Effectiveness of reparative therapy

[rlg94086]

Hi Rachel,

I’m glad it was not as severe as Clockwork Orange. Still, the use of pornography and the comments on suicide made by one of the leaders are very disturbing.

Pax,
Robert

It was nothing that extreme and the shock wasn’t painful, it was just a jolt, like static electricity. It was just meant to be a sort of slap on the wrist.

I was entirely consensual, I was underage yes, but it’s not like I was tied down, or even told to watch the screen. I agreed to it, and I could have quit at any time. I was just convinced that it was for my own good to do it, so I did it.

 

[rlg94086]

Probably just a different form of brainwashing. I don’t trust reparative therapy.

It sounds like you are basing your mistrust on what you guess it consists of.

 

[rlg94086]

I don’t know much specifically, never having had pathia’s personal experience on the subject. It’s still highly coercive and based in the idea that God doesn’t like gay sex – if you’re getting it on in any way conservative Christianity doesn’t endorse, you’re doing it wrong. It’s nothing more than a mere human attempt to remake another person in the image of what the ‘therapist’ considers Good. Can anyone have the hubris to attempt that without putting him- or herself in the place of God?

NARTH is founded entirely upon conservative Christian ideas, and Exodus – well, the name alone speaks for that, as does the founder’s apology I posted earlier. I do not know of any other groups that preach ‘reparative therapy’ as the only answer for homosexuals.

Mirdath,

It is well known that you don’t believe in Church teaching on sexual matters. Not everyone shares your view, especially on a Catholic forum. If the therapist is using techniques that won’t harm someone and achieve the patient’s desired results, then there is nothing nefarious about it.

As far as the patient’s want to change their desires, there is nothing inherently wrong with that. Therapy is used to do that with many other desires.

Pax,
Robert

 

[Mirdath]

You need to present some documentation concerning old style 'repartive therapy" for you are spreading a fallacy if not an outright homo-erotic fantasy.

Oh yeah, baby, torture me some more! You think I’m fantasizing about this? I have my kinks, but reducing people to the level of Pavlov’s dogs or Skinner’s rats isn’t one of them!

BMJ (British Medical Journal):

The age at which people received treatment ranged from 13 to 40 years, with most being in their late adolescence and early 20s. Treatments described were mainly administered in NHS hospitals throughout Britain and in one case a military hospital. Those treated privately usually underwent psychoanalysis. The most common treatment (from the early 1960s to early 1970s, with one case in 1980) was behavioural aversion therapy with electric shocks (11 participants). Nausea induced by apomorphine as the aversive stimulus was reported less often (four participants in the early 1960s).

In electric shock aversion therapy, electrodes were attached to the wrist or lower leg and shocks were administered while the patient watched photographs of men and women in various stages of undress. The aim was to encourage avoidance of the shock by moving to photographs of the opposite sex. It was hoped that arousal to same sex photographs would reduce, while relief arising from shock avoidance would increase, interest in opposite sex images. Some patients reported undergoing detailed examination before treatment, while others were assessed more perfunctorily. Patients would recline on a bed or sit in a chair in a darkened room, either alone or with the professional behind a screen. Each treatment lasted about 30 minutes, with some participants given portable electric shock boxes to use at home while they induced sexual fantasies. Patients receiving apomorphine were often admitted to hospital due to side effects of nausea and dehydration and the need for repeated doses, while those receiving electric shock aversion therapy attended as outpatients for weeks or in some cases up to two years.

Oestrogen treatment to reduce libido (two participants in the 1950s), psychoanalysis (three private participants and one NHS participant in the 1970s), and religious counselling (two participants in the 1990s) were also reported. Other forms of treatment were electroconvulsive therapy, discussion of the evils of homosexuality, desensitisation of an assumed phobia of the opposite sex, hypnosis, psychodrama, and abreaction. Dating skills were sometimes taught, and occasionally men were encouraged to find a prostitute or female friend with whom to try sexual intercourse.

rlg94086:

t is well known that you don’t believe in Church teaching on sexual matters. Not everyone shares your view, especially on a Catholic forum. If the therapist is using techniques that won’t harm someone and achieve the patient’s desired results, then there is nothing nefarious about it.

As far as the patient’s want to change their desires, there is nothing inherently wrong with that. Therapy is used to do that with many other desires.

Oh, I certainly do realize my opinion is in the minority here However, that isn’t what’s being discussed – the effectiveness of therapy intended to ‘cure’ homosexuality is. Like I’ve said, I’m not going to stop anyone trying to change his or her sexuality (although I do think it unwise) but therapy as pushed by NARTH simply doesn’t do the job.

 

[Bennie_P]

Oh yeah, baby, torture me some more! You think I’m fantasizing about this? I have my kinks, but reducing people to the level of Pavlov’s dogs or Skinner’s rats isn’t one of them!

Oh, I certainly do realize my opinion is in the minority here However, that isn’t what’s being discussed – the effectiveness of therapy intended to ‘cure’ homosexuality is. Like I’ve said, I’m not going to stop anyone trying to change his or her sexuality (although I do think it unwise) but therapy as pushed by NARTH simply doesn’t do the job.

You are still siting therapy which was not common to begin with and was not in use after the 70s for the bases of your view as to effectiveness of current used therapies. The methods are not the same. If you continued your search though you would have found that outcomes even for such an objectional form of therapy had some success, though I would not suggest that any one should go through such a crude form of treatment.Eventhough I don’t see British oral history on the subject as the best source (it is your source) and I don’t agree with the final assessments of King, Barlet and Smith of their own study, their appears to be evidence as to if treatment can be effective.

Treatments of homosexuality in Britain since the 1950s—an oral history: the experience of professionals
Michael King, professor of primary care psychiatry,1 Glenn Smith, research fellow,1 and Annie Bartlett, senior lecturer2
Outcomes of treatment
Outcome assessments were variable, and systematic follow up was attempted only in research settings. There were mixed views about efficacy of treatments but a minority of professionals still regarded treatment as effective:
This young man came in with homosexuality. Completely cured, went out and married a girl who turned out to be lesbian. We treated her, she got better and the last time we heard of them they were married with 4-5 children!
Psychiatrist
Others considered that gains were more limited but that it was still possible to curb homosexual behaviour:
I think two or three people really had become satisfactorily heterosexual. The rest felt that their problems had been ameliorated in that they were either better disposed to their homosexual condition or the fear that some of them had concerning homosexual behaviour had modified, either because they had been able to reduce it, terminate it, or been able to talk to people and become more adjusted to it.

I** never advocate anyone being forced to take any treatment for any reason. For change only can happen if the person is willing and truly wants change. **

Anyone under the age 40 that claims to have gone through this form of aversion therapy in the United States is suspect to the validity of their claim. Sorry but I wasn’t born yesterday.

 

[Mirdath]

You are still siting therapy which was not common to begin with and was not in use after the 70s for the bases of your view as to effectiveness of current used therapies. The methods are not the same. If you continued your search though you would have found that outcomes even for such an objectional form of therapy had some success, though I would not suggest that any one should go through such a crude form of treatment.Eventhough I don’t see British oral history on the subject as the best source (it is your source) and I don’t agree with the final assessments of King, Barlet and Smith of their own study, their appears to be evidence as to if treatment can be effective.

Not common? The portion of the article I quoted states that electroshock was the most common ‘treatment’ of homosexuality! It even gives statistics for providers with different methods of treatment (‘participants’ refers to hospitals, not to patients). There’s more to the article than the oral history.

And sure, aversion through electroshock or drugs is more effective than current ‘reparative therapy’. It’s also completely unethical!

 

[rlg94086]

Oh, I certainly do realize my opinion is in the minority here However, that isn’t what’s being discussed – the effectiveness of therapy intended to ‘cure’ homosexuality is. Like I’ve said, I’m not going to stop anyone trying to change his or her sexuality (although I do think it unwise) but therapy as pushed by NARTH simply doesn’t do the job.

Based on what I have read, that may be a fair assessment. I don’t know if there are other therapies however that may work.

 

[estesbob]

And sure, aversion through electroshock or drugs is more effective than current ‘reparative therapy’. It’s also completely unethical!

For sure-look how well it"worked" in Clockwork Orange

 

[Bennie_P]

Not common? The portion of the article I quoted states that electroshock was the most common ‘treatment’ of homosexuality! It even gives statistics for providers with different methods of treatment (‘participants’ refers to hospitals, not to patients). There’s more to the article than the oral history.

And sure, aversion through electroshock or drugs is more effective than current ‘reparative therapy’. It’s also completely unethical!

Not common as to how many persons submitted to it - if you also noticed it talked about how many of the persons that where submitted to it was becuase they were caught up in the criminal court system. How does a homosexual get caught up in to the criminal courts for their sexuality other then being involved in some public lewd behavorial situation? So I think the study is a little short sighted on other factors that it seems to have conviently omitted. As to effectiveness and comparisons between then and now, well,how many persons that once lived the homosexual lifestyle will come forward in today’s PC world and subject themselves to the hatred expressed by the the “gay” right movement against recovered homsexuals? Just look at the hatred expressed toward those that claim to be ex-gays _

****How do sexual orientation laws and policies affect ex-gays?****Ex-gays are subject to an increasingly hostile environment where they are labeled as perpetrators of hate and discrimination against homosexuals simply because they advocate for or live out a different view of homosexuality. Since the early 1990s, gay activists have focused on the creation of a situation in which everyone who does not accept the notion that homosexuality is in every way equivalent to heterosexuality is labeled as a bigot whose attitudes equate to racism.

**Alternatives to homosexuality are interpreted as harassment **against gays, even though the individuals seeking to leave behind their same sex attractions are merely exercising a freedom to reaffirm the gender of their birth. Sexual orientation laws are interpreted to silence the ex-gay community and their supporters. Consequently, sexual orientation laws legitimize intolerance against former homosexuals. Indeed, fighting hate and discrimination against gays has become a euphemism for attacks against ex-gays.

For example, David Ott of Madison, Wisconsin, was charged with a hate crime because he stated his own experience as a former homosexual that homosexuals could change their sexual orientation. The Gay, Lesbian and Straight Educational Network (GLSEN) distributed a booklet in the schools accusing former homosexuals of “harassment” because ex-gay groups want the same access to public schools as gay groups. Equality Virginia, a gay rights group, demanded that Metro remove PFOXs subway billboards advocating tolerance for former homosexuals.

**Cornelius Baker, the executive director of an AIDS clinic (Whitman-Walker) that receives federal funding, labeled ex-gays as **political extremists who tortured and brainwashed teens, although he endorses gay outreach to questioning youth. After receiving threats, insults and brutal letters for running an advertisement for an ex-gay book, Psychology Today Editor Bob Epstein acknowledged the dark, intolerant, abusive side of the gay community. Facing pressure campaigns, Detroits three major television networks refused to run ads featuring ex-gay men.

**Orlando Commissioner Patty Sheehan denounced her fellow commissioner for issuing a proclamation honoring an ex-gay organization even though she herself freely makes proclamations celebrating **Gay Days every year at Disney World. Ms. Sheehan, an open lesbian, went so far as to compare the ex-gay organization to the KKK, thereby demeaning African-American ex-gays. The list is endless because every day brings new hostile acts against the ex-gay community.

Ex-gays must be included in the formation of public policy because they have much to contribute to the understanding and application of sexual orientation. They are living proof that homosexuality is neither genetic, inborn, or immutable. Without testimony from all sectors of society, public policy on this issue is seriously flawed.

 

[rush176]

To begin with I am neither a psychologist nor a homosexual so all my comments are based upon the Church’s teaching not on any personal experience. I am not aware of any leader of the Church who every recommended forcing any competent human being into this type of “therapy” to change their sexual orientation. So long as they live a chaste lifestyle and don’t covet (or lust after) their neighbor or his wife I don’t see any problem with homosexuals. Being a homosexual is no more a sin than being an alcoholic, so long as you stay on the wagon you will be fine.

The problem as I see it is much more basic that whether someone can be “changed” from whom they are attracted. The problem is that too many Catholics are living the secular lifestyle that says its OK to separate sex from marriage. Sex should be a natural extension of marriage not some kind of national pass time that is used as some form of entertainment. There are a lot more heterosexual Catholics in hell than homosexual Catholics.

Catholics proclaim that theirs is the original Christian religion but dodge the responsibility that comes with it by setting a lousy example for everyone else. It is the worst kind of hypocrisy to call yourself Catholic and live your life like everyone else who doesn’t know better. As the bible says to those that much has been given, much is expected. Our Catholic Church was established by Jesus and has been guided by the Holy Spirit through our priests and bishops for 2000 years and we should act like it. We know the right answers to life’s questions we are just too lazy to do the right thing.

 

[Bennie_P]

To begin with I am neither a psychologist nor a homosexual so all my comments are based upon the Church’s teaching not on any personal experience. I am not aware of any leader of the Church who every recommended forcing any competent human being into this type of “therapy” to change their sexual orientation. So long as they live a chaste lifestyle and don’t covet (or lust after) their neighbor or his wife I don’t see any problem with homosexuals. Being a homosexual is no more a sin than being an alcoholic, so long as you stay on the wagon you will be fine. (my emphasis)

The problem as I see it is much more basic that whether someone can be “changed” from whom they are attracted. The problem is that too many Catholics are living the secular lifestyle that says its OK to separate sex from marriage. Sex should be a natural extension of marriage not some kind of national pass time that is used as some form of entertainment. There are a lot more heterosexual Catholics in hell than homosexual Catholics.

Catholics proclaim that theirs is the original Christian religion but dodge the responsibility that comes with it by setting a lousy example for everyone else. It is the worst kind of hypocrisy to call yourself Catholic and live your life like everyone else who doesn’t know better. As the bible says to those that much has been given, much is expected. Our Catholic Church was established by Jesus and has been guided by the Holy Spirit through our priests and bishops for 2000 years and we should act like it. We know the right answers to life’s questions we are just too lazy to do the right thing.

Yes, as Catholics we need to strive for holiness, but being an alcolhic in recovery, being fine (**Freaked, Insecure, Neurotic, Emotional) is somthing not to be confortable with, it is a redflag signaling possible relapse. **

The discussion is not about if or if not a person should be forced into therapy, but if threapy is effective or not. Forced rebilitation tends to produce poor results. Catholics that are positive about reparative therapy on this thread are not promoting forced therapy on others, but trying to debunk the idea that therapy is useless and SSA cannot be treated. An idea that entraps many into a lifestyle that is counterproductive to an individuals health -physical, mental and spiritual. Those that have SSA and live a chaste life as according to Church teachings are on the proper path, but we should not deny those that want to do more about their sexual orientation just because ‘gay"activist and "gay’ appoligist say it doesn’t work, for they don’t want to live as the Church teaches in any manner and to them seeing Catholics with SSA to remain in a constant struggle between faith and sexuality just gives them joy. As well an excuse to reject the Church’s teaching on morality which is so important to a Christian’s life, but for the ‘gay’ activist challenges their immoral lifstyle.

The basic problem is orginal sin, in which we all need to strive above and it’s the strangle hold on our society.
As to who is in hell - I leave that up to God to judge.

 

[rush176]

Yes, as Catholics we need to strive for holiness, but being an alcolhic in recovery, being fine (Freaked, Insecure, Neurotic, Emotional) is somthing not to be confortable with, it is a redflag signaling possible relapse.** **

The discussion is not about if or if not a person should be forced into therapy, but if threapy is effective or not. Forced rebilitation tends to produce poor results. Catholics that are positive about reparative therapy on this thread are not promoting forced therapy on others, but trying to debunk the idea that therapy is useless and SSA cannot be treated. An idea that entraps many into a lifestyle that is counterproductive to an individuals health -physical, mental and spiritual. Those that have SSA and live a chaste life as according to Church teachings are on the proper path, but we should not deny those that want to do more about their sexual orientation just because ‘gay"activist and "gay’ appoligist say it doesn’t work, for they don’t want to live as the Church teaches in any manner and to them seeing Catholics with SSA to remain in a constant struggle between faith and sexuality just gives them joy. As well an excuse to reject the Church’s teaching on morality which is so important to a Christian’s life, but for the ‘gay’ activist challenges their immoral lifstyle.

The basic problem is orginal sin, in which we all need to strive above and it’s the strangle hold on our society.
As to who is in hell - I leave that up to God to judge.

Obviously you purposely misunderstood my comment on being fine. I never intended for it to be anything other than what it is, fine, good or OK.

I also never said anything about not allowing someone to enter treatment on a voluntary basis. If they want to have reparative therapy or any other therapy/threatment that helps them I think it is fine,

Maybe you should really consider changing to decaf coffee.

 

[Bennie_P]

Obviously you purposely misunderstood my comment on being fine. I never intended for it to be anything other than what it is, fine, good or OK.

I also never said anything about not allowing someone to enter treatment on a voluntary basis. If they want to have reparative therapy or any other therapy/threatment that helps them I think it is fine,

Maybe you should really consider changing to decaf coffee.

I wasn’t attacking you, just wanted to clear up certain aspects of your post - blessings…

 

[redbird444]

I think reparative therapy could work on many people. When I was studying psychology in my master’s program, I found in my studies that reparative therapy based on behavioral modes of change as well as gender identity awareness seemed to be quite effective for many types of behavior, not just homosexual. Human beings are quite susceptible to societal change and will eagerly conform to change once society demands it. Here I could place many historical examples but will not unless asked.
Also, as a former bisexual person, I know for a fact people can change their desires.

I think the operative word in RWMorris’ post is repair therapy “COULD” work. I have to agree, well, almost.

But before I eagerly await the thousands of homosexuals to line up at the doors of rep therapists doors, I have to chuckle.

It’s kind of like alcoholism, right? A person can be sober for years and yet still be only one drink away from his next drunk.

Not to malign the validity of academic studies, statistics, charts, case history’s,… … but I also have an opinion on reparative therapy. It’s a pipe dream- but it depends on who is holding the pipe. Namely, the individual and their unique case.

As for the academic drivel, most of those polished uip professors with PhD’s with their penny loafers with the tassles on them would not last a day in prison if they brought that gibberish to the table. Of course, I am being overly facetious because I also walked the halls of academia. I work in the trenches and they walk safely to their next lecture.

If the child molesters, homosexuals/bi and transgendered, rapists, etc. WANT to go through with repair job therapy, then more power to them.

I think it is in the person’s psyche-if he/she wants to change, then change will happen. And prayer is a lot cheaper.

For every successful case, I am sure there is an unsuccesful case. I work in prison with sex offenders. Some of whom wish to change and some don’t.

I wish the best to those who do go. And I applaud anyone who can put it behind them.

 

[Mirdath]

child molesters, homosexuals/bi and transgendered, rapists, etc.

Much as I appreciate the sentiment of the rest of your post, I do hope lumping us mere oddities in with rapists and pedophiles was unintentional.

 

[estesbob]

Much as I appreciate the sentiment of the rest of your post, I do hope lumping us mere oddities in with rapists and pedophiles was unintentional.

Well if you are odd I am in big trouble…

 

[Bennie_P]

Much as I appreciate the sentiment of the rest of your post, I do hope lumping us mere oddities in with rapists and pedophiles was unintentional.

Disordered behavior is disordered behavior. immorality is immorality, sin is sin, doesn’t matter, each of us have our own cross to carry and personal sin to overcome. What’s important is to accept the Grace to overcome what will destroy one’s life and soul, but most choose to drown in denial, and I’m not talking about a river in Egypt.

For we have not a high priest who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin. Let us go therefore with confidence to the throne of grace: that we may obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid. Hebrew 4:15 -16

 

[Bennie_P]

A new study is suggesting that religous meditated approaches may have postive outcomes in changing sexual orientation. It seems it may really be a challenge to those that don’t want others to seek change.

Study finds sexual orientation can be changed through religious mediation
Colorado Springs, Sep 19, 2007 / 11:06 am (CNA).- A new study has found that it is possible to change one’s sexual orientation through religious mediation.
Study findings were first released last week in a book, “Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation.”
The researchers, Stanton Jones of Wheaton College and Mark Yarhouse of Regent University, tracked men and women who had undergone a program of group discussions, counseling, journal writing, Scripture reading and prayer to change their gender orientation.

Despite claims by some mental-health experts, new research indicates that a change in sexual orientation is possible for some homosexuals. In the book Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, which was released today, authors Stanton L. Jones and Mark A. Yarhouse address two of the most disputed questions in the homosexuality debate: Is change possible and can the attempt to change be harmful? C. S. Lewis said that science produced by Christians would have to be “perfectly honest. Science twisted in the interests of apologetics would be sin and folly.” Jones and Yarhouse took Lewis’ advice to heart as they conducted their research, which produced what publisher InterVarsity Press claims to be “the most scientifically rigorous study of its kind to date.”
Jones, a provost and professor at Wheaton College in Wheaton, Ill., spoke with CitizenLink about the research.

Of course the nay sayers attack with venom.

However, former APA President Nicholas Cummings praised the research methods of Jones and Yarhouse. “This study has broken new ground in its adherence to objectivity and a scientific precision that can be replicated and expanded, and it opens new horizons for investigation,” he said.

Nevertheless, Wayne Besen, executive director of Truth Wins Out, which describes itself as “a non-profit organization that counters right-wing propaganda, exposes the ‘ex-gay’ myth and educates America about gay life,” called the study a “deceptive sham with the goal of making it appear as if science backs fundamentalist beliefs on homosexuality.” Full story

It seems to me Mr. Benson doesn’t realize Science doesn’t have a agenda.

 

[goofyjim]

I won’t waste my time with it until it is covered by insurance. I have no moral obligation to line the pockets of the rich psychiatrists with money from the poor.

 

[Bennie_P]

I won’t waste my time with it until it is covered by insurance. I have no moral obligation to line the pockets of the rich psychiatrists with money from the poor.

You know Jim, you might want to check a ministry I know about called Celebrate Recovery, it isn’t reparative therapy but but a Christ Centered Recovery program that deals with many issues. They have one special support group that deals with sexual addictions, and it could be a Christ centerd way to deal with your attractions without trying to change your orientaion or being be condescending about your SSA. The small groups are not judgemental. It is based on 12 step principles and the groups usually have both hetersexual and homsexual men in them. They don’t try to fix you, just support you and it is free. It could be a way to help you deal with staying chaste. Myself I attend Celebrate Recovery for alcoholism and chemical addiction. I did a 12 step study with 11 other men and some of the men in the group in my 12 step study had (and still do) issues with SSA. No body tried to change them, everybody in the group just became very close brothers in Christ that gave and continue to give (the study group ended over a year ago) support to each other as we all try to live with our different issues as Christians. Its free. I don’t know where you live and if they have one near you but here are links for you to get more information and find a location near you.

What it is and isn’t

celebraterecovery.com/things.shtml

Info about Small Groups for Sexual Addiction

celebraterecovery.com/SmallGroups/sa_Men.shtml

Locations
celebraterecovery.com/global.shtml