I released the advocacy film "I Do Exist" in July 2004. It was supposed to be a documentary way business relationship of 5 former gays who had become straight through religious means. I showed the film at a briefing of change therapists in November of that same twelvemonth to great fanfare. It was shown all over the earth, merely ultimately it was non an accurate portrayal of reality for at to the lowest degree 4 of the participants. Gradually over the adjacent couple of years, I became aware of that and stopped selling the video in early 2007.

My experience with "I Do Be" drove me back to the research on change and sexual orientation. After realizing that I had been moving in the incorrect direction with my earlier claims, I  became a critic of reparative therapy. I chronicled that alter on this blog from the beginning in July 2005. All of the posts on reparative therapy and sexual orientation change efforts in full general would take hours to review. That story is summarized in this Yahoo News account past Jon Ward.

Even so, I did non simply criticize change therapy, I wanted to observe an alternative for people who struggled morally with their sexual orientation. In 2005, I began a process of developing a framework to help guide therapists who worked with religious clients conflicted by their sexual orientation. Correct abroad, I asked Mark Yarhouse to collaborate. By 2006, we came out with the sexual identity therapy framework. Mark and I discuss that story in this interview.

Of the two of usa, Mark has been the prolific writer and researcher. His book Sexual Identity and Faith contains applications of the Sit down framework and I recommend information technology for that purpose. I accept multiple posts near the framework on the blog and those tin can be found hither.

In add-on to talking over our work together, Mark describes his more recent work with Revoice and gender identity. Thanks to Marker for taking time to reminisce.

Dr. Marker Yarhouse is a clinical psychologist who specializes in conflicts tied to religious identity and sexual and gender identity. He assists people who are navigating the complex relationship between their sexual or gender identity and Christian faith. He is the Dr. Arthur P. and Mrs. Jean May Rech Professor of Psychology at Wheaton Higher, where he runs the Sexual and Gender Identity (SGI) Found. He is an award-winning teacher and researcher. He was a by participant with the Ethics and Public Policy Center think tank in Washington, DC, and he was named Senior Fellow with the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities to conduct a report of students navigating sexual identity concerns at Christian colleges and universities. He has been a consultant to the National Found of Corrections to address problems facing sexual minorities in corrections, and he was part of a consensus panel from the American Psychological Association on sexual orientation and gender identity modify efforts that convened to provide input to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Assistants in Washington, DC.  He is currently the Chair of the task force on LGBT bug for Division 36 (Psychology of Religion and Spirituality) of the American Psychological Clan. He was also invited to write the featured white paper on sexual identity for the Christ on Campus Initiative edited past Don Carson for The Gospel Coalition.

He has published over 80 peer-reviewed periodical articles and book chapters and is author or co-author of several books, including Agreement Sexual Identity: A Resource for Youth Ministers and Understanding Gender Dysphoria: Navigating Transgender Problems in a Changing Civilisation. His most recent books are Sexual Identity & Organized religion and Costly Obedience: Listening to and Learning from Chaste Gay Christians. (this is the book where the celibacy inquiry is reported)

On Tuesday July 21, I volition publish an interview with Marker Yarhouse, professor at Wheaton Higher. Mark and I are authors of the sexual identity therapy framework which became an culling for religious gay clients.

Marking and I will discuss the history of our work together going back to our opposition to a ban on reorientation therapy to our focus on sexual identity therapy. We as well talk about Mark'southward more recent piece of work in gender identity.

I asked Mark about a relatively new grouping on the scene helping people navigate sexual identity concerns – Revoice. In that context, he described research into the furnishings of celibacy. Here is an excerpt of that conversation.

I hope you will revisit the blog on Tuesday to grab the full interview with Mark.

You can encounter all posts about these interviews past clicking this link.

Also subscribe to my Psychvideos Youtube channel where I am posting them.

Concluding week, this came across my path:

I assume Christopher Doyle refers to the attempt around the land to prohibit sexual reorientation alter efforts for minors. Nonetheless, I write this post to accost a couple of points.

When it comes to sexual orientation and psychotherapy, the reparative therapy narrative of defective parenting doesn't hold water or match up with inquiry or experience.  However, in that location are still therapists who believe that and endeavor to impose it on their clients and their families. Much of my work has been to develop a therapy approach (sexual identity therapy) which requires therapists to present scientific enquiry about sexual orientation to clients and let clients to decide what to exercise about it.

On the other hand, the Family Research Quango speaker Christopher Doyle worked and trained with Richard Cohen who has a dissimilar approach. Here is a snapshot of a couple of Richard Cohen's techniques.

I will leave it to readers. Is this psychotherapy?

Doyle defended these and other outrageous techniques in this legal brief designed to exist used in a New Jersey trial involving JONAH, a Jewish change therapy group. JONAH lost at trial.

You tin see Doyle in activity in this review of a documentary called Sunday Sessions in which Doyle provides sexual orientation change counseling to a young adult human. Note that Richard Cohen is involved in the group sessions at the commencement.

In the end, the young man feels somewhat better but credits the teachings of the Catholic church for his mood improvement. In that location is no indication that his sexual attractions changed.

Sexual Identity Therapy

I watched the documentary (I recommend information technology although there is no real conclusion to the story), and I need to make another thing clear. In the picture (and on this folio), Doyle calls his approach to therapy "Sexual Identity Affirming Therapy." I want to say plainly that what he does is unrelated to "Sexual Identity Therapy" as adult past Mark Yarhouse and me.

In the documentary, Doyle did not provide a range of data about the development of male person homosexuality but instead authoritatively expressed the reparative narrative of weak fathers and an unmasculine upbringing. The directive way demonstrated in the movie review in a higher place is not taken out of context. None of this is consequent with sexual identity therapy. People working within the principles of Sit do not endeavor to alter a client'south sexual orientation. SIT is antithetical to what Doyle demonstrates in the documentary and more broadly, to what Cohen does in his various public demonstrations.

The War is Over

In my opinion, within psychotherapy, the war is actually over and change therapy has lost. No training programs teach information technology. I know of no Christian training programs that teach information technology (although I would like to exist corrected if I am wrong). Information technology is misleading to pretend there is a wronged group of psychotherapists who want to practice information technology and tin can't. The courts take not been inclined to defend it.

On the other mitt, in that location has been a resurgence of involvement in ex-gay type ministries. While I don't yet see an accompanying revival of professional interest in change therapy, information technology is the nature of true believers to keep trying.

In a contempo CBS News written report on reparative therapy (sexual orientation modify efforts), Focus on the Family's Jeff Johnston was quoted in support of the exercise and a link to FOTF'south website was a part of the story. I have a long history with Focus on this issue. At that place are some misleading statements on this page which I outline below.

Focus says:

Focus on the Family does non and has never offered sexual-orientation modify therapy, as well referred to as "reparative therapy." Nosotros have licensed counselors on staff who take one-time phone calls and refer to other therapists, upon request. We as well support an individual'due south right to counseling for unwanted homosexuality — and the rights of counselors to offer such assistance.

Although technically true, Focus did recommend reparative therapy via their Love Won Out traveling ex-gay workshops from the late 1990s into the late 2000s. Reparative therapy popularizer Joe Nicolosi was the featured speaker on the origins and treatment of homosexuality. Exodus, Focus on the Family and NARTH (National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality) were the trinity of sexual orientation change efforts in the Us. Even if Focus didn't have counselors on site who offered counseling, they promoted reparative therapy to the world in a very aggressive style.

Focus really confuses matters in their definition of "sexual orientation change efforts."

"Sexual Orientation Change Efforts" (SOCE) is a broad term that deals with any kind of help from a licensed mental-wellness professional for those with unwanted homosexuality. This is counseling, or talk therapy, to assist someone with unwanted homosexuality —whether information technology'southward behavior, attractions or identity — to live according to their religion and values.

Focus tries to soften the meaning of the give-and-take "change." SOCE is a broad term only it doesn't refer to "any kind of help from a licensed mental-health professional person for those with unwanted homosexuality." Change means modify. SOCE is about trying to help people change their orientation. Opponents of SOCE oppose the efforts of counselors to change orientation.

Focus confuses the outcome by proverb SOCE includes counseling efforts to aid clients "live according to their faith and values." That would only be SOCE if living according to 1's faith meant changing sexual orientation. Yet, sexual identity therapy (which is what Marking Yarhouse and I adult) helps people without focusing on orientation change every bit a goal. Our perspective is that clients tin can be assisted inside their religious framework without any SOCE.

Sexual identity therapy is not SOCE. SIT is a kind of assistance for people who are conflicted most their sexual orientation but information technology isn't SOCE. SIT does assist people seek harmony within themselves without using SOCE. Focus' description of SOCE is as well broad and misleading. Focus appears to want to make this issue about religious freedom when in fact, it is about what is helpful with clients.

Focus then speculates most what isn't allowed past a ban on SOCE.

If this therapy is banned, think about the impact this would have on minors:

A teen boy who is hooked on gay pornography — and wants to stop — could not get help from a licensed professional advisor.

A young daughter who was sexually abused, and was questioning her identity, could simply get help to identify as lesbian, bisexual or transgender.

A boy who wants to develop his sense of masculinity and identity could not get help to affirm his masculine identity from a country-licensed counselor.

A girl who'southward involved in a aforementioned-sexual practice human relationship, but whose faith says that's not all-time for her, could not go assistance to stop the relationship from a licensed counselor.

As worded above, SOCE is not required to address whatever of these situations. Laws prohibiting SOCE for minors allow for identity exploration and the handling of sexual abuse. The laws practise not forbid clients from interim in line with their religious beliefs as long as the counselor does non implement techniques designed to change a client'due south sexual orientation. For instance, if a aforementioned-sex attracted teen is in a same-sex relationship but believes information technology is incorrect, she tin can seek help to take steps to stop it and cope with the results.

The outrage surrounding California'due south anti-conversion therapy bill (AB 2943) is growing by the press release. For example, last Monday (April thirty) Summit Ministries canceled a conference in CA because they fence the bill (when it becomes law) will forbid advice which doesn't affirm homosexuality. According to the printing release,

Summit's programme would fall under the proposed law considering its lineup includes defenders of traditional human being/woman marriage and people who abet pursuing but those sexual activities canonical in the Bible. Myers said it has also been common during prior trainings for students to inquire questions of Summit staff about how to address confusion over gender identity and sexual attraction in the context of their faith. By prohibiting such conversations, AB2943 would cripple Meridian's ability to intendance for and equip its students, Myers said.
"What are we going to say to a young person experiencing sexual confusion?" he asked. "That the land of California forbids us from assuasive a biblical ethic embraced by billions of people for thousands of years to inform our answer?
"California state authorities are hijacking good-faith concerns well-nigh reparative therapy to deny ramble protection to those who hold traditional views of sexuality and marriage," Myers added. "We cannot and will not bend God's truth to arrange the state of California.
"This is the near blatant chilling of free spoken language in America in my lifetime."

According to the nib's sponsor, the beak doesn't relate to speech or religious teaching. Information technology regulates sexual orientation change efforts. The bill would merely apply to their conference if Superlative Ministries charges conference goers for sexual orientation change counseling.
If students inquire questions nearly what the Bible teaches, the teachers are free to provide any teaching they believe. They can recommend alter efforts, celibacy, prayer, meditation, or any they believe. They can recommend books, sell books and tapes, and even recommend therapists. Notwithstanding, those therapists can't conduct those treatments under the new constabulary.

Would the Bill Prohibit Counseling to Live a Chaste Life?

Summit Ministries argued that biblical advice, such equally celibacy, would be prohibited by the bill. I asked bill sponsor Evan Low'due south part if counselors could assist clients seek celibacy if clients wanted to avoid homosexual behavior. Low'southward office referred me to policy advisor Anthony Samson who answered by email that "AB 2943 would not prohibit one from providing therapeutic help to an individual seeking to become celibate."  He pointed to the word "includes" in the following definition of "sexual orientation modify efforts"

(i) (1) "Sexual orientation alter efforts" ways any practices that seek to alter an individual's sexual orientation. This includes  efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.

Samson said, "The term 'includes' means that the practices following it must be in connection with seeking to modify an individual's sexual orientation.  In other words, 'efforts to alter behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex' would be precluded to the extent they were provided in connection with seeking to change one's sexual orientation." Samson explained, "Considering providing services to aid one become celibate would not exist in connection with changing 1's sexual orientation, it would be permitted."
So biblical advice would not be banned and therapeutic assist for traditional clients will nonetheless be available likewise. For case, I accept no hesitation in conducting or recommending sexual identity therapy in CA.
To me, these protestations appear to be efforts to derail the neb in guild to protect reparative therapy. Having read the bill, I tin tell that the Acme printing release, and most of the Christian news articles on this beak are reactionary efforts which don't bargain directly with the actual bill. If these groups desire to be ta ken seriously, they should secure scholarly opinions from serious legal scholars and not civilisation warriors.
Furthermore, if religious conservatives want to have an touch on this legislation, I encourage them to practice what I accept done. Contact the sponsor and enter into a respectful, rational, fact-based dialogue.

Fact Canvas on AB 2943

Why the Mental Health Professionals Want to Ban Conversion Therapy

While there are several reasons why mental health advocates want to ban sexual orientation change efforts, I desire to focus on the recent push to legislate bans on the do by licensed professionals.
Historically, therapists who treat gays with an aim to change them accept viewed homosexuality as a developmental disorder. Some may also think same-sex sexual beliefs is immoral, but principally the use of therapeutic techniques is driven by a belief that in that location is something psychologically wrong with someone who is attracted to the same sexual practice. If the right techniques can be applied, eventually the GLB person volition experience a shift in psychological perspective and notice the reverse sex activity bonny. In short, homosexuality is an disease to be cured.
As most readers know, this view of aforementioned-sex orientation isn't held by whatsoever medical or mental health professional person system today. Merely a tiny grouping of practitioners hold to this view and they are amidst those who are fighting legislative efforts to ban sexual orientation modify efforts. When legislators craft bills to stop treatment of same-sex activity orientation, they are hoping to end efforts to cure something that isn't a disorder.
To me, this is a sensible opinion. No disorder, no need for treatment.
On the other hand, many religious traditions disagree with same-sex sexual behavior. They discourage such beliefs as inconsistent with their moral teachings. Churches and religious groups have the right to teach this and advise their members in keeping with their principles. When people ask for their communication or opinion, churches tin teach their views. In fact, anyone can teach and speak any view about homosexuality.
Even so, when a person joins a learned profession and gets a state license to do that profession, there are sure restrictions that come forth with that pick.  Mental health professionals are not clergy. We have a role to raise the mental wellness of our clients and curing non-existent diseases doesn't seem to me to be a function of that mandate. If clergy need to speak confronting sure behaviors, that is their correct and the country's regulation of mental health professionals cannot cease them.
I do have sympathy for those clients who believe that their aforementioned-sex attractions consequence from some historical trauma. In fact, there is a very small subset of people for whom those factors might be relevant to an understanding of their overall personality, including their sexual interests. I also believe that those people can continue to receive therapy, nether these laws, if the treatment is not framed as a direct effort to alter orientation.
Ultimately, I believe this is an result of regulation of mental wellness professionals and not one of religious liberty. Since there is no universe in which sexual orientation modify efforts are effective, why would mental health professionals make space for them? The rare exceptions can be accommodated via other frameworks (e.thou., identity exploration, trauma recovery). Religious views will keep to be shared and whatever challenge to them will not succeed. Nosotros can coexist.

For more than information on helping non-affirming same-sexual activity attracted people live in keeping with traditional sexual ethics without engaging in sexual orientation change efforts, come across the post-obit manufactures and websites:

Sexual Identity Therapy Framework
Institute for the Written report of Sexual Identity
A New Therapy on Faith and Sexual Identity (WSJ)
Living the Practiced Lie (NYT)

To hear Focus on the Family's public policy arm, Family Policy Alliance, talk nearly it, the opponents of forcing teens to go to sexual orientation change efforts (aka conversion therapy) don't desire kids to become to counseling. Heed to Stephanie Back-scratch employ the phrase "bones talk therapy" like it is her job (which in this case information technology is).

Transcript:

Hi, I'yard Stephanie Curry and I'thou a public policy manager with Family Policy Alliance. I'chiliad here today to talk to you about a series of bills that we're seeing beyond the state that would seek to ban basic talk therapy for our children. Family Policy Alliance cares about this upshot because we care about our children and that they're able to have access to bones talk therapy if they are struggling with unwanted same-sex allure and gender identity issues. Nosotros believe that families and parents know what'southward best for their children and they should have the power to find licensed therapists that support their moral and religious principles.
Some bills nosotros're seeing that are cause for business concern are for instance a bill in Massachusetts that said it was child abuse for a family to take their child to a therapist to get therapy for their unwanted same-sex attractions or gender identity issues. We also have seen a pecker in Massachusetts that equates this type of basic talk therapy to torture. Now we know that this isn't true. Considering we love our children, we desire them to have admission to compassionate and ethical basic talk therapy that is open to alter. Thank you then much for joining u.s.a. today.

The Bones Talk Therapy Bill

In fact, the only bill I could find in MA did not refer to therapy as child corruption or torture. The neb does not prohibit basic talk therapy. The 2017 beak — H1190 — specifically forbids interventions which serve sexual reorientation or gender identity change. Nevertheless, the bill does allow a neutral exploration of sexual and gender identity problems.
Read the the nib below:

Section i. Chapter 112 of the Full general Laws, equally actualization in the 2014 Official add-on, is hereby amended by calculation following new section:-
Department 266. (a) Definitions.
For the purposes of this section, "licensed professional" means any licensed medical, mental health, or human service professional licensed under Chapter 112, including any psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker, psychiatric nurse, allied mental wellness and homo services professional, licensed marriage and family therapist, licensed rehabilitation counselor, licensed mental health advisor, licensed educational psychologist, or any of their respective interns or trainees, or any other person designated or licensed as a mental wellness or human service professional person nether Massachusetts law or regulation.
The term "sexual orientation" shall hateful having an orientation for or being identified every bit having an orientation for heterosexuality, bisexuality, or homosexuality.
The term "Gender identity" shall mean a person'southward gender-related identity, appearance or beliefs, whether or non that gender-related identity, appearance or beliefs is different from that traditionally associated with the person'southward physiology or assigned sex at nativity. Gender-related identity may be shown by providing evidence including, but not express to, medical history, care or treatment of the gender-related identity, consequent and uniform assertion of the gender-related identity or whatsoever other evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person'south core identity; provided, however, that gender-related identity shall not be asserted for any improper purpose.
"Sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts" means any practice by a licensed professional that attempts or purports to impose modify of an private'south sexual orientation or gender identity, including but non limited to efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the aforementioned sex. The term "sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts" does non include practices:
(A)(ane) to provide acceptance, support, and understanding of an individual's sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression; (two) facilitate an individual's coping, social support, and identity exploration and development; or (iii) that are sexual orientation-neutral or gender identity-neutral including interventions to prevent or address unlawful conduct or dangerous sexual practices; and
(B) Do not attempt or purport to impose change of an individual's sexual orientation or gender identity.
(b) Under no circumstances shall a licensed professional advertise for or engage in sexual orientation and gender identity alter efforts with a patient less than 18 years of historic period. Any licensed professional violating this prohibition shall be such subject field to discipline by the advisable licensing lath, which may include suspension or revocation of license.
(c) Whoever violates this section shall be considered to accept violated section ii of chapter 93A. Whatsoever such merits brought under this section shall exist subject to sections 5A and 7 of chapter 260.
SECTION 2. (a) Subsection (a) of Section 51A of chapter 119 of the General Laws, as actualization in the 2010 Official improver, is hereby amended by inserting after the words "chapter 233" the following words:-
or (vi) being subjected to sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts as defined by section 169 of chapter 112
(b) Section 51A of affiliate 119 is further amended in subsection (i) after the word "family unit." by calculation the following words:-
Any report including licensed professionals engaging in sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts as divers nether section 169 of chapter 112 shall be filed within xxx days to the advisable licensing lath for review and possible suspension or revocation of license.

Therapists Should Be Neutral

Religious right pundits have been distorting these bills since they first came along. The MA nib clearly allows "basic talk therapy" which "provide[s] credence, support, and understanding of an private'due south sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression" and "facilitate[southward] an private's coping, social back up, and identity exploration and development" or "that [is] sexual orientation-neutral or gender identity-neutral including interventions to prevent or address unlawful acquit or unsafe sexual practices."
Therapist should facilitate coping, social support and identity exploration and practice so in a neutral manner. Therapists should not try to push sexual reorientation.
Every bit a issue of supportive therapy, some teens will make up one's mind that they are straight or cisgender and others volition come up out as a sexual minority. Such therapy is legal under this bill. Religious therapists should exist perfectly fine with this arrangement. Therapy should not exist a platform for spreading religious beliefs or making clients into Christian disciples.
What the state of MA is trying to prevent is for a therapist to use the cover of a state license to pursue sexual orientation or gender identity change. Therapists may do many things to support families who are traditional in their beliefs, but under a law like this, they may not actively use techniques or prescribe methods which have the intent to change orientation. Given that those techniques rarely, if ever, work, this would be beneficial for teens on residuum.

Over the by few weeks, I have written about the Nashville Statement. In doing and so, I realized that many readers here haven't followed this blogclass2
since the beginning (2005) and aren't aware of my work in the area of sexual identity. In fact, I would say a significant number of readers came forth in 2014 when I wrote nearly Mars Hill Church building.
On Saturday, Yahoo News published a profile of my piece of work past Senior Political Contributor Jon Ward. In the well written piece, Jon focused on my prior support for sexual orientation change efforts. However, he as well connected the dots from that work to my opposition to Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill and later on opposition to Christian nationalism and megachurch exploitation. I appreciate Jon's careful attention to the nuances in the story.
If you are interested in more than information about how I went from being a supporter of reorientation therapy to being a vocal opponent and how that journey connects to electric current interests, I encourage you to go read Jon's contour.

The x pinnacle posts during 2015 are as follows with the most pop commencement:
1. Open up Letter to Gateway Church Pastor Robert Morris from a Former Member of Mars Hill Church – This was posted on November 2, 2014 simply remained popular throughout 2015. Driscoll recently joined Jimmy Evans as a director to class The Trinity Church building in Phoenix.
2. Former Chief Financial Officer at Turning Signal Claims David Jeremiah Used Questionable Methods to Secure a Spot on Best Seller Lists – This story about David Jeremiah's questionable tactics from a former insider was a scoop merely not i which stuck to Jeremiah like  a similar scandal did to Mark Driscoll.
3. Hillsong'southward Brian Houston Interviewed Mark and Grace Driscoll After All (VIDEO) (Audio) – First, he said he would interview Driscoll, then he said he wouldn't, then Brian Houston aired an interview with Marker and Grace Driscoll. Information technology was keen theatre but didn't draw good reviews from former Mars Hill leavers.
4. A major report of kid abuse and homosexuality revisited – This post from 2009 is 1 of the virtually popular manufactures in the history of the blog. In it, I demonstrate a primal error in a journal article ofttimes used to link homosexuality and child abuse.
5. Southern Baptists Say Enough to Perry Noble and NewSpring Church building – I am surprised that this post got then much attention.
6. Gospel for Asia Faces Allegations of Misconduct; GFA Board Investigation Establish No Wrongdoing – The GFA story received the most attending from me this twelvemonth.
seven. Pastor of Willow Creek Presbyterian Says Church Reaction to Hiring Tullian Tchividjian is "Overwhelmingly Positive" – I briefly covered Tullian Tchividjian'southward comeback as a evolution government minister at a PCA church in FL.
eight. A Few Thoughts on The Village Church Controversy – Village Church's leadership apologized for their response to a immature woman who sought a divorce from her husband who had admitted having child porn.
9. Hillsong Founder Brian Houston Issues Statement On Marking Driscoll at the Hillsong 2015 Conference – Mark Driscoll's return to the spotlight garnered much reader attention.
10. Gospel for Asia's K.P. Yohannan and the Ring Kissing Ritual – While the financial scandals were of interest to readers, this article ranked higher than the coin problems.
To fully capture action on the weblog, one should consider the Gospel for Asia scandals (Patheos considered my coverage as a part of one of their tiptop ten Evangelical stories of 2015).
It has been a adept year and I thank my readers and those who support the blog with their comments and regular visits.

Robert Spitzer at his home in 2004, screencap from I Do Exist.
Robert Spitzer at his home in 2004, screencap from I Do Exist.

According to the New York Times, psychiatrist and writer of the third edition of the American Psychiatric Association's diagnostic transmission Robert Spitzer died on Christmas Day. Spitzer is credited with changing the way mental health professionals view diagnosis of mental disorders. Past basing the assessment of mental disorder on personal distress and diminished performance, Spitzer promoted a more rigorous approach to diagnosis.
More famously, Spitzer'south modifications also paved the manner for reconsidering homosexuality every bit a mental disorder. After coming together gay psychiatrists who did not experience distress over homosexuality, Spitzer, in the early 1970s, led the effort to remove homosexuality from psychiatry's listing of mental disorders.
I first talked to Bob Spitzer when he invited me to take part in a debate over sexual orientation change efforts at the American Psychiatric Association coming together in 2000. The debate was canceled when, about the beginning of the conference, the two psychiatrists arguing against sexual orientation change backed out. Bob later told me that the psychiatrists who declined to participate wanted out because they heard that I was a member of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). While I had been a NARTH member for ane twelvemonth in 1997, I had allowed my membership to lapse past 2000. An irony is that I after became one of NARTH's biggest critics. Bob knew I tracked NARTH's actions and about once a yr asked about any news on their activities.
Although I was unable to attend, the following year Bob invited me to speak equally a function of a symposium where he presented results of his research on ex-gays. Eventually, that study was published in 2003 in the Archives of Sexual Behavior and was 1 of the most controversial studies in modern psychiatry. At the fourth dimension, due to his conversations with people who described themselves as ex-gay, Spitzer believed that some gays had been able to change their sexuality toward the straight side of the continuum. Later, in 2012, Spitzer retracted that estimation of his research, denounced his earlier beliefs, and apologized to gays.
In 2004, I met Bob Spitzer in person and spent a few hours at his home nearly New York City while filming for the video I Do Exist, a video with the testimonies of five people who told me they changed from gay to straight. Considering one of the chief participants retracted his statements and 2 others had significant changes, I later retracted the video in January 2007. My views were also altered past the emergence of new information on sexual orientation and the failure of modify therapy supporters to produce evidence in their favor.
After he published his report, Bob's collaboration with social conservatives was something he afterward regretted. On i occasion in Nov 2008, I sent him a link to Focus on the Family unit's website where they had misrepresented his study. He wrote back and said, "That is awful. Whoever wrote it must have known information technology to be incorrect. Can y'all do something about it?" Focus later modified the statements slightly simply all the same did non fully correspond Bob's views.
In 2007, Spitzer told me in a telephone call that he endorsed the sexual identity therapy framework that I developed with Mark Yarhouse. The endorsement was later published on the Sit down framework site:

I have reviewed the sexual identity framework written by Warren Throckmorton and Mark Yarhouse. This framework provides a very necessary outline to assist therapists address the important concerns of clients who are in conflict over their homosexual attractions. The work of Drs. Throckmorton and Yarhouse transcend polarized debates about whether gays tin modify their sexual orientation. Rather, this framework helps therapists work with clients to arts and crafts solutions tailored to their individual situations and personal behavior and values. I support this framework and promise it is widely implemented.
Robert 50. Spitzer, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York Land Psychiatric Found, New York Urban center, NY. Co-editor of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental and Emotional Disorders, 3rd Edition and tertiary Edition (Revised).

On a personal level, I liked Bob immediately. He was friendly and very outgoing. While he seemed to like the controversy, in my hearing he communicated no malice toward whatever side of the gay change fence. He seemed to exist a genuine truth seeker and wanted to follow the evidence no matter what. I will miss him.
Bob Spitzer, R.I.P.