Homosexuality and the Church of Jesus Christ/Aversion therapy performed at BYU

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

==

Questions

==

• What was the history of BYU and aversion therapy for treating homosexuality?
• How did that relate to modern science at that time?
• What was the role of the Church in BYU's treatments

==

==

In the 1970s, a graduate student at Brigham Young University conducted a number of experiments in the use of aversion therapy to treat ego-dystonic homosexuality. At the time, homosexuality was considered a mental illness and aversion therapy was a standard practice for cure. Experiments were run on a volunteer basis adhering to the professional standards of the time. Even so, there is no indication that anyone from the church leadership was aware of the experiments. Church leadership is typically not involved in minute details of the daily activities of BYU such as approving standard procedures being run by graduate students.

There are reports of bishops counseling people to undergo aversion therapy. These reports have not been verified, but it is not uncommon for bishops to counsel people to go to standard therapies recommended by professional societies. The church itself has never recommended aversion therapy. President Kimball did quote from several reputable medical sources about how the practice of homosexuality could be abandoned through treatments, but he did not specify what treatments those were.

Elder Oaks stated:

"The Church rarely takes a position on which treatment techniques are appropriate, for medical doctors or for psychiatrists or psychologists and so on. The second point is that there are abusive practices that have been used in connection with various mental attitudes or feelings. Over-medication in respect to depression is an example that comes to mind. The aversive therapies that have been used in connection with same-sex attraction have contained some serious abuses that have been recognized over time within the professions. While we have no position about what the medical doctors do (except in very, very rare cases — abortion would be such an example), we are conscious that there are abuses and we don’t accept responsibility for those abuses. Even though they are addressed at helping people we would like to see helped, we can’t endorse every kind of technique that’s been used."

Aversion therapy is a standard technique

Aversion therapy is still used today for a variety of treatments, such as gambling, smoking, alcoholism, and violence. A 2010 article in Psychology Today states "To date, aversion therapy using shock and nausea is the only technique of quitting [smoking] that offers decent gambling odds."[1] The Encyclopedia of Mental Disorders has this entry for aversion therapy:

A patient who consults a behavior therapist for aversion therapy can expect a fairly standard set of procedures. The therapist begins by assessing the problem, most likely measuring its frequency, severity, and the environment in which the undesirable behavior occurs. Although the therapeutic relationship is not the focus of treatment for the behavior therapist, therapists in this tradition believe that good rapport will facilitate a successful outcome. A positive relationship is also necessary to establish the patient's confidence in the rationale for exposing him or her to an uncomfortable stimulus. The therapist will design a treatment protocol and explain it to the patient. The most important choice the therapist makes is the type of aversive stimulus to employ. Depending upon the behavior to be changed, the preferred aversive stimulus is often electric stimulation delivered to the forearm or leg. [2]

Over the years, the methods have been refined and approved. Today, we have decades of research that were not available in the 1970s. It was not known where aversion therapy would be effective and where it would not be effective. The methods of the 1970s may seem crude compared to today's standards, but today's standards will probably seem crude in another 40 years. For whatever reason, aversion therapy is still a therapy used by mainstream psychologists.

History of aversion therapy and homosexuality

In 1966 Martin E.P. Seligman conducted a study at the University of Pennsylvania which showed positive results in applying aversion therapy to help people stop engaging in homosexual behavior. According to Seligman, this lead to "a great burst of enthusiasm about changing homosexuality [that] swept over the therapeutic community." (p. 156, Seligman, Martin E.P., What You Can Change and What You Can't: The Complete Guide to Self Improvement Knopf, 1993; ISBN 0-679-41024-4)

The majority of the time, aversion therapy was used to treat ego-dystonic homosexuality. This is when a patient experiences distress over their sexual orientation. It was considered a mental illness by the American Psychological Association until 1987, and is still considered a mental illness by the World Health Organization. [3] Even after the declassification, aversion therapy was still in use to treat homosexuality. It was not until 1994, that the American Medical Association issued a report that stated "aversion therapy is no longer recommended for gay men and lesbians" (Health Care Needs of Gay Men and Lesbians in the U.S. American Medical Association Report, 1994) and not until 2006 that using aversion therapy to treat homosexuality has been in violation of the codes of conduct and professional guidelines of the American Psychological Association and American Psychiatric Association.

The role of BYU in aversion therapy research is relatively minimal. The major research was done by a single graduate student, Max McFord, who then moved on. BYU did not pioneer the therapy nor did it continue the therapy after it fell out of practice. It was simply one of many places that did research in the area.

==

Answer

== It is important to keep in mind that:

• Aversion therapy was not unique to BYU
• Aversion therapy for homosexuality was not unique to BYU
• Homosexuality was considered a "treatable disorder" at the time
• Research and treatments were done with the informed consent of participants according to professional standards
• There is no evidence to support a "suicide epidemic" as a result of the practice of aversion therapy at BYU.
• There is no way to tell what caused the suicides that happened. Suicide rates of people involved in same-sex relationships are higher even in places that embrace such relationships.

== Notes ==