|
from About NARTH
OUR PURPOSE:
Defending True Diversity
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."
--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.
In April 2001, the American Psychologist--the
journal of the American Psychological
Association--published a lead article entitled,
"Sociopolitical Diversity in Psychology: The Case
for Pluralism." The author, Richard Redding,
argued that the psychological profession lacks
political diversity.
The April 2002 issue of the American Psychologist
followed up with published commentaries to the
Redding article. Here are some of those
clinicians' comments:
"Those charged with guiding students during [the
clinical training] process have a responsibility
to ensure that they do not impose their own
worldview on students...It is critical that students
be able to honestly express their feelings and
concerns without fear of ridicule, sanction, or
retribution by those in power."
"...although many in the field of multicultural
supervision and training write about the need to
'provide trainees with a highly supportive
environment,' trainees' differing ideas about such
sensitive issues as gay rights...could unfortunately
lead those directly responsible for their therapy
training to label them as problematic or otherwise
clinically 'impaired'..."
"...psychology needs to court a greater diversity of
voices..."
"What justification has psychology to identify
moral principles or social policies that are right
for society?"
"Supporters (such as me) of psychology's efforts
to promote diversity, inclusiveness, and
multi-cultural approaches to research and practice
should embrace an expanded definition of diversity
that includes socio-political values."
Since its 1992 founding, NARTH has been calling
for just what those clinicians agree is absolutely
essential within the profession: an openness to
differing worldviews, values and philosophies.
The American Psychological Association has assumed
an authority it cannot rightly claim. The group
claims that science has somehow "proven" that
homosexuality and heterosexuality are
qualitatively indistinguishable. Thus A.P.A.
advocates in the political arena for a broad array
of social policies--telling our lawmakers that
science supports, if not in fact mandates, gay
marriage and adoption--as if any particular social
policy could flow directly from the facts (from an
"is" to an "ought") without an intervening
philosophical judgment.
NARTH has responded to the mental-health
professions' refusal to open itself up to
socio-political diversity by advocating here for
another view of sexuality and gender. No
philosophical position--ours or the A.P.A.'s--is,
or can be, scientifically "neutral."
NARTH's function is to provide psychological
understanding of the cause, treatment and behavior
patterns associated with homosexuality, within the
boundaries of a civil public dialogue.
The Right to Self-Determination
We respect others' right to differ with us. We do
not support coercive therapy--indeed, the basic
human rights of dignity, autonomy and free agency
require that it be the client who chooses whether
to embrace life as gay or lesbian, or to work
toward change.
But the fact that we respect and welcome
intellectual diversity does not mean that we have
no opinions--or that we consider all conflicting
viewpoints to be equally valid. Toleration of
difference does not require intellectual apathy.
A respect for pluralism does not mandate
relativism.
And so on these pages, we will make our case for
what we believe to be the truth--as indeed, gay
advocates also do, with equal intensity and
conviction--in the public forum.
During the last 25 years, powerful political
pressures have done much to erode scientific study
of homosexuality. As a result, there is now great
misunderstanding surrounding this issue. Because
of the angry tenor of the debate, many researchers
have been intimidated, we believe, into trading
the truth for silence.
What is "Normal"?
Fifty years ago, researcher C.D.
King offered a very useful definition of "normal."
The practical wisdom of that definition is still
apparent. Normality, he said, is "that which
functions according to its design."
As clinicians, we have witnessed the intense
suffering caused by homosexuality, which many of
our members see as a "failure to function
according to design." Homosexuality distorts the
natural bond of friendship that would naturally
unite persons of the same sex. It threatens the
continuity of traditional male-female marriage--a
bond which is naturally anchored by the
complementarity of the sexes, and has long been
considered essential for the protection of
children.
In males, homosexuality it is associated with poor
relationship with father; difficulty individuating
from mother; a sense of masculine deficit; and a
persistent belief of having been different from,
and misunderstood by, same-sex childhood peers. In
adulthood we also see a persistent pattern of
maladaptive behaviors and a documented higher
level of psychiatric complaints.
Who Joins NARTH?
Professionals who belong to NARTH comprise
a wide variety of men and women who defend the
right to pursue change of sexual orientation. This
right-to-change is currently under threat by all
of the leading mental-health professional
organizations. Students writing doctoral
dissertations on sexual reorientation are being
discouraged from pursuing their projects;
researchers are silenced and cannot find funding;
and clinicians are concerned about harrassment
from their professional associations.
Most NARTH members consider homosexuality to
represent a developmental disorder. Some of our
clinician-members, however, do not consider the
condition disordered, but simply defend the right
to treatment for those who desire it. They have
joined NARTH because they know that the client's
right to choose his own direction of treatment
must be protected.
There is also a wide range of religious and life
philosophies represented among our members,
including Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, Bah'ai,
Protestant, Muslim, and secular humanist/atheist.
What We Hope To Do
Today, children from
kindergarten through college are being taught that
homosexuality is a normal, healthy lifestyle
option with no disadvantages other than society's
disapproval. Sexually confused teenagers are
encouraged to investigate homosexual relationships
when they are too young to make critical lifestyle
decisions. If they seek counseling, they are told
that change from homosexuality is impossible.
Gender-disturbed children are no longer helped to
become more comfortable with their own biological
sex, or with the same-sex peers they have been
avoiding. Instead, counselors tell their parents,
"Your child is fine--the only problem is with
society."
It is NARTH's aim to provide a different
perspective. Particularly, we want to clarify
that homosexuality is not "inborn," and that gays
are not "a people," in the same sense that an
ethnic group is "a people"--but instead, they are
(like all of us) simply individuals who exhibit
particular patterns of feelings and behavior.
When gay advocates reframed the public debate as a
discussion about "who one is" rather than "what
one does," they successfully intimidated
dissenters by casting them as personally bigoted
and hateful. As a result, most people who defend
the reality of male-female design have been
embarrassed into public silence.
NARTH stands ready to advise government,
educational, and mental-health agencies as well as
the media and religious groups on issues
pertaining to homosexuality.
Sympathetic individuals are asked to join our
organization as a "Friend of NARTH." (See the
membership page on this website.) With your help,
we will deepen and expand the level of public
debate.
Updated: 27 February 2008
|
