Conversion Therapy: Ethical Considerations in Family Counseling

Abstract

This article is the third and final part of a series of articles considering ethical issues in counseling with families and individuals within families with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transsexual (GLBT) concerns. Conversion therapy and the ethical and practical considerations are explored in this third part. Emphasis is placed on the need for counselors to assess personal biases in the area of working with sexual minorities. A reflective exercise and case study are presented for personal exploration of awareness of biases and prejudice in working these populations.

Weighing the Evidence: Empirical Assessment and Ethical Implications of Conversion Therapy

“…In light of the ethically questionable nature of CT, we turn to ethical reviews and the ethical framework of APA to understand better whether CT holds any ground for continued practice. A number of scholars and practitioners have written about the ethical considerations and ramifications of CT (e.g., Gonsiorek, 2004;Haldeman, 1994Haldeman, , 1999Halpert, 2000;Steigerwald & Janson, 2003;Tozer & McClanahan, 1999). For example, Gonsiorek highlighted the clash between implementing psychological services while respecting and incorporating religious beliefs.…”

Nursing Implications in the Application of Conversion Therapies on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Clients

“…(ANA, 2006, para. 1) The harms of conversion therapies have been well-documented in the literature (APA, 2006b;Beckstead & Morrow, 2004a;Bright, 2004;Cianciotto & Cahill, 2006;Phillips, 2004;Shidlo, & Schroeder, 2002;Steigerwald & Janson, 2003;Tozer & Hayes, 2004;Tozer & McClanahan, 1999;Worthington, 2004). Critical inquiry into the effects of conversion therapies has revealed several ominous findings of ethical significance (Drescher, 2006).…”

“…Finally, regarding the safety and efficacy of conversion therapies, Robinson (2006) has found four uniting themes: (1) None are currently accepted by most therapists; (2) None were accepted by most therapists at any time in the past; (3) All are, or have been, widespread forms of therapy by a minority of therapists or clergy; and (4) None have been meaningfully researched and shown to be helpful (Robinson, 2006). Strong evidence indicates the effects of these therapies on GLBT clients can be harmful and damaging and in fact, result in serious psychological trauma to clients (APA, 2006b;Beckstead & Morrow, 2004a;Bright, 2004;Cianciotto & Cahill, 2006;Phillips, 2004;Shidlo, & Schroeder, 2002;Steigerwald & Janson, 2003;Tozer & Hayes, 2004;Tozer & McClanahan, 1999;Worthington, 2004). As a consequence, many professional organizations have branded conversion therapies as unethical.…”

“…While no strong scientific data exist which support the longitudinal efficacy of conversion therapies in successfully reversing a client's homosexual orientation to heterosexual (Herek, 2006;Robinson, 2006), much data suggest these therapies cause significant psychological, social, and interpersonal harms (APA, 2006b;Beckstead & Morrow, 2004a;Bright, 2004;Cianciotto & Cahill, 2006;Phillips, 2004;Shidlo, & Schroeder, 2002;Tozer & Hayes, 2004;Tozer & McClanahan, 1999;Steigerwald & Janson, 2003;Worthington, 2004), resulting in the branding of such therapies as unethical by a multitude of professional organizations.…”

“…Conversion therapists apply various methods in different combinations (Steigerwald & Janson, 2003), some of which include long-term psychoanalytic therapy in attempt to solve unconscious childhood conflicts believed to be the etiology of one's homosexuality, group social demand treatments, heterosexual responsiveness instruction, aversion conditioning, social learning training, covert sensitization, fantasy modification, capacity for heterosexual intercourse, training for abstinence and celibacy, drug treatment, and fundamental spiritual treatments (Haldeman, 1994;Steigerwald & Janson, 2003). While longitudinal critical assessments of the efficacy of conversion therapies are scarce, perhaps the most exhaustive inquiry was that of Shidlo and Schroeder (2002).…”