whereas any well-trained clinician, as I said earlier, does not coercively try to change a child's or an adolescent's gender identity.
I think a well-trained clinician engages in all kinds of exploration. The problem with Bill C-6 is that it doesn't define what that means or doesn't mean. I think that is a very serious issue.