The U.S federal government should ban licensed professionals from practicing ex gay “therapy” on minors

[gus]

I guess the government could “outlaw” reparative “therapy”.

I guess I don’t see the need because no licensing bodies (Psychiatry, Psychology, Social Work, Marriage and Family Counseling, Counseling) permit professionals to use it anyway.

If a licensed professional (like myself) knew of another professional practicing reparative therapy they would be ethically bound to report that clinician or face disciplinary action themselves.

It is unethical to engage in any type of “therapy” designed to “change” a persons sexual orientation.

Isn’t that position directly contrary to the prevailing public opinion on gender re-Assignment.
Or do the rules change depending on the politics.

 

[St_Francis]

On the whole those drugs help far more people than they harm, “reparative therapy” does not.

So what if exposing prisoners to infectious agents and then vivisecting them as they manifest symptoms is completely unethical, for Science!

In the US military abuse of people perceived to be homosexual was rampant because the abusers would just accuse them of being gay and then they’d be kicked out of the military so it is unsurprising they’d be more likely to suicidal. I can’t tell if the number is about gay people in opposite sex marriages.

In the article, it explained that the studies were not conducted in the US military; they were conducted in nations particularly friendly to homosexuals. Despite that, homosexuals still had much higher rates of suicide and suicidal ideation, and particularly among “married” homosexuals.

gender≠sexuality

 

[1990Domer]

People can claim that the American Psychological Association is ideologically infiltrated and pressured all they want. The individuals who claim that are unaware that the APA is a professional organization that conducts and sites methodologically valid studies on homosexuality. This forum and the hilarious junk science organizations like the Family Research Council on the other hand, do not conduct or site methodologically valid studies.
The consistently methodologically valid APA have validly concluded that there are several methodological problems with the studies that claim ex gay “therapy” changed people’s perceived sexual orientation.

76crimes.com/ex-gay-therapy-what-reputable-experts-have-to-say/

Licensed theorists who practice this on minors can be prosecuted in a handful of states because they ban this “therapy” for minors. I hope to see the federal government ban this practice for minors in order to protect the vulnerable minors that are pressured or forced by religiously conservative parents to go through this potentially dangerous “therapy” that is not supported by valid scientific evidence.

Read this: nature.com/news/epigenetic-tags-linked-to-homosexuality-in-men-1.18530?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews

 

[1990Domer]

I agree that such therapy for a minor is highly problematic, especially since “perceived sexual orientation” means very little in the long run. It may very well do more harm and good. Would you agree that such therapy and surgery should also be banned when parents, psychologists, etc. attempt to alter the gender and gender behaviour of a child?

I’ll ask my psych tomorrow. Also, I am sick and tired that SSA kids get the majority of the attnetion when kids with visible and invisible disabilities are cast aside and often have harder time navigating life because of bullying, rumors, lack of friends, issolation…to name a few.

Why all the emphasis on SSA kids? Other demongraphic kids kill themselves, especially from bullying. But the liberal news media won’t address the problem or report the stories.

Sorry, it is unjust, unChristian and unfair. Period. Amen.

Licensed theorists who practice this on minors can be prosecuted in a handful of states because they ban this “therapy” for minors. I hope to see the federal government ban this practice for minors in order to protect the vulnerable minors that are pressured or forced by religiously conservative parents to go through this potentially dangerous “therapy” that is not supported by valid scientific evidence. My thought…ultra-liberal BS!

 

[1990Domer]

People can claim that the American Psychological Association is ideologically infiltrated and pressured all they want. The individuals who claim that are unaware that the APA is a professional organization that conducts and sites methodologically valid studies on homosexuality. This forum and the hilarious junk science organizations like the Family Research Council on the other hand, do not conduct or site methodologically valid studies.
The consistently methodologically valid APA have validly concluded that there are several methodological problems with the studies that claim ex gay “therapy” changed people’s perceived sexual orientation.

76crimes.com/ex-gay-therapy-what-reputable-experts-have-to-say/

Licensed theorists who practice this on minors can be prosecuted in a handful of states because they ban this “therapy” for minors. I hope to see the federal government ban this practice for minors in order to protect the vulnerable minors that are pressured or forced by religiously conservative parents to go through this potentially dangerous “therapy” that is not supported by valid scientific evidence.

Your right, the APA itself does not conduct studies. There a professional watchdog that cites methodologically sound studies and judges the validity of studies with taskforces.

It is important to note that the link you put out there mentions studies that have limitations and potential for bias, that doesn’t mean there studies are completely discredited. If you want to see some studies that are completely discredited, just look around this forum or go to the Family Research Council. They admit that their studies are small and not representative and that they have potential for dishonesty and bias, but are we really going to claim that EVERY SINGLE child of same sex parents was biased or dishonest when these studies were conducted? One small representative study by itself is considerably weak, but when all these studies start piling onto each other over the decades, it becomes something much greater.

If you support banning “therapy” that is involved with bizarre junk science practices like this

“Unger described another group therapy session where the boys were told that their close relationships with their mothers had played an integral role in turning them gay. Unger was then instructed to reimagine a pillow in the therapy room as his mother, and to then beat that pillow as hard as he possibly could with a tennis racket, according to court documents.”

forward.com/news/310914/jury-rules-against-jonah-in-landmark-gay-conversion-therapy-case/#ixzz3ovo83kOH

Or support banning “therapy” that shame its patients, then you might as well just say you support banning ex gay “therapy” all together. This is because I highly doubt that any professional that has the audacity to try and change someone’s sexual orientation would not have the slightest amount of shame or absurd practices like the one example out of several I provided involved in ex gay “therapy”.

So should we bad autism therapy, OCD therapy, anxiety therapy, Downs therapy, ODD therapy, bipolar or anxiety therapy for children? You see, SSA groups have a ton of money to fight the arguments you bring up. Do these other groups? NO! And I would argue the have a heck of a lot more therapy to try to live independent lives! My BIL is SSA, and DH never witnessed the stuff you are quoting, although he went untreated for bulemia.

 

[1990Domer]

Why should it be *illegal *for an adult patient and a psychologist to try to change the patient’s sexual orientation? And why should be illegal for parents to decide that goal for their child with a psycholigist?

Wrt to part I bolded: this is conflating the goal of the patient (or patient’s parents) with the method(s) used by the psychologist. That is the problem I have with this whole idea of legally probibiting “reparative therapy”–that the patient (or parents) cannot determine their own goal and work towards that goal in a good way.

WRT the first part of this part of your comment–so what if it is not considered a disorder by the APA? Does that mean that if I go in to a psychologist, he will reject me on the grounds that my problem is not a psychological disorder as defined by the APA?

Before you answer that, you should understand that the reason the APA has a list of disorders is so they can get money from insurance companies–they have to provide a “diagnosis” and hope for a “cure” in order to be reimbursed. Problems that parents used to take their children in for which were not at the time labeled acquired scientific-sounding names for that reason.

The whole thing really grew into an industry in poor areas. For a while it was quite a scandal, as schools billed Medicaid for providing psychological services (like an attendant for the “patient”), and parents getting an increase in their welfare payments due to their child’s “disability.” When Medicaid caught on, all these children were suddenly “cured”.

Having been dxed as variously as stress, over-active imagination, hypochondria, teeth problems, etc., until doctors finally discovered TMJ syndrome, I am not impressed by this. For decades homosexuality was considered a problem in and of itself. That changed. It could change again.

It’s an immoral belief that a tendency to sin is immoral?!?!?!?!

Why not try to explore it. My DH’s youngest brother was raised in a totally different environment than DH and middle brother. The mom went back to work, the dad was absent working on a project and the grandmother–a very crumugenly lady who the other 2 avoided–raised the youngest. Nature…probably not all but certainly some. It didn’t help that she had a temper and a drinking problem.

 

[Jake21]

Jake, you’re making a sweeping generalization about reparative therapy for homosexually oriented people. You’re just assuming that all reparative therapy is bad because “it involves shaming” and it seems to me you believe that all reparative therapy involves similar incidents such as the “hitting the pillow imagining it is your mother” thing.

Come on now. Isn’t it possible that if reparative therapy is done correctly, it simply calls to mind the fact that no one is perfect, not even parents, and that parents can make mistakes? And that even if they did not intend for certain things to happen in their relationships between their children, these developments nonetheless happened? Do you think we live in a perfect world?

What if that is all that this “shaming” you speak of is? I can concede that some therapists have failed to carry out their mission in the correct manner. I will not believe for one second, though, that this “shaming” is the goal of the reparative therapist. You need to read this article:

josephnicolosi.com/collection/what-is-reparative-therapy

In short, I believe you are just fixated on a false idea of “shaming” and are therefore basing your claim that all reparative therapy should be banned on false ideas. Perhaps a misunderstanding.

Remember, I’m not claiming that every reparative therapist carries out the therapy with the patient perfectly, and that, as with probably a lot of treatment in the mental/psychological field, there is the possibility of error in the treatment. Consider at least the possibility that any perceived “error” with the treatment of the individual is not a flaw with the actual ideas, but with how the ideas are carried out.

I’m also not trying to claim that even this idea of reparative therapy as laid out by Dr. Nicolosi is perfect, though I think, at the very least, there is a lot of merit to his ideas based on his wealth of experience with reparative therapy. I am only claiming that this type of therapy need not be outlawed, and that further research on things such as “reparative therapy” needs to be allowed; rather, only if specific actions (“shaming the client” would have to be specifically defined, and proved to have been actual “shaming”) are proven to be harmful, should they be considered for being outlawed, and only if the same practices aren’t working at all for other clients. And I don’t mean harmful for a handful of patients - I mean harmful for a significant number of patients, again, while also being proven to have NOT been helpful for a significant number of people.

I could go on and on about this, so I better stop there.

Please disregard my orignal post. I have been convinced that the federal government should just ban any therapy that uses bizarre and dangerous methods that are similar to the example I mentioned. I believe there should be a significant amount of research done on the success rate of reparative therapy that claims to not be involved with bizarre and dangerous methods before any more laws are passed.

 

[1990Domer]

If you support banning “therapy” that is involved with bizarre junk science practices like this

“Unger described another group therapy session where the boys were told that their close relationships with their mothers had played an integral role in turning them gay. Unger was then instructed to reimagine a pillow in the therapy room as his mother, and to then beat that pillow as hard as he possibly could with a tennis racket, according to court documents.”

forward.com/news/310914/jury-…#ixzz3ovo83kOH

Or support banning “therapy” that shame its patients, then you might as well just say you support banning ex gay “therapy” all together. This is because I highly doubt that any professional that has the audacity to try and change someone’s sexual orientation would not have the slightest amount of shame or absurd practices like the one example out of several I provided involved in ex gay “therapy”.

This mimics the crazy theory that Jenny McCarthy and Andrew (Fake)field pushed. Now childhood diseases are returning in large pockets because uneducated parents believe a former Playboy bunny that vaccines cause autism…despite millions of dollars of research.

These SSA arguments are getting old and are highly unfair to kids that have legitimate learning disorders.

 

[1990Domer]

Well I don’t know. I mean if someone told me they had a cure for this. And I wanted that cure. I’d want that cure to be available. But first we have to be willing to admit it’s not a normal way of thinking. We’d have to admit that it’s disordered. A problem with the wiring. Or with the way things get interpreted. Or maybe with some later patterning. I don’t know. But we’d have to admit something. In order to justify studying it further. In order to think about whether there’s such a thing as a cure.

I mean we’re cool with admitting that adults who lust after children have a disorder. And people who fall in love with barnyard animals have a real problem. And someone who wants to marry a pillow has issues. But SSA is not part of that spectrum? Just magically not in any way related? I mean I’ve got the strongest desire to reach out for someone in a way that defies all reason. Why is that normal?

I mean what I don’t like is the idea that we somehow have to pretend that something like this is somehow off the table. That we can’t dig into it. Like we would for any other brain-altering condition. I hate the political nice-ness that comes at the expense of scientific honesty. I mean you’re an atheist. What do you think about that? Are you thinking this kind of stuff should be up for rational discussion? Or is it fair to expect it should be blocked by emotions?

I don’t know. I think we need to watch how this stuff’s played for sure. There’s no point in screaming names at people. But we don’t do that anyway. I just don’t think we should make everything so touchy. Just say that it’s a different patterning of thought if we want. Say there’s evidence that these patterns can be changed. Show the evidence for that. Study that. But honestly. Don’t outlaw science. That’s always the wrong approach. Keep thinking. Keep searching. Keep finding truths. Let’s go guys. Let’s do that the right way.

I mean I’d like to know the answers to this too. I’m maybe on a different ride here. But that doesn’t mean that I suddenly find it better to pretend than to face the truth. I’ve got a heart and soul in this. I care about where this leaves me. And I resent blunt thinking. When we need to stay sharp.

Peace.

-Trident

YOUR POST ROCKED!

 

[1990Domer]

Would you mind telling me some examples of reparative therapy that don’t involve the slightest amount of shaming or something absurd like the example I provided? I’m willing to bet that if the federal government were to ban therapy that used methods similar to the example I provided or shamed its patients, then therapy that tried to change people’s sexual orientation would be almost nonexistent.

Funny, my ASD kid feels shamed when social skills miistakes are pointed out to him. What’s the difference? Can it be because our president has a strong gay agenda?

 

[1990Domer]

My apologies, but I have to withdraw from this thread. Anyone who took logic or philo in college can see these glaring mistakes in reasoning.

I will pray for the OP at a healing mass my son is serving on Saturday.

God bless.

 

[bobballen_18]

Please disregard my orignal post. I have been convinced that the federal government should just ban any therapy that uses bizarre and dangerous methods that are similar to the example I mentioned. I believe there should be a significant amount of research done on the success rate of reparative therapy that claims to not be involved with bizarre and dangerous methods before any more laws are passed.

Ok, fair enough. I agree that there should be a significant amount of non-biased (as much as possible that is…) research on it, and that research cannot happen if there is a blanket ban on all therapy claiming the title “reparative therapy”.

Then there could be debate on what constitutes “significant success”, and this is partially dependent upon the stated goals of such therapy. Just FYI, reparative therapy does not guarantee any change, so “changing one’s sexual orientation” is not necessarily a stated goal, or at least is not a guaranteed outcome. I am of the opinion that as long as it is helping some people, and as long as there is some way to ensure that nothing unethical is going on, and all potential patients are given all the information about what reparative therapy is and what it is not, there is no reason to ban it.

This is why the rampage against it is so terrible - so many people are being told that if they have SSA then they must be gay and they should embrace that and be ok with looking for a same-sex relationship. No! They should hear the whole spectrum of possibilities and not just have the secular opinion shoved on them.

And in the Catholic world - the faithful Catholic world which acknowledges the sinfulness of homosexual relationships that is - Catholics with SSA are told they just have to deal with it and that they can’t change (except from some extraordinary Divine intervention). Ok, yes, technically all change for the good is facilitated by God’s grace. But otherwise, NO, as someone with SSA, I find it rather insulting, or at best, just rather depressing, to have that mindset of ‘you can’t change’ thrown at me. It makes perfect sense to me in this fallen world, that factors in my childhood/adolescent development formed me into who I am today, both for better and for worse. And that if I am able to delve into finding those factors and being real with myself, there can be healing in some sense. All through the grace of God of course - but God wants us to take action ourselves, too.

I don’t know if I will ever “get over” my SSA, and frankly, I am leaving that up to God - His will be done. Just don’t tell me there is no earthly thing I can do about it with His help. There is far too much to still be found out about homosexuality for anyone to be making that claim for me.

 

[Trident_H]

So what if exposing prisoners to infectious agents and then vivisecting them as they manifest symptoms is completely unethical, for Science!

gender≠sexuality

Hey JDV. Hey. Don’t dig your nails into me on this. I mean I don’t remember making science a master. I don’t remember saying science should be capitalized. That anyone can do anything in the name of science. All I was against was how politics seems to have moved the needle on this. How politics, instead of science, is at the heart of changing entire lines of thought. Just because it might hurt someone’s feelings if they found out that the way they see the world might not be the optimal. I’m just so beyond needing that kind of crutch. I’m beyond the need of well meaning people. The kind who want to help. I’m beyond them reaching out and saying I’m Ok where I’m at. That I can’t help it. It’s not my fault. That I can just do what I was hard-wired to do. That I don’t need to change. I mean imagine if we treated compulsive eaters that way? Or hoarders? Or anyone else with a strong pull to do something illogical. And unnatural?

But JDV. If there was a way to understand it. And maybe reverse it. Or maybe treat it in a way. Why wouldn’t I want to know that? To have that option? Why do I have to be treated like a fragile little child just because what I crave is now politically great news to the powers and medias? Why can’t we just stay adults about some of these things? Why can’t we face reality with our eyes open? Instead of always crying whenever our ‘feelings’ get hurt? I don’t know. I just can’t deal with feel-good politics.

I mean if those guys really want to help me? Give me options. Not meaningless platitudes.

Peace JDV. Thanks for understanding. And caring.

-Trident

 

[Trident_H]

YOUR POST ROCKED!

Thanks Domer! I’ve been enjoying your very reasonable posts on this too. I mean what you say is true. I was thinking a lot of those same thoughts.

Peace Domer. Hope things are working out for you these days. Hope life’s not too stressful. Take it easy my friend.

-Trident

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

In the article, it explained that the studies were not conducted in the US military; they were conducted in nations particularly friendly to homosexuals. Despite that, homosexuals still had much higher rates of suicide and suicidal ideation, and particularly among “married” homosexuals.

The study of US Army vets did have to do with the US military.

I’ve seen people try to commit suicide as a result of horrible things that happened a decade before hand so I am not surprised that gay people would have bad memories years after the fact.

Hey JDV. Hey. Don’t dig your nails into me on this. I mean I don’t remember making science a master. I don’t remember saying science should be capitalized. That anyone can do anything in the name of science. All I was against was how politics seems to have moved the needle on this. How politics, instead of science, is at the heart of changing entire lines of thought. Just because it might hurt someone’s feelings if they found out that the way they see the world might not be the optimal. I’m just so beyond needing that kind of crutch. I’m beyond the need of well meaning people. The kind who want to help. I’m beyond them reaching out and saying I’m Ok where I’m at. That I can’t help it. It’s not my fault. That I can just do what I was hard-wired to do. That I don’t need to change. I mean imagine if we treated compulsive eaters that way? Or hoarders? Or anyone else with a strong pull to do something illogical. And unnatural?

But JDV. If there was a way to understand it. And maybe reverse it. Or maybe treat it in a way. Why wouldn’t I want to know that? To have that option? Why do I have to be treated like a fragile little child just because what I crave is now politically great news to the powers and medias? Why can’t we just stay adults about some of these things? Why can’t we face reality with our eyes open? Instead of always crying whenever our ‘feelings’ get hurt? I don’t know. I just can’t deal with feel-good politics.

I mean if those guys really want to help me? Give me options. Not meaningless platitudes.

Peace JDV. Thanks for understanding. And caring.

-Trident

Just because science can be advanced in a way doesn’t mean it should.

There are no effective treatments to date.

 

[ringil]

Isn’t that position directly contrary to the prevailing public opinion on gender re-Assignment.
Or do the rules change depending on the politics.

Clinical practice is based on research and experience, not on politics.

 

[ringil]

Funny, my ASD kid feels shamed when social skills miistakes are pointed out to him. What’s the difference? Can it be because our president has a strong gay agenda?

Homosexuality is not a mental illness. It is a sexual orientation.

But back to the OP. I don’t believe the government has banned what is called “re-birthing therapy”, but all licensing bodies ban it- as far as I know.

If licensed therapists can’t conduct this pseudo-therapy anyway; why ban it specifically?

 

[St_Francis]

The study of US Army vets did have to do with the US military.

I’ve seen people try to commit suicide as a result of horrible things that happened a decade before hand so I am not surprised that gay people would have bad memories years after the fact.

This is the thing: the nations in which these studies occurred have been fine with homosexuals for a long time. They are very different from the US.

If we reject all evidence that something else may be going on with homosexuals, then how will we help them? If we are intently focused on bullying-when-they-were-young as the motive for current suicide, and that turns out not to be the reason, then how have we helped?

Just because science can be advanced in a way doesn’t mean it should.

I think we all agree that certain forms of “therapy” are wrong, like those which cause physical harm. Why? Because causing physical harm without a proportionate benefit to the person harmed is, in and of itself, wrong.

Now you are suggesting that adult homosexuals making an agreement with a psychologist to try to change their orientation is, in and of itself, akin to innoculating someone with a serious disease and dissecting him while he is still alive.

There are no effective treatments to date.

And there won’t be, if we think as you suggest.

 

[St_Francis]

Homosexuality is not a mental illness. It is a sexual orientation.

On what grounds is it claimed that SSA is not a mental illness? What are the definitions of mental health and mental illness that we can sort conditions into one category or the other?

 

[at9009]

On what grounds is it claimed that SSA is not a mental illness? What are the definitions of mental health and mental illness that we can sort conditions into one category or the other?

I could be wrong, but I believe SSA is not defined as a mental illness because unlike other mental illness, a person is capable of functioning fully. I believe that in general, it was shown that SSA individuals were just as likely as non-SSA individuals to have or to not have related psychiatric disorders. Additionally, unless disclosed, it is often difficult to distinguish between a SSA person and a non-SSA person (I believe most mental illness often are associated with particular signs and symptoms, ex. bipolar disorder patients experience fluctuating periods of mania and depression).

To clarify just because something is not a mental illness does not necessarily make it morally okay. To give a slightly bad example. A person might be tempted to steal something from a store. That in itself is not a mental illness. Now if the person has a compulsive temptation to steal (kleptomania) then it is indeed a mental illness. Same thing applies to SSA. I think it enters into mental disorder zone when it becomes compulsive for that person (say as a sexual addiction).

One of my biggest problem with reparative therapy is seems like the goal is to fit all SSA individuals into a particular box. For men its overbearing mother, distant father, and bad at sports/lack of same sex peer affirmation. However, this is often not the case for many individuals. Additionally just like the pro-homosexual acts crowd, the research done by reparative groups are often skewed and misleading. So it is difficult to trust or accept it as good therapy.

I do think an adult should be able to do the research and determine for themselves whether or not they went to undergo the therapy. Ultimately it is their choice and their life. The difficulty for children is often they don’t have a choice and reparative therapy has been very negative for many individuals (leading to high rates of shame, self-loathing, and unfortunately ultimately suicide). One of the biggest issues is it is often implied (either explicitly or implicitly) that therapy will automatically cure said person if only they have the motivation and desire. When the change doesn’t come… very negative things result. An adult has the ability to decide for themselves that they no longer want to participate in the process, but a child is often compelled by parents. I do see a difficulty here in balancing the right of the parents to care for their child and the child’s own wellbeing (Not sure how to exactly resolve it).

Sorry for the long spiel but I hope this is a somewhat level-headed approach.
**** There is a big difference between therapy for an individual with SSA and reparative therapy. (At least in my opinion). So therapy can often be a good thing for a SSA individual.

Have a great day everyone.