Bill to Deny Therapy Infringes on Rights of Patients Who Want to Change and Encourages – Actually Mandates – Malpractice by the Therapist
Philadelphia, PA—A new bill passed in California and New Jersey squashes the rights of individuals who are struggling with homosexuality to pursue sex orientation change via psychotherapy.
The law was initiated in California in 2012 by Senator Ted Lieu who openly speaks about his homosexuality, then copied in NJ, but similar bills have thankfully been defeated in several other states.
Homosexual activists around the country have deemed conversion therapy to help those struggling with feelings of homosexuality “dangerous.” But many therapists know—and the American Psychological Association agrees—that no data exists confirming that homosexual attractions are inherent from birth, or that people are “born gay.” However, there are many individuals who have left the homosexual lifestyle and have proven that one can change from being a homosexual to a heterosexual.
Psychotherapy that heals deeper relational wounds and misconceptions leading to heterosexual orientation does work, because homosexuality is a complex choice determined by many psychological factors. Denying this healing and freeing therapy to those who truly want to change infringes on their freedoms.
The fact is that this law blocks hurting people who want to change their current sexual orientation through healthy and appropriate psychotherapy so they can pursue healing and restoration. This law takes away not only their individual freedoms but also their religious liberties. As a therapist and psychiatrist, I know that some people want to change their sexual orientation and grow toward a healthier lifestyle sexually, psychologically, and spiritually. They should have that right to pursue treatment and then have treaters able to provide this specialized care.
Why would we withhold care and a cure for any illness from anyone, especially if the cure can be so freeing from psychological and spiritual distress? Laws should not impede the advance of science and its application to help the human condition. The First Amendment protects the right of the clinician to practice his or her faith, and this is a prime example of denying the Right of Conscience for our healthcare professionals. As long as the patient and therapist are clear on the goals and the methodology, especially when science validates it, the government should not interfere.
Many erroneously believe homosexuals were “born that way” – born homosexual – because the majority of core events influencing this orientation decision are subliminal and occur early in life, so homosexuality may seem like the person’s inherent way of life from a young age.
I find it interesting that the government allows people the freedom to change their body to change their gender and the various treatments for that process to be completed, or the freedom to have an abortion and take another life, but yet won’t allow someone else the choice to engage in treatment—proven to be helpful—to change their sexual preference. Clearly, if opponents feel this healing therapy is ‘dangerous,’ then they should see that changing your body’s gender or abortion is exponentially more dangerous, as an example, and want to ban those, too. But this is not the case, so obviously another agenda is at play here.