Re: Gay conversion therapy

I am writing in response to the July 2, 2018 article, “Fight over conversion therapy: Should California limit services meant to turn gay people straight?” Having been present at two of the hearings for AB2943, I’d like to comment on what the article doesn’t tell the reader:

At these hearings, many formerly gay people testified of the benefit of therapy in dealing with their unwanted same-sex attractions. Prior to the hearing on June 12, 2018, there was a rally attended by several hundred people outside the Capitol. There was more than two hours of testimony by former gays who attest that change is possible and that therapy is helpful and valuable. Their written stories are available at oncegay.com. After the rally, hundreds of people opposing the bill flooded the hearing room with many more filling the hallway. For well over an hour, hundreds of citizens came forward to express their opposition to the bill.

My heart goes out to those who have suffered from inappropriate therapy methods; however, there is legitimate therapy that is consistent with accepted psychological practice. Legislators should talk with reparative therapists and work to determine which practices are hurtful and which are helpful. Then, yes, by all means, they should protect people from those that are hurtful, but they shouldn’t, in the process, ban those that are helpful. The terms “conversion therapy” and “reparative therapy” are too broad and ill-defined in this bill.

Everyone should have the right to choose who they love and how they choose to identify. However, we need to make sure that equal right of choice remains for those who might want to explore the roots of same-sex attraction or seek help for change. All should have the freedom to self-direct and choose the type of counseling in which they would like to participate. Therapy and resources should be accessible for all.

René Martin