I really want to write a paper on litigating against reparative therapy camps...-αmεσ (spy) 22:52, 10 November 2007 (EST)
Wow...you mean both of them?Toe Tapping Republican 23:06, 10 November 2007 (EST)
How many are there? I know of CbS now, but that's it.-αmεσ (spy) 23:09, 10 November 2007 (EST)
- Upon some small amount of research I withdraw my last joke/comment as insensitive. There seems to be a lot of those places. Poor kids, probably run by groomers too. Toe Tapping Republican 23:13, 10 November 2007 (EST)
Just did some research too. It's horrifying! But at least one has closed. I claim victory. By thinking ill about them for two minutes, I closed them five years ago.-αmεσ (spy) 23:17, 10 November 2007 (EST)
There seems to be a confusion about the gender of the parent that Cohen believes did not get the proper attachment from; in Hugging the parent is the same gender, but beforehand (and implied in the pillow-bashing) afterwards it is the parent of the opposite gender... Adny 21:57, 21 February 2008 (EST)
- Adny, let's just say Cohen is a very confused man. I've actually seen him blame both parents for his problems.Jsonitsac 01:43, 23 February 2008 (EST)
- Oh, sorry... I reacted based only on the explanatory text. Shall I roll back or shall you?-αmεσ (spy) 11:55, 15 April 2008 (EDT)
Our present intro states:
Many reparative therapy "camps" are maintained where children's parents send them to be "cured" of homosexuality: however, these re-education facilities in fact amount to little more than non-fatal concentration camps. Many camps are deliberately placed beyond United States territory so as to avoid their jurisdiction, and, ostensibly, their laws. Some RationalWiki users dream of burying such camps in a sea of class actions...
Does anybody think that few more verifiable citations would be a good idea? At the moment it looks a bit stronger on opinion and rhetoric than on facts. I'm not saying it's wrong, it's probably correct, but a bit of evidence up front might be a good idea.--Bobbing up 12:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
APA repudiates it in near unanimous vote
According to this article, the American Psychological Association declared Wednesday that mental health professionals should not ever tell gay clients they can become straight through therapy or other treatments.The Goonie 1 (talk) 21:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- Having read and compulsively wikilinked its entirety, I agree. ~ Kupochama 19:36, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Reparative Therapy and Gender Variance
I think some work needs to be done to this, and perhaps even have it spun into its own article. The world authority on gender issues, WPATH, also prescribe in the standard course of treatment for GID that a form of reparative therapy be undertaken by the individual with gender variant issues. Namely, the person should attempt in every way to conform to their assigned gender prior to any intervention of medical procedures. Now, if an individual is using the same heavy-handed "there is no alternative" approach that Reparative therapy widely takes with homosexuals, then this would be an ethics violation, and the APA would dismiss such individuals from their ranks, and the person would most certainly not be sitting in a DSM selection committee. So, I'm going to remove the section added by the anonymous IP for now, with a view that such material should be spun off to another article with a less aggressive tone. (As homosexual reparative therapy is seeking drastic psychological intervention to prevent a nominal human trait, while transgender reparative therapy is seeking measured psychological therapy and support to avoid drastic medical intervention of a rare human syndrome that can only be corrected through such drastic intervention.) --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 16:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
"Many reparative therapy "camps" "
Hur hur hur. "Camp". Geddit?
- But which way does that work in your mind for the transgender people? — Unsigned, by: 126.96.36.199 / talk / contribs
(@Jsonitsac) This article states: “The techniques that reparative therapists use are quite varied, but have one thing in common: they do not work.”
However, the American Psychological Association says that (my emphasis) “[t]here are no studies of adequate scientific rigor to conclude whether or not recent SOCE do or do not work to change a person’s sexual orientation.” (SOCE = sexual orientation change efforts)
- Keep in mind that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and indeed that the burden of proof lies on those who say it works — not on those who say it doesn't. The faith "healing" supporters have all their work still ahead of them. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
We should really aim for gold here
This stuff is important enough — it's well documented; there's been plenty of science refuting it; it's a good example of Christian nuttery; it's an absolutely nuts (no gay pun intended) read; et cetera.
Current article could use a good comb-through and see some expansion, and it'd be silver ready.
Perry: 'I prayed the gay away at my Jesus camps'
With more and more states passing laws against conversion therapy (New York the latest) maybe we could have some kind of list, table or map of where it's banned, in the US and/or internationally. Is there an easy way to do a map? Does anyone have a list? --Annanoon (talk) 13:39, 18 January 2019 (UTC)