Results of studies of reparative therapy and
transformational ministries:
Some evaluations of these therapies have been performed. None have been published in peer reviewed
journals. None have produced really useful data:
Ex-gay conservative Christian ministries: Some ex-gay
ministries do not claim specific success rates; a few estimate 30 to over
70%. But their data
should be considered suspect, because:
Many of the groups do not clearly differentiate between homosexual behavior and
orientation.
Many appear to ignore the existence of persons with a bisexual orientation.
Many of the groups do not perform rigorous studies; that is not
their purpose.
Many of studies that are conducted are short term.
Most, if not all, of the clients retain their original bisexual or homosexual orientation.
They continue to have feelings of same-sex attraction, but do not act on them. Both groups are generally recorded as having been "cured."
Exodus International: Two psychiatrists, were allowed to interview
members of Exodus International in 1978. The percentage of clients with a
homosexual orientation who became heterosexual, was under 0.4%. Two of the founders of the
organization, Michael Bussee and Gary Cooper, later fell in love and criticized their own organization and
other ministries for gays as fraudulent. They said that their program was "ineffective...not
one person was healed."
In 1979, Masters and Johnson claimed an impressive conversion rate of 50 to 60%
which was maintained for 5 years after treatment. These results are often quoted by
proponents of reparative therapy. Unfortunately, the number is not particularly
significant, because:
93% of the subjects were not homosexual; they were bisexual.
sexual orientation was not measured; only sexual behavior.
It is not known whether any homosexuals were able to change either
their sexual orientation or behavior during the study. 1
National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality: In
1997, NARTH announced the results of a study of 860 clients who had experienced reparative
therapy. The study is not particularly useful, because they have not published data on the
percentage of persons with a homosexual orientation who were able to change
their orientation to heterosexual, even
temporarily.
More details.
Dr. Spitzer study: Dr. Robert Spitzer is a psychiatry professor at Columbia
University. He conducted a study of 143 ex-gays and 57 ex-lesbians who
report that they have become "straight." 8,9He
reported his findings at a meeting of the American Psychiatric
Association on 2001-MAY-9. He concluded, as a result of 45 minute
interviews with each subject, that 66% of the males and 44% of the
females had arrived at "good heterosexual functioning."
It is important to realize that the subjects in this study did not end
up with a heterosexual sexual orientation; almost all report that they
are currently bisexual.
Unfortunately, there appear to be serious flaws in the study, and
in its reporting in the media.
The most serious deficiency is that 43% of the subjects were referred to Dr. Spitzer by conservative
Christian ministries. Another 23% were referred by the National
Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH).
These individuals seem to have been hand-picked from a much larger
number of bisexuals and homosexuals in therapy. As David Elliot, spokesperson for the National Gay and Lesbian
Task Force said, "The sample is terrible, totally
tainted, totally unrepresentative of the gay and lesbian community."
No information source that we have been able to find described
the original sexual orientation of the subjects. We suspect that
most or all had a bisexual orientation and engaged in at least
some homosexual activity. After therapy, we suspect that they
remain bisexual.
Schroeder and Shidlo: Another North
American study was launched to determine the experiences of people who have been treated by either
ex-gay ministries or by individual reparative therapists. The study is
sponsored by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, and funded by
the H. van Ameringen Foundation. 10 By late 1997, they were half-way towards
their goal of 200 subjects. Shidlo had yet to find a single "cure" as a result of
reparative therapy. Two of their subjects initially reported that they had been cured, but later
admitted that they had simply decided to become celibate; their sexual orientation was
unchanged. They had find some harmful effects which
effected some individuals during and after therapy.
They concluded their study in 2001. They determined that:
88% of subjects failed to achieve a sustained change in their
sexual behavior.
4% reported changing their orientation to heterosexual.
9% reported either losing all sex drive or continuing to
struggle to remain celibate.
An article in Wikipedia speculates:
"Of the 8 respondents (out of a sample of 202) who reported a
change in sexual orientation, 7 were employed in paid or unpaid
roles as 'ex-gay' counselors or group leaders, something which has
led many to question whether even this small 'success' rate is in
fact reliable." 12
It is probable that few if any conservative Christians participated
in the Schroeder and Shidlo study because it is sponsored by the National
Gay and Lesbian Task Force. In their appeal for subjects, the
researchers indicated their bias by stating: "You can be of
help in the long process of getting the message out that these
conversion therapies don't work and do the opposite of healing by
informing your l/g/b communities of our search for participants to be
interviewed. Please announce our project in any upcoming lesbian and
gay community meetings and spread the word. Help us document the
damage!" 11
Schroeder and Shidlo presented a
paper about their study at the same annual meeting of the American
Psychiatric Association. in 2001-MAY.
According to the New York Times:
"Dr. Schroeder said 18 subjects who deemed themselves 'successes'
in becoming heterosexuals 'don't fit into what the public sees as
success'."
" 'They were celibate or they continued to really struggle with
homosexual desire or behavior,' he said."
"Many subjects, Dr. Schroeder said, had invested 5 to 15 years in
the therapies, and when they were not successful experienced 'an
inordinate sense of loss'." 13
Although both this study and Spitzer's
study were presented together at the APA conference, this study received
almost no attention from the media.
Dr. Jack Drescher, a medical doctor who works extensively with gays, commented: "My own clinical experience with gay men
who failed to change in reparative therapy is that they suffered damage to their
self-esteem, experienced resultant anxiety and depression, and often felt a deep
mistrust of mental health professionals. This mistrust and shame may explain why
no good follow-up studies of these individuals exist." 3
A representative of the Honolulu, HI Gay and Lesbian Education and Advocacy
Foundation (at HawaiiGay1@aol.com ) wrote that
over a 25 year period, hundreds of their members had tried reparative therapy groups. He
commented: "I can honestly say, I have never seen one of them claiming they were
cured or felt better until they began to accept their goodness as a Gay person."
Mel White, a prominent Evangelical Christian, unsuccessfully attempted to change
his homosexual orientation over a period of decades. His book describes his experiences.
4
Investigative report of ex-gays: In 1995, reporter Justin Chin joined an ex-gay program which is affiliated
with Exodus Ministries in California. His study was funded by the Fund for
Investigative Journalism and was published in The Progressive. 5He
found that: "Ex-gays are sexually celibate but homosexuality is still
central to them: Everything in their lives revolves around homosexuality and
avoiding it. Listening to Exodus conference junkies and ex-program members
speak, it is easy to see how this subculture is maintained. Ultimately, the
difference between gays and ex-gays is like the difference between cheese and
cheddar. The ex-gays try to drown their homosexuality in Bible verses, marriage,
family, and their own new subcultural niche, but their homosexuality remains."
The author attempted to survey each of the 36 websites of the GayChangeWebRing. 6These are mainly Internet sites
created by individuals or small Christian ministries. From the sites' content,
all appear to be conservative Christian in outlook. Five
returned the dreaded "404" error message; one was a discontinued site;
two did not publish their Email address. On 2000-MAY-20, we sent a
survey by Email to each of the 28 accessible websites.
The core of the survey letter asked:
"Considering all of the persons who have entered your program and who
have made a sincere effort to change, please estimate what percentage of
individuals fall into each of the following categories:
Entered the program with a homosexual orientation and left with a
heterosexual orientation.
Entered the program with a homosexual orientation and left with a
homosexual orientation, but committed to celibacy.
Entered the program with a homosexual orientation and left with a
homosexual orientation, and open to future gay/lesbian sexual relationships.
Entered the program with a bisexual orientation and left with a
heterosexual orientation.
Entered the program with a bisexual orientation and left with a bisexual
orientation, but committed to pursuing only relationships with the opposite
gender.
Entered the program with a bisexual orientation and left with a bisexual
orientation, but open to gay/lesbian or heterosexual sexual behavior.
Don't know
Other (please define)"
We received 7 replies:
Four stated that they had no results to report. Some of their reasons
were:
They dealt with gays and lesbians only by Email or the phone.
They met with clients for only a short time.
They kept no records.
They dealt with clients anonymously.
One group reported three successes over 7 or more years:
Two clients entered therapy with a homosexual orientation, and
left with a homosexual orientation. Both have decided to remain
celibate.
One entered therapy with a bisexual orientation, and left with a
bisexual orientation, has made a commitment to a person of the
opposite sex and is now open to marrying them.
One group refused to reveal their results because they felt that we
are biased.
Our survey produced very little meaningful data. The few results support
the concept that RT does not change a person's sexual orientation, but can
occasionally change an individual's behavior, largely by choosing celibacy.
Although tens of thousands of individuals are (or have been) involved in
these forms of experimental therapy, very few studies have been made of its safety or
effectiveness. Those that have been made are seriously flawed
An meaningful study could be conducted along the following lines:
Organize a research group containing scientists who have no preconceived beliefs
about the nature of sexual orientation. Since this is probably impossible, then the group
should at least include balanced numbers of therapists who hold various opposing views on
the safety and effectiveness of these therapies.
Design a study to:
Determine the sexual orientation of a large number of clients entering reparative therapy.
Document their sexual self-identification, fantasies, feelings of
attraction, past sexual activities, reasons for
seeking conversion, etc.
Study them periodically during the progress of therapy.
Repeat the evaluation as they leave therapy.
Follow them for at least 5 years after therapy. Periodically assess
their sexual orientation by evaluating their sexual
self-identification, fantasies, feelings and behaviors.
Determine how many persons with homosexual orientation before therapy were able to
change their orientation to heterosexual or bisexual during therapy and maintain this for many years
after therapy.
Publish the results in a peer-reviewed journal.
Have the study independently replicated by one or more additional groups.
The cost of such a study would be miniscule when compared to the expense of
blindly continuing reparative therapy at its present level. This type of study
has never been conducted. The National Association for Research and Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH) has called for a review similar to this, to be designed jointly
by themselves and the American Psychological Association. Unfortunately,
the APA has refused to cooperate. Such a study has little
chance of being performed in today's religious and social climate.