Michelle A. Cretella

Shouldn’t same-sex oriented teens be given a chance to change?

Michelle A. Cretella
By Michelle Cretella
Image

February 14, 2014 (MercatorNet) - In 2013 California and New Jersey passed laws that ban licensed mental health providers from offering sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) to minors. Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, Minnesota and Maryland are considering similar legislation. Recently, however, this legislation died in the Virginia House, and a stay was imposed in California pending review by the Supreme Court of the United States.

To be clear, the present debate concerns banning voluntary (not coerced) SOCE by professionals for minors who are distressed by their unwanted homosexual feelings. Support for this ban is based upon four claims. First, that sexual orientation is a fixed, inborn trait. Secondly, that homosexual attractions experienced during adolescence are enduring. Thirdly, that homosexual behavior carries no increased health risks as compared to heterosexual behavior, and finally, that scientific research proves SOCE is universally harmful. None of these claims, however, is based in science.

Homosexuality is not innate

Identical twins share exactly the same genetic makeup and are exposed to the same pre-natal hormones. If homosexuality were genetic like race or determined by pre-natal hormones alone, then identical twins would have the same sexual orientation 100 percent of the time. Instead, at most, identical twins are both homosexual only 20 percent of the time.[1] Dr. Francis Collins, former director of the Human Genome Project, summed it up best when he wrote sexual orientation "is not hardwired by DNA, and whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predetermination."[2]

The American Psychological Association acknowledges that "[s]ome people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person’s lifetime."[3] The psychodynamic and social learning theories of homosexuality have never been disproven. There is good evidence that parental and social influences, including childhood trauma, can contribute to SSA for some.[4],[5] These adolescents have the right to therapy for their trauma, they do not deserve the added trauma of being legislated into a false sexual identity.

During adolescence homosexual attractions are more fluid than fixed

Adolescence is well recognized for its sexual fluidity and instability of homosexual attractions. In 2007, Savin-Williams and Ream conducted a large longitudinal study that documented changes in attraction so great between the ages of 16 and 17 that they questioned whether the concept of sexual orientation had any meaning for adolescents with homosexual attractions. Seventy-five percent of adolescents who had some initial homosexual attraction between the ages of 17-21 changed to experience heterosexual attraction only.[6] This is in stark contrast to the stability they found among adolescents experiencing heterosexual attractions. Among these adolescents, fully 98 percent retained their heterosexual-only attractions into adulthood.[7] Another study demonstrating significant change away from homosexual attractions in adolescence involved 13,840 youth. Of those initially "unsure" of their sexual orientation, 66 percent became exclusively heterosexual.[8]

No studies have examined the success rates of SOCE among adolescents. Logically, however, if such high rates of change in homosexual attraction occur adventitiously, many adolescents who desire therapeutic assistance should succeed.

Homo/bi-sexual behavior carries grave health risks

There are many reasons for adolescents, especially males, who are distressed by unwanted homosexual attractions to seek therapy. According to the CDC, from 2006-2009, young men who have sex with men aged 13-24 years had the greatest percentage increase in diagnosed HIV infections of all age groups.[9] Among all adolescent males aged 13-24 years, approximately 91 percent of all diagnosed HIV infections were from male-to-male sexual contact.[10] This is because receptive anal intercourse is 20 times more risky than receptive vaginal intercourse.[11]

Moreover, compared with heterosexual youth, non-heterosexual youth are at increased risk (by a median of 76 percent if bisexual; 63.8 percent if homosexual) for contracting other sexually transmitted infections, using tobacco, alcohol and other drugs, and engaging in behaviors that contribute to violence, depression and suicide.[12]

No scientific proof of harm from therapeutically assisted SOCE

No therapy is free from harm. Regarding all forms of psychotherapy for any given condition a surprisingly high 14-24 percent of children deteriorate during psychotherapy.[13] There is not one study demonstrating that SOCE causes harm greater than or even equal to this baseline level.[14] The research cited as "proving" universal harm from SOCE is a 2002 study by Shidlo and Schroeder even though the authors themselves never made such a claim. Instead, they stated: "[This study does] not provide information on the incidence and prevalence of failure, success, harm, help or ethical violations in conversion therapy [i.e., SOCE]."[15] However, there are a number of surveys of individuals who have experienced positive outcomes from SOCE.[16],[17],[18],[19]

Conclusion

Anti-SOCE claims have no basis in science. Therefore, the American College of Pediatricians and the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality insist that adolescents retain their right to choose SOCE with full informed consent under the care of experts in the field.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Michelle Cretella MD is the Vice-President of the American College of Pediatricians and chairs the College’s Committee on Adolescent Sexuality. She is also a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics. For a fully referenced version of this article visit the American College of Pediatricians website.

Notes

[1] Collins, F. The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. New York. Free Press. 2007 (p.260).

[2] Ibid. p.263.

[3] American Psychological Association fact sheet available from:  http://www.psychiatry.org/mental-health/people/lgbt-sexual-orientation [accessed February 13, 2014].

[4] Roberts AL., Glymour MM., Koenen KC. "Does maltreatment in childhood affect sexual orientation in adulthood?"  Arch Sex Behav. 2013 Feb;42(2):161-71. doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-0021-9. Epub 2012 Sep 14.

[5] Alanko, K., Santitila, P., Sato, B., Jem, P., Johansson, A., et al. (2011). Testing causal models of the relationship betwen childhood gender atypical behavior and parent-child relationship. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 29, 214-233. doi: 10.1348/2044-835X.002004

[6] Savin-Williams, RC and Ream, GL (2007), "Prevalence and Stability of Sexual Orientation Components During Adolescence and Young Adulthood," Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 385-394.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ott, MQ, Corliss, HL, et. al. (2011), "Stability and Change in Self-Reported Sexual Orientation Identity in Young People: Application of Mobility Metrics," Archives of Sexual Behavior, June; 40(30): 519-532. Published online 2010 December 2. doi:  10.1007/s10508-010-9691-3

[9] http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/sexualbehaviors/pdf/hiv_factsheet_ymsm.pdf [accessed February 12, 2014].

[10] Ibid.

[11] Grossman, M. (2009) You're Teaching My Child What? Regnery Publishing, Inc. Washington, DC , p. 87.

[12] Kann, L., Olsen, E., et.al. "Sexual Identity, Sex of Sexual Contacts, and Health-Risk Behaviors Among Students in Grades 9-12 -- Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance, Selected Sites, United States, 2001-2009." MMWR/June 6, 2011/Vol. 60

[13] Lambert (2011). "Psychotherapy research and its achievements." In J.C. Norcross, G.R. VandenBos, & D.K. Freedheim (eds.), History of psychotherapy: Continuity and change (2nd ed., pp. 299-332).

[14] Rosik, C. "The (Complete) Lack of a Scientific Basis for Banning Sexual-Orientation Change Efforts with Minors" available from:  http://www.narth.com/#!narth-analysis-of-soce-ban/c1q8f [accessed February 13, 2014].

[15] Shidlo, A., & Schroeder, M. (2002). "Changing sexual orientation: A consumers' report." Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33(3), 249-259.

[16] Santero, P., Whitehead N., Ballasteros, (2014) "Change Effects in U.S. Men with Unwanted Same-Sex Attraction after Therapy". Psychological Reports (in process; personal communication w/ Dr. Whitehead February 3, 2014).

[17] Karten, EY and Wade, JC (2010). "Sexual Orientation Change Efforts in Men: A Client Perspective." Journal of Men's Studies. 18, 84-102.

[18] Spitzer, R.L. (2003). Can some gay men and lesbians change their sexual orientation? 200 participants reporting a change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation. Oct;32(5):403-17; discussion 419-72.

[19] Nicolosi, J., Byrd, A.D., Potts, R.W. (2000). "Retrospective Self-reports of Changes in Homosexual Orientation: A Consumer Survey of Conversion Therapy Clients." Psychological Reports, 86, 1071-1088.

Reprinted with permission from MercatorNet

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:

Donate to LifeSiteNews

Give the gift of Truth.


Share this article

Advertisement
Hillary Clinton
Shutterstock
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , ,

For Hillary Clinton, abortion access trumps religious liberty

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- For Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, apparently abortion trumps religious liberty.

It may have gotten bipartisan support in the House of Representatives last night, but a spokesperson for the Democratic Party's leading presidential candidate says a resolution protecting religious liberty in the District of Columbia "overrule[s] the democratic process" and hurts women.

The vote, which saw three Democrats join the GOP majority and 13 Republicans stand with Democrats, was meant to protect pro-life and religious organizations in the District from the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act (RHNDA).

RHNDA was signed by the mayor of the District of Columbia, Muriel Bowser, in January, and makes it illegal for any employer, including religious and pro-life organizations, to use a person's belief or actions about abortion in employment considerations. It also requires employers to provide abortion coverage.

The resolution now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to fail due to the Senate being on recess. Under existing federal law, the measure has 30 legislative days to be disapproved by Congress and President Obama. If this does not happen, it becomes law.

The 30-day window ends on Saturday. President Obama promised a veto of the resolution on Thursday, even though RHNDA was opposed by former District mayor Vincent Gray. According to Gray, while he "applaud[s] the goals of this legislation," the former mayor believes RHNDA could violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal treatment under the law.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The statement by the Clinton campaign left no doubt that she stood with Obama and a majority of Democratic legislators. Spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri told CNN, "Hillary Clinton has fought for women and families and their right to access the full range of reproductive health care without interference from politicians or employers."

"Hillary will fight to make it easier, not more difficult, for women and families to get ahead and ensure that women are not discriminated against for personal medical decisions."

The remarks come a week after Clinton took criticism for saying that "religious beliefs" critical of "reproductive rights" must "be changed."

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” she told the Women in the World Summit on April 23.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper," said Clinton in her speech. "Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will."

“Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed,” said the candidate.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, ,

Social conservatives may be funding the destruction of marriage: corporate watchdog

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- With over $55 million in annual revenue, the Human Rights Campaign may be America's most powerful LGBT activist group. And according to a conservative corporate watchdog, that's in part because social conservatives are funding it.

"Conservatives would be surprised to know that many of the dollars they spend every day are helping fund an agenda that seeks to destroy traditional marriage and undermine religious freedoms," said 2nd Vote National Outreach Director Robert Kuykendall. "Even when they purchase a beverage from a company like Coca-cola or Starbucks, their dollar is going to support HRC's liberal agenda to redefine marriage."

Less than 18 months old, 2nd Vote has graded hundreds of corporations on six issues -- corporate welfare, the environment, education, support for the Second Amendment, abortion, and as of two weeks ago, same-sex "marriage." Using their "scoring" system, 2nd Vote ranks corporations on their direct or indirect involvement with these hot-button public policy and cultural issues.

And according to them, some of America's favorite corporations are making the radical HRC agenda possible.

"HRC is the largest LGBT lobbying organization in the United States with reported revenues of over $55 million," Kuykendall told LifeSiteNews. "The redefinition of marriage and the undermining of religious freedom are major components of HRC’s policy agenda. To fund their policy goals, HRC has enlisted the help of many major corporations that we do business with every day to help fund. Over a third of the contributions received by HRC are listed as 'Corporate/Foundation Grants.'" 

Why should conservatives care about corporate donors to HRC? Kuykendall says the organization is both politically influential and publicly deceptive. "Last election cycle, HRC spent around a million dollars on electioneering activities and in support of liberal candidates willing to push their legislative agenda. HRC is responsible for spreading much of the misinformation regarding [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] laws and has also mischaracterized the protections provided by these laws."

"HRC organized a massive grassroots campaign in support of the legal battle to overturn state laws protecting marriage and influence the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges," said Kuykendall.

Marriage isn't the only issue on which conservatives may be at odds with HRC's corporate backers. "2nd Vote’s research into other issues such as life, the environment, and the 2nd Amendment shows that many of the companies supporting HRC have taken liberal stands on other issues as well,” he said. “For example, Apple, Citigroup, Microsoft, and Coca-Cola are Platinum Partners, the highest level of HRC’s National Corporate Partners, that have also funded the liberal Center for American Progress [CAP]."

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

"Bank of America, Google, Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, PepsiCo, and Morgan Stanley are also HRC Corporate Partners that have funded CAP. Furthermore, all of these companies signed the amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn state marriage laws."

In Indiana, the state's religious liberty law was modified because of corporate pressure led by Tim Cook, Apple's gay CEO. Kuykendall says conservatives should not give up, though he acknowledges that "for too long, conservatives have let liberals and groups like HRC bully companies into not just going along with their agenda, but actively funding and promoting it."

"However, conservatives have also proven their ability to mobilize and use their dollars in support of traditional values as we’ve seen through the fundraising campaigns for the pizza parlor and wedding cake makers who have been attacked by liberals for their beliefs. Conservatives need to turn the tables on the left, and groups like HRC, and motivate companies to stop funding the liberal agenda through the power of their shopping habits."

Only nine companies have ranks of "five" or "four" on 2nd Vote's ranking system, indicating a pro-marriage perspective. They are outnumbered more than 10 to 1 by organizations that support redefining marriage.

Concerned citizens can download the app on 2nd Vote's website. The full list of corporation scores can be found here.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Fr. Mark Hodges

First graders exposed to book about transgender boy—without parental notification

Fr. Mark Hodges
By Fr. Mark Hodges

KITTERY POINT, ME, May 1, 2015, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Parents at one Maine school are upset that children as young as six were exposed to a book promoting transgender issues, in the name of "acceptance."

Parents were not only not consulted, they were never even notified of their children's exposure to transgenderism.

Horace Mitchell Primary School read the book I Am Jazz to first-grade students. The book is about a boy who identifies as a girl from the age of two, "with a boy's body and a girl's brain." He eventually finds a doctor who tells his parents, "Jazz is transgender."

Parents began to inquire about what was being taught at Horace Mitchell Primary after children came home with questions about their own sex and wondering if they, too, might be transgender.

One mother, upset that teachers would broach the subject of transgenderism with her little boy, said the primary school ignored her complaint. "I feel like my thoughts, feelings and beliefs were completely ignored...My right as a parent to allow or not allow this discussion with my child was taken from me," she told Hannity.com.

"When I spoke with the principal he was very cold about it," the mother continued. "It's amazing how thoughtless the school has been with this whole thing."

Only after Sean Hannity made national inquiries did Horace Mitchell Primary School suggest that teachers should have told parents ahead of time.

Allyn Hutton, the superintendent of the local district, said she supported reading the book but admitted that parents should have been given advance warning about the subject matter. "We have a practice of – if a topic is considered sensitive – parents should be informed. In this situation, that didn't happen," she said. "We understand that toleration is tolerating people of all opinions."

Horace Mitchell Primary School sent an e-mail, after the fact, to concerned parents, including a link to a blog post of the school's guidance counselor, explaining their motivation was "cultivating respect."

"Some may think primary school students are too young to worry about addressing issues surrounding gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) students. Not so, experts say,” the school's guidance counselor wrote. “It’s never too early to begin teaching children about respecting differences."

Homosexual activists say they support the teaching of transgenderism to first-graders, with or without parental notification. "The staff of Mitchell School is...shedding a light on [LGBTQ] issues,” said a column in Gay Star News.

The LGBT puublication goes even further, advocating homosexual propaganda be commonplace in elementary schools across the country. "LGBTQ issues should never be classified as a 'sensitive subject,' [because] there is nothing sensitive about the way we are born. Blonde hair, brown hair, gay, straight or somewhere in-between."

Brian Camenker of MassResistance commented on the infiltration of homosexual propaganda in children's schools. "We deal with parents and teachers a lot, and the idea that teachers would do this is unconscionable. It's like the people that promote this stuff are evil. It's demonic. You can't imagine adults that would do this to other people's children, and do it with such anger, and such vitrol.”

Camenker emphasized that this is “not an isolated incident with just one, rogue teacher. This happens because the whole administrative hierarchy buys into it.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“The new generation of educators is very, very frightening,” he said.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook