Is Reparative Therapy for Homosexuals Possible and Ethical?

Reparative Therapy for Homosexuals

The issue of homosexuality needs to be a major controversy within the social environment. All across the world people are still struggling with the idea that they may or may not be, homosexual, especially within the context of society that tends to look down and discriminate against individuals based on sexual orientation. In the light of this controversy, there are some therapeutic methods which have been created and regarded by many within conservative or religious institution as being effective in helping remold one's sexual identity. Also known as reparative therapies, these are psychological or other style implementations of therapeutic methods designed at rewiring one's sexual identity. Still, the majority of psychologists and professionals view these therapies as more harmful than beneficial; this makes it crucial for pastor therapist to help guide potentially concerned individuals towards more productive use of therapeutic models that would focus on self-acceptance rather than completely removing one's sexual self.

Reparative therapy is not necessarily new, but is continuously invoking controversy within social work in psychological circles. According to the research, "reparative or conversion therapies claim, through the use of psychotherapy or other interventions, to eliminate a person's sexual desire for a member of his or her own gender" (National Committee on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues 2012). There is underwhelming evidence to show these therapies work as claimed, which is only continue to fuel professionals to take a stance against such therapies which often work to lower images of self-esteem and continue to place individuals in a position of self-denial. Here, "the literature indicates that interventative therapies that attempt to alter sexual orientation of lesbian and gay men have succeeded only in reducing sexual behavior and self-esteem rather than shaping attractions of opposite gender" (National Committee on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues 2012). In this, it is clear that these therapies often tend to have more harmful effects and beneficial one within the lives of already confused and vulnerable individuals.

The question of ethics is still unclear in regards to these types of therapy although many professionals would claim that guidance towards such therapies would be unethical practice on behalf of physician and psychologists. Essentially, homosexuality is not seen to be a mental disorder. In fact, the American Psychological Association "opposes all portrayals of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as mentally ill and in need of treatment due to their sexual orientation" (Herek 2012). The APA actually encourages psychologists to do their part in dismissing stereotypes correlating homosexuality with the connotation of mental illness. Most genres of social and cognitive science dismiss reparative and conversion therapies and "the major professional organizations are unanimous in condemning it" (Schumacher-Matos 2012). Since scientific evidence which may support such efforts is lacking in the modern discourse, pursuing strategies of care that feature such therapies would be considered unethical due to its potential future harm on the individuals in question. Many professionals question the legitimacy of those individuals who have even gone through such invasive and controversial therapies, posing the question on whether or not the patient "truly changed or are they in denial?" (Schumacher-Matos 2012).

At the same time, the APA does state that all psychologists must respect the autonomous decisions and rights of individuals, whether they are homosexual or not (Herek 2012). There are those individuals who may want to go to such extremes, as the literature shows that "there are dozens of gay men and women who will struggle through a process that asks them to annihilate a part of themselves" (Schumacher-Matos 2012). If an individual decides to take this route, it is essentially their decision to do so and should have the right to do so. However, the unethical position would be to recommend such therapies or guide vulnerable individuals to their use. Anyone who "enters into therapy to deal with the issues of sexual orientation should be able to have the expectation that such therapy would take place in a professionally neutral environment absent of any societal bias" (Herek 2012). Essentially, the role of modern psychology is to help an individual with guidance and not bias.