controvertial therapy

Started by actw1989
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

The word you're looking for is bisexual, and there are a whole hell of a lot more of us than people assume.

I would argue that if the OP doesn't consider him/herself to be bisexual, then the label doesn't apply. Sexuality is too complicated a construct to fit into a series of ill-defined categories.
 
I am a practicing Christian who belongs of the Eastern Orthodox Church. I went to my one and only AACC (American Association of Christian Counselors) conference in Myrtle Beach a couple years ago. I met some advocates of "reparative therapy" who had set up a booth and were trying to sell books stc... I asked them if they agreed with the psychodynamic underpinnings of this therapy. Reparative "therapy" is ultimately derived from Freudian ideas about the resolution of the Oedipal Complex and the existence of childhood sexuality. I specifically asked these guys if they adhered to these psychodynamic constructs in light of the fact the Freudian ideas were (and may still be) roundly condemned within protestant evangelicalism for over a century. I got an incoherent answer that made no sense. The astounding thing to me is that a group of people are embracing a "therapy" which is derived from a system of thought (Freudian psychoanalysis) that has been historically condemned by many segments of christianity as "perversion."I was then asked about my religious affiliation and was I "saved" by these jokers since I guess this sort of thing happens at such conventions I suppose. I replied that I was an Orthodox christian and gave them a fairly sophisticated theological description of salvation trying to neatly sidestep an attempt by them to peg me as something religiously suspect. It then became real clear that these people were ALSO theologically illiterate when they did not recognize any references to the major christian theologians from the first 5 centuries of the common era. Then these 3 Ph.D.'s could not understand why an orthodox jewish person would be attending the AACC conference in the first place. That level of ignorance was simply amazing. One set of ignorance built upon another set of ignorance piled upon yet another set of ignorance I suppose! That was my first and last AACC meeting. I was utterly unimpressed with their psychological and theological justifications for their "therapy."
 
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I am a practicing Christian who belongs of the Eastern Orthodox Church. I went to my one and only AACC (American Association of Christian Counselors) conference in Myrtle Beach a couple years ago. I met some advocates of "reparative therapy" who had set up a booth and were trying to sell books stc... I asked them if they agreed with the psychodynamic underpinnings of this therapy. Reparative "therapy" is ultimately derived from Freudian ideas about the resolution of the Oedipal Complex and the existence of childhood sexuality. I specifically asked these guys if they adhered to these psychodynamic constructs in light of the fact the Freudian ideas were (and may still be) roundly condemned within protestant evangelicalism for over a century. I got an incoherent answer that made no sense. The astounding thing to me is that a group of people are embracing a "therapy" which is derived from a system of thought (Freudian psychoanalysis) that has been historically condemned by many segments of christianity as "perversion."I was then asked about my religious affiliation and was I "saved" by these jokers since I guess this sort of thing happens at such conventions I suppose. I replied that I was an Orthodox christian and gave them a fairly sophisticated theological description of salvation trying to neatly sidestep an attempt by them to peg me as something religiously suspect. It then became real clear that these people were ALSO theologically illiterate when they did not recognize any references to the major christian theologians from the first 5 centuries of the common era. Then these 3 Ph.D.'s could not understand why an orthodox jewish person would be attending the AACC conference in the first place. That level of ignorance was simply amazing. One set of ignorance built upon another set of ignorance piled upon yet another set of ignorance I suppose! That was my first and last AACC meeting. I was utterly unimpressed with their psychological and theological justifications for their "therapy."

Thanks for sharing this bit of your experience. I have a question: does being a practicing Christian affect the way you look at your clients? I, too, am a Christian and I have concerns that my beliefs may stand in the way of my practice and that the mixture of psychology and theology may negatively affect those I serve... much like your experience with the people at the reparative therapy booth. Though I would believe that the "incoherent" answer would probably be a "yes." I don't understand why there would be any shame in admitting it because reparative therapy is heavily centralized around men (hence the oedipus complex). I think it is because of this aspect of the therapy that many Christians disagree with it. And the ignorance of theology (though I'm not surprised) shows that if they are "Christian" counselors, they should have some intelligence of early theologians of the first five centuries... however, i understand reparative therapists do not heavily ground their practice on religion.

Here's what I want to know: what would you do if a man walked into your office asking for help on how to eliminate his homosexual feelings? There is evidence that the lifestyle has caused much distress in his life. Would you consider another therapy like CBT to weene him of certain behaviors that may be destructive?
 
Here's what I want to know: what would you do if a man walked into your office asking for help on how to eliminate his homosexual feelings? There is evidence that the lifestyle has caused much distress in his life. Would you consider another therapy like CBT to weene him of certain behaviors that may be destructive?

This line of reasoning is misguided. Read the article I cited above by Davison.
 
This line of reasoning is misguided. Read the article I cited above by Davison.

So your reasoning would be that a therapist should tell the client that his homosexual feelings are good and does not require change, regardless of the fact that is is undesireable to the client? So, in short, the client's dissatisfaction is not grounded on science, whereas the fact that homosexuality is normal is?
 
So your reasoning would be that a therapist should tell the client that his homosexual feelings are good and does not require change, regardless of the fact that is is undesireable to the client? So, in short, the client's dissatisfaction is not grounded on science, whereas the fact that homosexuality is normal is?

I feel that helping the client become more accepting of themselves would be a much more realistic goal than trying to change something that as of now has no empirical evidence showing that it can be changed.
 
So your reasoning would be that a therapist should tell the client that his homosexual feelings are good and does not require change, regardless of the fact that is is undesireable to the client? So, in short, the client's dissatisfaction is not grounded on science, whereas the fact that homosexuality is normal is?

Clients want things that it would be impossible or unethical for the therapist to help with all the time. "I want to be happy all the time," "I want to weigh 85 pounds," "I want to be sexually pure in thought" spring to mind as examples. In these cases the therapist would do better to help the client understand where those drives are coming from than help achieve the goal.
 
Clients want things that it would be impossible or unethical for the therapist to help with all the time. "I want to be happy all the time," "I want to weigh 85 pounds," "I want to be sexually pure in thought" spring to mind as examples. In these cases the therapist would do better to help the client understand where those drives are coming from than help achieve the goal.

I couldn't agree more Jock.
 
Clients want things that it would be impossible or unethical for the therapist to help with all the time. "I want to be happy all the time," "I want to weigh 85 pounds," "I want to be sexually pure in thought" spring to mind as examples. In these cases the therapist would do better to help the client understand where those drives are coming from than help achieve the goal.

ditto!

I realize now that emphasis is a big deal. one thing i dislike about reparative therapy is that they heavily emphasize homosexuality, which cripples the therapy altogether. Even if homosexuality is an issue, it is but one out of a PLETHORA of manifestations of whatever conditions the client may have had in the past. The idea of whether a manifestation is positive or negative for the client is out of the question when it comes to a psychological therapist. What the therapist should do (I believe) is help the client function more effectively in his or her daily life, and not to become a scruple in the client's already troubled life.
 
ditto!

I realize now that emphasis is a big deal. one thing i dislike about reparative therapy is that they heavily emphasize homosexuality, which cripples the therapy altogether. Even if homosexuality is an issue, it is but one out of a PLETHORA of manifestations of whatever conditions the client may have had in the past. The idea of whether a manifestation is positive or negative for the client is out of the question when it comes to a psychological therapist. What the therapist should do (I believe) is help the client function more effectively in his or her daily life, and not to become a scruple in the client's already troubled life.

I think you're still missing the point. Read the Davison article.
 
Here's what I want to know: what would you do if a man walked into your office asking for help on how to eliminate his homosexual feelings? There is evidence that the lifestyle has caused much distress in his life. Would you consider another therapy like CBT to weene him of certain behaviors that may be destructive?

I would carefully explain to this client that I lacked the skills, training and ability to help him achieve the goal of altering his sexual orientation. I would explain to him that it is impossible to provide "treatment" for a sexual orientation which is not a mental illness. I would also explain to him that nothing in the current peer reviewed literature indicates that such a change is possible. In doing so I would respect the limits of my abilities and the limits of what psychotherapy can offer. Clients may want and desire many things but one of the realities of our existence is that changing some things is not possible by human agency. To agree to "treat" something contains an implicit promise to the client's that a psychological intervention will induce a change. To provide a psychological intervention in such a case would be unethical and exploitative. I am uncertain about what you mean by "certain behaviors that may be destructive." If by this you mean homosexuality, I think you would be hard pressed to support the contention that this sexual orientation is inherently unhealthy.
 
Last edited:
Here's what I want to know: what would you do if a man walked into your office asking for help on how to eliminate his homosexual feelings? There is evidence that the lifestyle has caused much distress in his life. Would you consider another therapy like CBT to weene him of certain behaviors that may be destructive?

Again, CBT is not meant to help get rid of homosexual feelings, but the restructure irrational thoughts. In this case, most likely the irrational thoughts would be that he can't be happy if he's not straight. CBT would probably focus on that.
 
The word you're looking for is bisexual, and there are a whole hell of a lot more of us than people assume.

I agree .

I feel that , that study is a form of brain washing . After teaching or telling someone something , anything , for so long they'll begin to believe it . I question several factors in this study and it's accuracy . I personally disagree with it and I don't take comfort in knowing they did it for say two years with this so called positive and favorably results ...

I know I am fresh in psychology and no I don't have all of the fancy degrees but I do believe I can form an opinion on something like this .
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Even if homosexuality is an issue, it is but one out of a PLETHORA of manifestations of whatever conditions the client may have had in the past.

It sounds like you're still treating homosexuality as a symptom of something else. As in, there is an underlying condition... "cure" the condition, and homosexuality will revert back to heterosexuality.

It doesn't work that way.
 
It sounds like you're still treating homosexuality as a symptom of something else. As in, there is an underlying condition... "cure" the condition, and homosexuality will revert back to heterosexuality.

It doesn't work that way.

This is exactly the point I was referring to above, that I felt the OP was not getting.
 
song-chart-memes-gay-agenda.jpg



Saw this, thought of the conversation
 
Saw that report the other day. Just skimmed it, but hoping to find time to go through it more thoroughly in the near future. I was wondering when APA was going to release something official regarding this.
 
Yes, it is a free country, and those who wish to pursue reparative therapy for homosexuality should have the option of doing so. That being said, the evidence for either the isolated, clinical efficacy or the real-world effectiveness of reparative therapy is bleak at best. That being said, it is unlikely you will find anyone on this board or practicing under one of the common mental health professional licensures (LP, LPC, LICSW, MFT, etc...) that will endorse it.

The press release referred to is but a precis, the full report is here:-
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/therapeutic-response.pdf

That report makes it quite clear that the APA (psychological) deprecates reparative therapy in adults.

But at the same time an exception is carved out for some children " ... Recommendations regarding treatment protocols that promote stereotyped gender-normative behavior to mitigate behaviors that are perceived to be indicators that a child will develop a homosexual orientation in adolescence and adulthood. ... ".
 
But at the same time an exception is carved out for some children " ... Recommendations regarding treatment protocols that promote stereotyped gender-normative behavior to mitigate behaviors that are perceived to be indicators that a child will develop a homosexual orientation in adolescence and adulthood. ... ".

This isn't my area of expertise, but is there much of a literature describing the negative outcomes of such therapy?
 
The press release referred to is but a precis, the full report is here:-
http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/therapeutic-response.pdf

That report makes it quite clear that the APA (psychological) deprecates reparative therapy in adults.

But at the same time an exception is carved out for some children " ... Recommendations regarding treatment protocols that promote stereotyped gender-normative behavior to mitigate behaviors that are perceived to be indicators that a child will develop a homosexual orientation in adolescence and adulthood. ... ".

?

Unless I'm somehow misreading it, at the bottom of page 79 their recommendation regarding treatment protocols for children is basically in line with the recommendations for adults...help them develop their identity, reduce stigma, etc. Its shorter just because it sounds like there is very little research on it, but it seems perfectly clear to me they are taking a pretty strong stance that there is no reason to suspect it helps, many reasons to suspect it harms, and no justification for such treatment in children.
 
?

Unless I'm somehow misreading it, at the bottom of page 79 their recommendation regarding treatment protocols for children is basically in line with the recommendations for adults...help them develop their identity, reduce stigma, etc. Its shorter just because it sounds like there is very little research on it, but it seems perfectly clear to me they are taking a pretty strong stance that there is no reason to suspect it helps, many reasons to suspect it harms, and no justification for such treatment in children.

Those who do not use reason cannot be swayed by it.

🙂
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Unless I'm somehow misreading it, at the bottom of page 79 their recommendation regarding treatment protocols for children is basically in line with the recommendations for adults...help them develop their identity, reduce stigma, etc. ...
Yes and no, and I'm not an expert.

But as I read it, yes it is the same for children and for adults who request change.

But it is different for children whose parents request that they be changed.

It's an open secret that the Gender Identity diagnosis is applied to justify treatment for children "to help them feel more comfortable as god intended them to be". And the APA goes along with that.