Two recent articles bring to light a long standing debate in the field of social work and psychotherapy, that of the use of Reparative, or Conversion, Therapy. Reparative Therapy is considered a pseudotherapy whose purpose is the change the sexual orientation of an individual from that of homosexual to heterosexual.
Earlier this week, the ‘California Governor Oked ban on gay conversion therapy, calling it ‘quackery‘. The ban would take place starting January 1st and would ban this practice with youth under age 18. The first article states “This bill bans non-scientific ‘therapies’ that have driven young people to depression and suicide,” Brown tweeted. “These practices have no basis in science or medicine.”
In the second article, ‘Gay Cure Therapists, ‘Cured’ Student Sue California Over New Law’, the new ban is challenged. Two therapists and an individual who has undergone this therapy ‘successfully’ are suing the state for infringing on their civil, religious, and parental rights and freedoms. The first hearing is scheduled to be held January 22nd.
As social workers we are supposed to strive for the self-direction and self-efficacy in our clients, helping them achieve the goals they want. However, we are supposed to also do no harm. With Reparative therapy, this line is blurred especially in the case of work with youth. NASW states that:
“The social worker should not practice, condone, facilitate, or collaborate with any form of discrimination on the basis of . . . sexual orientation . . .” (NASW, 1996),
meaning social workers are not permitted to use this type of treatment but how far can we go in banning or denying this treatment before rights are violated?
I for one stand on the side of caution, given the research suggesting the cons of this treatment and the history of ‘forced use’ but I am only one person.
For more information on this treatment, as well as to read the position statement from NASW regarding this matter in full read here.
Our authors want to hear from you! Click to leave a comment
Related Posts
The operative words here are “forced use.” As a clinician with twenty years of experience, “practice wisdom” tells me that forcing therapy on anyone who is resistant often becomes more of a problem than an answer. When it comes to adolescents with gender identity issues, parents generally make the decision that their child needs help in “correcting” the child’s conception of who they are. Therefore, I am against forcing adolescents into any type of therapy that basically says, “there’s something wrong with you and I will fix it.” Historically, parents even had children committed to mental institutions in order to “cure” gender confusion, only to create a hostile, angry and gravely unhappy adult.
Very True Judy, but do you feel putting a law out there to ban treatment would harm those youth who want to obtain the treatment, and do you think those youth should be able to make that choice?