ther's = there's
Sticky E key. LOL
Here's an article from a few days ago critquing Dr. Spitzer's study on former homosexuals:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1598889/posts
Some interesting excerpts:
"Of particular interest was the finding that problematic masculinity may be more amenable to sexual reorientation interventions than an absent/weak paternal bond. This finding suggests that homosexual attractions may be more related to gender (a sense of maleness or masculinity) than to sexuality itself. Also, it may suggest that treatment aimed at strengthening gender identity may be more efficacious than focusing on strengthening parental bonds."
"Thus Karten's study, along with others, adds to the body of clinical and research data that conclude that homosexuality is more fluid than fixed. Indeed, the quality of such research, mentored by seasoned professionals, provides scientific evidence to refute the repeated claims of The American Psychological Association (APA) that there is "no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change one's sexual orientation." The Spitzer study provided clear evidence to the contrary. And now, the Karten study expands on the Spitzer study by identifying factors that are associated with treatment success.
With such data providing support for the efficacy of reparative therapy with some individuals, the question of the ethics of APA discouraging such therapy now becomes center stage. No longer can the opponents of reparative therapy state there is no scientific evidence of its effectiveness. More importantly, as reparative therapy is studied, perhaps it is time for APA to insist on data to support the efficacy of other therapies, including gay affirmative therapy.
The ethical route demands the following: clients should be informed of the possibility that they may be disappointed if therapy (for any reason) does not succeed, so they can make a rational decision whether or not enter therapy. Offering such a choice should be fundamental to any therapeutic endeavor, and is central to client autonomy and client self-determination. In fact, it is clearly unethical for any professional, informed by the literature and guided by evidence-based interventions, to deny the choice of therapy to those who are unhappy with their same-sex attractions and seek therapy to diminish those attractions.
Though such research into sexual reorientation may be viewed as politically incorrect, no longer can it be ignored. Sociopolitical concerns must not interfere with the scientist's freedom to research any reasonable hypothesis, or to explore the efficacy of any reasonable treatment."
I would also ask this question (rhetorically; I don't expect anyone to answer it) - why are some people so opposed to the fact that there are indeed former homosexuals?