Posted on 06/04/2013 8:15:15 PM PDT by EveningStar
Gay Therapy
Gay conversion therapy, as it is known, supposedly helps gay people overcome same-sex attractions. But mainstream psychologists say the therapy is ineffective, unethical and often harmful, exacerbating anxiety and self-hatred among those treated for what is not a mental disorder.
In 2013, two cases involving the therapy to convert gay people into heterosexuals hit the courts, with one seeking to sue counselors who offer the therapy and the other seeking to defend them.
Here are five things you need to know about the therapy and the current lawsuits.
(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...
Darrell and others, let me clarify a few things:
When I said everybody knows who I am, I was talking about forums where I use a name other than EveningStar. The people at those forums know that I’m EveningStar from Free Republic. I’m open about who I am. Also, it’s difficult to hide a posting style.
As to my real name, FReepers who I’ve met in real life, as well as many FReepers on Facebook, know it.
Religiously, I was raised as an Episcopalian, but I have Jewish ancestry on both sides of my family and my wife is a Jew. At one time I considered converting to Judaism. I now consider myself a Deist. I believe in God but I follow no organized religion.
I have nothing but respect for the vast majority of Christians I know.
If you look at my posting history as a whole, you will see that I am firmly on the Right.
As far as me being a troll, several FReepers, including some prominent ones, have accused me of being one. I don’t think I am, but it’s all in the eye of the beholder, so I guess you’ll have to draw your own conclusions.
General information:
NARTH: National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality
Information specific to the topic:
Reorientation Therapy Includes Many Different Mainstream Approaches to Therapy (middle of the page)
excerpt:
Reorientation therapy is simply psychological care aimed at helping clients achieve their goals regarding their sexual attractions, sexual orientations and/or sexual identities. Reorientation is not decidedly different from other therapies. There are many psychological approaches to helping clients with unwanted homosexual attractions. All approaches supported by NARTH are mainstream approaches to psychotherapy. The term "Reparative Therapy" refers to one specific approach which is psychodynamic in nature, but not all who offer therapy aimed at orientation change practice Reparative Therapy. Critics sometimes use the phrase 'reparative therapy' to describe reorientation therapy. This may be misconstrued to support a view pathologizing homosexuality, and that this is the only therapeutic modality used in reorientation therapy. Both inferences are incorrect. The members of NARTH are diverse in their training and in their approaches. Like other therapists, most clinical members of NARTH practice whatever type of therapy they were trained to practice, including but not limited to: interpersonal therapy, cognitive therapy, family therapy, behavioral therapy, EMDR, and psychodynamic approaches of which Reparative Therapy is one type. Quite simply, this is psychotherapy, nothing more and nothing less.NARTH is often described by journalists with terms that are not used by NARTH or its members. For example, NARTH is sometimes "branded" as offering a "cure" for homosexuality, implying that NARTH views homosexuality as a disease. NARTH does not view homosexuality as mental illness; rather, homosexuality is an adaptation that is distressful for some people. Another inaccurate description is "conversion" therapy, a term not used by NARTH members. This term seems to imply some type of force or the idea of a therapist pressuring a client to change. NARTH therapists understand that psychotherapy should never be coercive, but should be offered in accordance with professional ethics and a respect for client self-determination. Neither do NARTH members offer or provide "aversion therapy." This form of behavioral therapy was used in the 1960's and 1970's to treat many different types of presenting problems, one of which was unwanted homosexual thoughts and feelings. However, aversion therapy was deemed unethical and was discontinued over 25 years ago, prior to NARTH's existence. NARTH encourages all of its members to abide by the highest standards of ethicality, which by definition would exclude any form of aversive therapy.
NARTH encourages its members to assist those who seek help for unwanted homosexual attractions, attractions which seldom occur in isolation from other issues commonly treated in therapy. More often than not, other issues become a part--and even the primary focus--of the care provided. Such issues might include past sexual abuse or trauma, family relationships, a weak sense of self, gender insecurity, depression, hopelessness, self-hatred, or any other issue that is problematic for the client. Many NARTH therapists report that once these other issues are addressed, issues regarding sexual attractions, identity, and orientation are easier to resolve.
I don’t care about your other names, forums, or anything else.
All I care about is that you utterly refuse to state your position on the homo agena, and posted a pro-homo agenda propaganda peice without being honest or clear about your POV.
I totally disagree with the mod action on this thread, in pulling a comment of mine that did not break FR rules. Since when is critizing someone’s viewpoint, or slippery excuses for not posting a viewpoint, breaking the rules?
I don’t care of mods know someone, mods ain’t perfect either.
Peoples’ posting history reveals everything. It’s realy simple.
YES, I read that. I think it was homosexual agenda promoting fact #5 if I am not mistaken. Looking at what Spitzer actually wrote "I believe I owe the gay community an apology for my study making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy," .
The statement deals only with the unproven accuracy of efficacy claims. In other words, how well the therapy works (how many were treated successfully) was not conclusively proven using the conventional accepted statistical methods of proving such claims. This does not imply the therapy does not work, it simply implies that its predicted success rate (effectiveness within a population) is unproven. NARTH addresses this 'disparity' in general:
Anti-Gay?! NARTH President Addresses Misperceptions about NARTH
While Success Rates are Similar to Some other Issues, Therapy for Unwanted Homosexuality Seems to be held to a Higher StandardWhile studies on therapy for unwanted homosexual attractions seem to yield varying success rates, ranging from 30%-70%, these rates seem to be no different than success rates for many other therapeutic issues.1 For example, one study on outcomes in ministry settings (Jones and Yarhouse, 2007) revealed success rates that were comparable to a similar study on the treatment for depression. There is no question that depression should be treated, even though neither therapy, nor medication, nor a combination of both, yield success rates of 100%. Another example is that of personality disorders. It is commonly accepted within the therapeutic profession that personality disorders do not fully resolve, regardless of the therapeutic modality offered. While some forms of therapy appear more effective than others in treating personality disorders, it is clear that clients who are diagnosed with such disorders will continue beyond therapy to struggle with some issues related to their diagnosis. Yet, despite the fact that the condition is not completely alleviated through therapy, we do not hear of attempts to stop therapists from offering treatment for personality disorders.2
Similarly, in the field of addictions, where there is debate over both etiology and treatment, we find varying success rates, but we do not see any model of treatment to be successful 100% of the time. In fact, there is a high recidivism rate in the addictions field, yet the work continues undisputed. In addition, those who successfully receive treatment for substance abuse, eating disorders, and other behavioral addictions continue to describe themselves as addicts long after their therapy ends, and some will claim that label for the rest of their lives, even after the initial presenting problem is resolved. In many ways, reorientation therapy is quite similar to therapy for other issues. Yet, it seems clear that therapy for unwanted homosexuality is held to a standard higher than therapy for any other issue, a standard unattainable in the mental health field.
I would say that the homosexual agenda promoting fact #5 is at best irrelevant and at worst a misrepresentation of a scientific reality being used to promote a political agenda.
These studies did find that conversion therapy could be harmful, however. Negative effects included "loss of sexual feeling, depression, suicidality and anxiety."
No numbers?
Many studies show that homosexual sex is harmful. I guess one would have to weigh the risks against the benefits in regards to avoiding homosexual sex. As far as whether or not to pursue a therapy course THAT would really be the only legitimate measure in my opinion.
I would consider the article more of an editorial than a scientific study, if you get what I mean. ;)
Many already knew that. I would add the word BIASED, as in biased left and worthy of a big fat BARF ALERT because it is leftist propaganda.
It sure does sound like “defining it away.”
Much as modern homosexual activists try to define their perversion away by politicking for an associated shack-up to be called “marriage.”
D’oh!
Anyhow, the desire to engage in homosexual copulation is a result of spiritual/emotional problems.
The “conversion therapy” actually seeks to relieve the problems underlying the desire. Psychology is of limited use here, as no imperative can be derived from psychology, only from spirituality. It’s like trying to rebuild a car without caring at all about the engine, only about the transmission and axles. An accurate spirituality works better. Success means the person is placed in a position where if he (usually, he) or she is furnished by God with a mate, he (or she) can offer his (or her) sexual function before God as a holy offering. OR, it may mean a pure singlehood.
I read more bible books than anyone else’s now, but I believe the biblical description of creation as fallen and flawed but still bearing an unmistakable fingerprint of God.
Someone who views the gospel as “rage” is in a pretty sad position.
WELL THEN psychology can declare whatever it wants to be whatever it wants it to be. In the case of this topic, psychology declared homosexual sex normal several years ago. AND NOW like every other leftist push for a utopian dream we see more and more the new messes created having new solutions imposed to fix them which of course will create more messes requiring more solutions. Square peg meet round hole....
There is reality and then there is leftist delusion...
Right now the leftists push to make illegal any activities or beliefs that oppose or question the fabricated sacred cow of homosexual sex normalcy.
Why of course no numbers! And some of the complaints sound silly, like the “reduction in sexual feeling” (if the sexual feeling is homosexual copulation focused, isn’t that what the counselee WANTED?)
I think psychology can be an empirical soft science. It involves the things that minds can do. It is like studying the operation of pianos. Nothing about that study can explain music, though it will help explain why pianists play their music in specific way (i.e. they are using the capabilities of their instruments, which can hit strings but can’t toot like horns).
LOL!
In the case of homosexuality, likening it to pianos, usually the music is wrong, though perhaps the piano is also suffering from being hit on the keys by a hammer.
To further the analogy, the piano has programmable music boxes inside and some of them could have gotten twisted up and need fixing too... before they will work in concordance with what is being played on the keys...
I do believe that ANGER PROBLEMS may be at the heart of a lot of human dysfunction and not just homosexuality/paraphilia. In a few days I believe I will write an essay in Religion titled “Let’s Get Good And Mad (Or, Saints In The Hands Of An Angry God)”
Apparently the GayAgenda likes to think that people who have put homosexual behaviors in the past are eager to line up and participate in surveys, or broadcast their stories publicly. Most probably still want to keep all that in the closet. It would be almost impossiible to construct a study that was not subjective or anecdotal. As a practical matter, researchers can’t biopsy the brains of living pre- and post-gay people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.