from Social Issues

Our profession, he agrees, needs much more frank and honest discussion on this issue.

Welcome to Salt Lake City. We are glad to have you here in a forum where theory, research and practice related to homosexuality can be discussed.

As we are all aware, there is much about this topic that is still unclear. Questions are most effectively answered when there are opportunities to talk openly about all sides of an issue.

I must say that preparing for this talk has been one of the more challenging experiences I have had in some time. There has been no shortage of advice and the sometimes contradictory nature of the suggestions has made it clear that there is no way to please everyone. I have been counseled to:

• "Take a stand. Somebody needs to be clear that change is possible."
• "Don't go out on a limb. Your career and reputation are at stake. There is no real evidence that change is possible."
• "Homosexuality is simply a selfish behavior. They don't want to pay the price it takes to change."
• "Homosexuals are sensitive and caring and are being hurt by what NARTH and others are doing."
• "This condition is not rooted in biology. It's a matter of relationships and conditioning."
• "The parents of homosexuals have been hurt long enough. You have to make it clear the problem is not rooted in some outdated view of relationships with mother and father. The issue is biology."

The fact that most of the variant views have come from mental health professionals, whom I view as knowledgeable, competent and caring, underscores an important reality - the science underlying the cause and treatment of homosexuality is still unfolding; and society is undergoing a major challenge in understanding homosexuality. It wants to be fair and non-judgmental, but there is still much concern about how to do that without sanctioning a change in mores that have been in place for thousands of years.

The greatest diversity of opinion seems to exist among religious leaders. Reactions of various denominations have ranged from full acceptance of gay behavior and gay clergy, to fundamentalistic, extreme rejections of both homosexual behavior and individuals.

Since you're in Salt Lake City, a place first colonized by members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, let me begin my sharing a statement recently made by Church President Gordon B. Hinckley: "Our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the Church. It is expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of sexual conduct that apply to everyone else, whether single or married." (LDS Church News, October 9, 1999, pg. 17).

These words of President Hinckley were given partly as a response to the changing trends we see all around us in society. My positive response to Dr. Nicolosi's invitation to be your lunch time speaker was prompted by my own attempts at responding to societal change.

I view myself as a "typical" individual and a "typical" psychologist. I graduated 22 years ago, and have been fortunate to have a multitude of experiences that have exposed me to many aspects of psychology.

Throughout my career, hearing all sides of an issue has made it much harder to decide what I believed than just hearing one side; but of course, it's the time-proven method of scientific and real-world investigation.

The Polarization of the Homosexuality Issue

The words of Camille Paglia, an adamant lesbian writer, in Vamps and Tramps (page 67) summarize how difficult it has become to explore both sides of the gay/lesbian issue. She said,

"Viewpoints polarized: [after Stonewall] people were labeled pro-gay or anti-gay, with little room in between. For the past decade, the situation has been out of control: responsible scholarship is impossible when rational discourse is being policed by storm troopers, in this case gay activists, who have the absolutism of all fanatics in claiming sole access to the truth."

When I came into the profession, I knew very little about homosexuality. I must admit my views were stereotyped and were probably more shaped by things I heard in the locker room than the classroom. In retrospect, there was and is a need for better understanding, less judgment and more genuine caring. Accordingly, changes are happening fast and they're happening in essentially every arena of life. Some of the changes are good, but it can't be too surprising to homosexuals that very typical, non-homophobic people might have some concerns about where the changes will lead. Here are some anecdotal examples:

The December 8, 1997 issue of Time Magazine (page 82) in an article entitled "Out, Proud and Very Young" said, regarding homosexuality,

"[It has] become a '90s version of Birkenstock environmentalism for many youths. Even in certain parts of suburbia, gay is becoming more than O.K.; it's cool."

A colleague who visited her daughter at an eastern university recently commented that the door to the coed dorm listed the names of residents, along with their sexual orientation, lest anyone run the risk of unintentionally offending.

A recent public radio program, Weekend Edition, gave poignant coverage, with the music of Judy Garland in the background, to the presentation of a plaque commemorating the events at Stonewall, and the way in which society has been benefitted by them. The tenor of the program was that anyone who wasn't excited by the more prevalent evidences of homosexuality was "behind the times."

I'm not suggesting this is all bad. Changes followed Stonewall that needed to be made. The Time Magazine article points out that over 500 support groups have been established, most of them in an appropriate manner; that is, by a provider not affiliated with a local school.

Where is the A.P.A. on this Issue?

Changes within the profession have been just as, or perhaps more, dramatic. Here are some examples: The 1999 American Psychological Association Convention in Boston had 29 presentations of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues. Each was in favor of increasing rights for gays, and discouraging efforts at change.

The September, 1999 Counseling Psychologist in an article entitled, "Treating the Purple Menace: Ethical Considerations of Conversion Therapy and Affirmative Alternatives" provides a scholarly, though one-sided, view of the issue. After pointing out all the ways a therapist can discourage a client experiencing ego-dystonic homosexuality from attempting to change, the authors suggest that for the persistent client, "the possibility of termination emerges."

They go on to say, "We submit that in such cases, no action (barring the risk of client self-harm, of course) is better than the wrong action. The therapist can provide the client with a bibliography of resources that factually refute the prevailing myths and misconceptions and that offer positive images of lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons." Further they state, "If the client wishes to terminate rather than proceed with non-conversion therapy, however, we believe that it is more ethical to let a client continue to struggle honestly with her or his identity than to collude, even peripherally, with a practice that is discriminatory, oppressive, and ultimately ineffective in its own stated ends."

Lynn Wardle, a legal professor at Brigham Young University, conducted a review of articles in legal journals, and found that of 71, only one presented a case against gay marriage. (LDS Family Services presentation on September 13, 1999).

Each article in recent issues of the Journal of Orthopsychiatry (July, 1998) and The Counseling Psychologist (September, 1998) was devoted to discouragement of attempts at change, and encouragement of gay affirmative therapy.

The Mental-Health Associations
Continue to Discourage Reorientation Therapy

One state association (Washington) printed a policy statement discouraging psychologists from any participation in sexual-orientation conversion therapy.

The Utah Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers issued a statement discouraging social workers from providing treatments designed to change sexual orientation, and from referring to practitioners or programs that claim to do so. A social worker who stated in a social-work graduate class that the client should determine what he or she wished to discuss in therapy, was accused of unethical behavior.

Nancy R. Nangeroni, in a 1999 APA presentation entitled "Integrating Transgender and Gender Identity Disorder Issues into Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Psychology" stated, "[the transgender movement] asks why we should behave in certain ways based on our genitals. People should be able to choose their own gender and change it at will." [S]he went on to say, "It's not us, it's society that is confused."

Though I'm giving some examples which suggest that mental-health professions are one sided in their view, I've actually had some positive experiences, as well. While attending the APA State Leadership Convention in Washington D.C. In 1998 I took the opportunity to have brief conversations with two APA leaders. Their responses were reasonable, as I had expected they would be. Dr. Martin Seligman, APA President that year, indicated, in response to my questions, that his understanding of the APA statement on gay and lesbian issues did not exclude those who wanted counseling to develop or strengthen a heterosexual identity from doing so.

He cited his book, What You Can Change and What You Can't, as stating his personal view. The research cited in his book is optimistic about change for those who have had fewer homosexual experiences, or who have bisexual feelings, and more pessimistic for those who have had more long-term, ingrained homosexual feelings and activities.

Dr. Ray Fowler, CEO of APA, indicated that more letters and telephone calls had been received in response to the gay/lesbian declaration than almost any previous APA action. He stated that his interpretation of the statement was that those who wished to explore developing heterosexual feelings or behavior had a right to do so, but that those who were comfortable with their style should be able to receive affirming help as well. He cautioned against therapists influencing clients based on the therapist's beliefs and personal biases. Both made strong statements about client self-determination.

I recently had another positive APA experience. I received a call from the lesbian, gay and bisexual concerns officer of the public interest directorate asking whether the Utah Psychological Association (UPA) would be willing to co-sponsor a statement they were writing which would have supported adoption by gay parents in Utah. We talked for half an hour, and he was very sensitive in his questions and responses. Ultimately, a decision was made not to impose such a stand from outside the state, but to leave it as a local issue.

In our local organization, UPA, I have found our discussions on this topic fair and reasonable and helpful in clarifying our organizational view. At this time we are in the process of writing a statement about our views, and it is too soon to know what the finished product will look like. All sides of the issue have been discussed and debated mildly. My impression is that there is respect for those with diverse views and that the greatest concern is that all individuals requesting help from a psychologist be given accurate information so they can receive counseling from a knowledgeable professional with informed consent. It is our desire that gays and lesbians in the community who are not requesting professional help, be treated fairly, non-judgmentally and inclusively.

There is A Side
Which is Not Being Heard on the Gay Issue

The profusion of popular media coverage, professional articles, state and national professional organization declarations are powerful, intimidating and persuasive. Setting aside the religious perspective, I must admit that if it weren't for two factors, I would be convinced that homosexuality is a biologically driven, unchangeable condition. The first factor is that there really are well trained, non-extreme, non-phobic, honestly searching professionals who are practicing, writing and doing some research which point out that there is a side to the issue which most people, including interested professionals, are not hearing.

Though I feel reasonably well read, I must admit I would have no awareness of what has been written or researched on the subject of change as a possibility if it weren't for a colleague of mine, Dr. Dean Byrd. Because Dr. Byrd has an interest in the topic, and is a contributing member of NARTH, he has periodically sent articles and findings my way which have opened an important perspective for me. It was Dean who brought to my awareness the article in the 1998, summer, APA Psychotherapy Journal entitled, "When Clients Seek Treatment for Same-Sex Attractions: Ethical Issues in the 'Right to Choose' Debate."

As you are probably aware, the article states,

"Psychologists have an ethical responsibility to allow individuals to pursue treatment aimed at curbing experiences of same-sex attraction or modifying same-sex behaviors, not only because it affirms the client's rights to dignity, autonomy, and agency, as persons presumed capable of freely choosing among treatment modalities and behavior, but also because it demonstrates regard for diversity." (page 248).

1997 NARTH Study Expanded the Literature

It was also Dr. Byrd who acquainted me with the findings of the two-year NARTH study which reported in 1997 that 68% of a sample of 860 subjects describe themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual before treatment while only 13% described themselves the same way following treatment.

The second factor which has influenced me is that there are many individuals, both male and female, who are willing to say that they were at one time actively homosexual in every way, and are now comfortably heterosexual or celibate. I've heard local people make these declarations, and I've heard those from outside our state.

In September of this year, the annual conference of Evergreen International, held in this same building, was enlivened by many participants who openly and powerfully shared their stories of change. I have no reason to question their sincerity or truthfulness. Perhaps some may revert, in time, to a homosexual lifestyle. That doesn't make the reality of change any less valid than it does for the alcoholic who returns to drinking, or the anorexic who returns to unhealthy eating patterns.

Because I happen to be giving a lunch time message at a NARTH Conference, one may assume I'm somewhat of an activist on this topic. What's most important about my giving this talk is that I'm not an activist on the topic. I'm a typical psychologist. Based on what I hear in the lay and professional media, I would be convinced by the message of the various gay and lesbian advocacy groups. I'm not convinced because I've had a glimpse of another perspective which is hard to find.

What I would like, and I think I'm not unlike most of my colleagues, is:

• Accurate information about what the outcome research says.
• Non-judgment of the professionals researching both sides of the issue.
• The right to treatment for all individuals with the client determining the direction of the treatment.
• Fair treatment and safety for content homosexuals, for those who wish to change, and for therapists who provide both forms of therapy.

In Defense of the Traditional Family

Personally, I would like the profession of psychology not to be the one that attempts to overturn and make irrelevant the traditional family.

We're all aware of the controversy that followed the recommendation in a recent article which suggested changing the label of sexual abuse to adult/child sex. While I hated seeing the profession of psychology take so many hits in the media, I was pleased that most people viewed the recommendation as extreme.

We're just starting to hear the reaction to the recent lead article in the American Psychologist on "Deconstructing the Essential Father." Again, I hate seeing my profession be the one identified as attempting to normalize some new view of the normative family, but I'm comforted by the negative reaction of many, because it says to me that society doesn't want to accept all the recommendations of research presented by admittedly biased researchers.

Change Does Appear to be Possible

My belief is that both research and anecdotal evidence declare that change from homosexual thoughts, feelings and behaviors to heterosexuality or content celibacy is possible.

I believe the cause of male homosexual identity is a complicated mix of biologically predisposed temperament, along with social shaping, both in the home and the environment. Our professions and society need ongoing research and open discussion to bring greater clarity to these issues. We need therapists who are willing to share their experiences with clients who are attempting to change. We need to hear clear, documented reports of what techniques and relationship patterns have been helpful.

More important, we need courageous clients who are willing to be verbal about their experiences. We can't expect anyone to believe that change is possible without hearing convincing examples of real change. We need to hear from clients who have maintained their change for 20, 30, 40 and 50 years. We need to hear the reports of single clients who can say their life is better being celibate than it was in an active gay or lesbian lifestyle. We need to hear married clients say their marriage is emotionally and sexually satisfying to them and their partner.

If the data is correct that individuals can overcome homosexual patterns at a success rate comparable to that of clients receiving counseling for depression or other common presenting problems, we need to hear from many more clients who report successful change.

I compliment members of NARTH for being some of the few who have been willing to make such claims. I compliment you for research which documents such claims. I encourage you to continue in this important work. I challenge other therapists, who are not members of NARTH, to document their successes to help counteract the prevailing belief that no therapists anywhere are having success.

I hope my profession, in spite of the short-term fighting, will emerge as a source of insight, compassion and encouragement for all. It may be a valid role of psychology to be an advocate for those in need, but not until enough data is in to make clear how that advocacy should be directed. We want fairness, non-discrimination and research about the best ways to increase personal adjustment and satisfaction, but we want it for all consumers not just a part of them.

I want to conclude with a personal observation based on a limited sample. Those I know who say they are homosexual seem like a diverse group to me. Some report that they have lived very promiscuous lives, and others report high moral standards with no sexual involvement. Some have come from families with obvious relationship problems, and some have come from families that look ideal. Some demonstrate insecurities and detachments, while others appear well-adjusted and confident.

I feel like I'm becoming somewhat of an expert at identifying AIDS obituaries in our local paper. The appearance is generally very positive and the write-up frequently reports their having been a top student, sometimes having completed some significant religious service, having some successful business or professional experience, and ultimately dying much too young surrounded by family and friends. The situations with which I've been close enough to be personally involved have provoked some of the most powerful emotions I've ever seen. Individuals and families experience shock, denial, confusion and anger. Outcomes vary. Pain is always part of the process. Sometimes joy is part of the resolution.

Brigham Young, one of our early LDS Church founders, spoke about the dangers of judging others based on our limited perspectives. He said, "Respect one another; do not speak lightly of each other . . . O fools! Not to understand that those you condemn are the workmanship of God, as well as yourselves! God overlooks their weaknesses; and so far as they do good, they are as acceptable as we are." He went on to say, "Let us be patient with one another . . . in connection with words and actions, the sentiments and intentions of the heart will be taken, and by these will men be judged." (Teachings of Brigham Young, 221-222).

The issues are too complex, and the individuals involved too valuable, to attempt to overly simplify all the factors relevant to the experience of homosexuality in this talk. It is my hope that our understanding on the topic will continue to unfold systematically to the benefit of everyone involved, and that mental health professionals will be a contributing factor in this endeavor.

References:

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (1995) Teachings of presidents of the Church: Brigham Young. Salt Lake City. LDS Church Publications.

Cloud, J. (1997). Out, proud and very young. Time, Dec. 8, 1997, 82-83.

Herman, E., Publications Editor, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (1998). From the personal papers of A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.:unpublished.

Hinckley, G. B. (1999). Explaining 'why we do some of the things we do.' LDS Church News, October 9, 1999, 14 & 17.

NARTH. Questions and answers on homosexuality. Encino.

Paglio, Camille. (1994). Vamps and Tramps. New York: Vintage Books.

Division of Counseling Psychology of the American Psychological Association. (1998). The Counseling Psychologist. Vol. 26, No. 5, September 1998. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Tozer, E. E. & McClanahan, M. K. (1999). Treating the purple menace: ethical considerations of conversion therapy and affirmative alternatives. The Counseling Psychologist, Vol. 27, No. 5, September 1999. 722-741.

Yarhouse, M. A. (1998). When clients seek treatment for same-sex attraction: ethical issues in the "Right to Choose" debate. Psychotherapy, Vol. 35 No. 2, Summer 1998, 248-259.

Updated: 8 February 2008

Join us at the next NARTH Convention and Training Institute in West Palm Beach, Florida on November 20, 21, and 22, 2009.


DATES AND DETAILS COMING SOON