Last week Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., introduced a bill
in Congress asking states to ban sexual orientation conversion therapy,
often abbreviated as CT, for minors. California is one of two states
that have prohibited licensed professionals from offering the practice,
which includes efforts to change not only sexual orientation but also
gender identity.
While the congressional bill is only a resolution—it
encourages states to bar the practice rather than proposing the heavier
lift of a federal ban—the idea that CT is dangerous and should be banned
is gaining momentum. Eighteen states have introduced bills prohibiting the “therapy.” President Barack Obama recently endorsed the bans, and next week the Supreme Court will consider whether to take up a legal challenge to them.
In two different national polls (see here and here), more than 60 percent of Americans indicated that they believe conversion therapy doesn’t work. Others disagree. In one poll, nearly a quarter of the population said they believe it works, and in another,
28 percent were unsure. Some have complained of “sociopolitical
pressures” to prohibit such treatment, suggesting that politics rather
than science has governed the debate.
[,,,]
Only one found that CT works. That study, written by Joseph Nicolosi, has been roundly condemned for its methodological weaknesses. It used a convenience sample of subjects drawn largely from the stridently anti-gay organization the author co-founded—a group that claims it can turn gay people straight. It relied entirely on self-reports, with no attempt to verify claims by patients that they were now heterosexual. It never defined sexual orientation and ultimately seemed to measure self-identification rather than documenting an actual change from gay to straight. It did not account for the obvious likelihood that many subjects who claimed they were no longer gay were actually bisexual to begin with. And its subjects consisted entirely of people who identified as religious or very religious. Even with all these limitations, only a minority of subjects claimed CT had converted them from gay to straight.
[,,,]
Only one found that CT works. That study, written by Joseph Nicolosi, has been roundly condemned for its methodological weaknesses. It used a convenience sample of subjects drawn largely from the stridently anti-gay organization the author co-founded—a group that claims it can turn gay people straight. It relied entirely on self-reports, with no attempt to verify claims by patients that they were now heterosexual. It never defined sexual orientation and ultimately seemed to measure self-identification rather than documenting an actual change from gay to straight. It did not account for the obvious likelihood that many subjects who claimed they were no longer gay were actually bisexual to begin with. And its subjects consisted entirely of people who identified as religious or very religious. Even with all these limitations, only a minority of subjects claimed CT had converted them from gay to straight.
Can gays and bis turn straight? What the evidence says about ex-gay therapy.
No comments:
Post a Comment