The Qualifications to Write for NARTH
The National Association for the Research and Treatment of Homosexuality (NARTH) claims to represent that segment of the mental health community that believes that sexual orientation is mutable. Their website state’s that “NARTH’s primary goal is to make effective psychological therapy available to all homosexual men and women who seek change.”
NARTH claims membership of 1,000 professionals. Although this is only a tiny fraction of the 185,000 combined membership of the American Phychiatric Association and the American Psychological Association, even this number may be grossly inflated. As Wayne Besen points out on his blogsite, NARTH was only able to muster 75 signatures on a petition expressing support for conversion therapy. And, further,
research has revealed that of this paltry showing of names, at least one-third of signatories are NARTH members, staff, Board members or conference presenters.
But perhaps more interesting than how many NARTH professionals exist is the question of what type of professionals does NARTH represent. It would be fair to state that they have selected those whom they believe to be most familiar with issues of sexuality and effective psychological therapy as their writers, speakers and advisors.
NARTH has 28 members of its Scientific Advisory Committee. It is reasonable to assume that these 28 people are the best NARTH has to offer. Without a thorough analysis of each, let’s review just a few to see if we can determine the standards that NARTH requires to be an advisor.
Joseph Berger, M.D.
Last month in an article on the NARTH website Dr. Berger recommended ridiculing and teasing children who are gender-nonconforming as a tool in “re-establishing that necessary boundary”. He also recommended sending children who procrastinate getting ready for school out in the snow in their underwear.
NARTH had to revise the article and issue a disclaimer stating “Narth disagrees with Dr. Berger’s advice as we believe shaming, as distinct from correcting can only create greater harm.”
G. van den Aardweg, Ph.D.
In an article posted a few days ago, Dr. van den Aardweg claims to refute an article in the Journal of Family Psychology that discusses research into the functioning of children of lesbian couples.
Van den Aardweg sees “holes” in the report which include
The first big hole, of course, is the ridiculous assertion that 15-year-olds who do not steal or use violence and do not smoke, drink, or abuse drugs more than others are, therefore, developing normally and healthily.
A second hole is the way risk behavior has been assessed. The youngsters had to tell it themselves.
He has a few other “holes” which primarily consist of a string of questions about the methodology. Clearly he does not have actual specific methodology issues but is listing hypothetical possibilities (e.g. “what of the child who could not accept her relationship to the father”).
Whether or not van den Aardweg’s criticisms are legitimate, the remainder of the article invalidates any point that he might have to make. Without supporting a single smidgen of evidence, NARTH’s specialist makes the following claims:
As it is well-known, activist homosexuals and lesbians devote their lives to their Great Ideal: convincing themselves and others of their normality.
the emotional problems of children reared by gay parents are quite likely to predispose them to later problem behaviors, alcohol or drug abuse not excepted
These lesbian mothers, as anyone knows who has some experience here, are defensive and full of rationalizations for their choices. Apart from that, they are excessively self-centered and, in fact, emotionally immature, so that they often do not really see and understand the needs of their children. The world revolves around their feelings, not around those of their children.
Refusing to refer to the women as couples, he uses the phrase “lesbian mothers-with-lovers”. As a single anecdote to illustrate his conjecture, he offers the story of a girl in Germany in 2004 named Sabine who was unhappy with her lesbian mother.
Finally, van den Aardweg takes an activist position on lesbian parenting. Without fully explaining what he means, van den Aardweg gives this chilling call to action
If this is not psychological violence, child abuse, what is? How many Sabines must be produced before this collective moral insanity will be stopped?
By this article, van den Aardweg shows himself to be illogic, irrational, and biased in his views towards lesbians. Not only does this article do nothing to refute the research, but by including this on their website, NARTH expresses hostility to any same-sex attracted person who may seek change.
(thanks, Boo)
Richard P. Fitzgibbons, M.D.
In July, Anthony Bogaert issued a follow-up to his earlier work that showed a link between the sexual orientation and fraternal birth order. In this study, Bogaert addressed questions as to whether the presence of older siblings could play a part and he did so by looking at those who had step-siblings present, full siblings living elsewhere, and study subjects that were raised apart from their birth mothers. Bogaert found that these were statistically irrelevant and that only the number of older male siblings to have been in the mother’s womb was an indicator.
NARTH issued a response from three of their “professional members” and Dr. Fitzgibbons was one selected.
It was readily apparent that the intent, methodology, and findings of Bogaert’s follow-up study didn’t register with Fitzgibbons. His response was
In my clinical experience a major issue in regard to older brothers is the rejection a younger brother often experiences from older male siblings. This is particularly the case when the younger brother is not good in sports and is called cruel names by the older brother.
Perhaps Fitzgibbons got the second study confused with the first or perhaps he got lost in musings out of his past. In any case, NARTH contributed four paragraphs to Dr. Fitzgibbons resulting in both the organization and the doctor appearing to be disconnected and foolish.
Jeffrey B. Satinover, M.D.
Dr. Satinover has contributed to some less than orthodox ideas. One contribution to “science” is a book described on his website as
Cracking the Bible Code is the first fully-researched and fully-documented account of the codes–a story far more rich, strange and stunning, and with far more to tantalize both skeptics and enthusiasts than has yet anywhere been told.
Yes, Dr. Satinover believes that there are mysterious codes in the Bible that tell us secret things. Of those who think this type of mentality is, well, a bit odd, Satinover said in his scholarly tome:
But of most immediate concern was the newly organized effort by a growing body of intellectually superbly-armed academic critics to destroy the credibility of the codes–and inevitably, therefore, the reputation of the researchers. In fact, an unnamed group or individual had placed a large sum of money at the disposal of this team of mathematicians and statisticians for the sole purpose of proving once and for all not just that the codes were meaningless, but that possibly the entire scheme was concocted by presenting research only on carefully crafted data sets selected over many years from a mountain of concealed failures.
Perhaps it is no surprise that Dr. Satinover sees gay conspiracies as well.
The Rest
I leave it to those interested to review such other luminaries as may exist in the rest of the Advisor list.
John Babatzanis, M.D.
Toby B. Bieber, Ph.D.
Sander J. Breiner, M.D.
Reuven Bulka, Ph.D.
Lawrence F. Burtoft, Ph.D.
A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.
Cora Dobbs-de Fierro, Ph.D.
Abraham Freedman, M.D.
Hillel Goldberg, Ph.D.
Ian Graham, M.D.
Russell Hilliard, Ph.D.
Nathaniel S. Lehrman, M.D.
Felix Loeb, M.D.
Loretta Loeb, M.D.
Uriel Meshoulam, Ph.D.
Paul Popper, Ph.D.
James Randall, M.D.
Philip Scott Richards, Ph.D.
Marcosa Santiago, M.D.
Gerald Schoenewolf, Ph.D.
Natalie Shainess, M.D.
E. Mark Stern, Ed.D., ABPP
Johanna K. Tabin, Ph.D.
C. Downing Tait, M.D.
I am certain that not all of those in the mental heath field who believe orientation to be mutable are either loons, senile, or raging homophobes. I am convinced that some are scholarly folk who, for some reason or other, believe that through therapy one can – and maybe even should – change ones sexual orientation.
But with advisors like those above and with opinions such as those stated on the NARTH website, it is little wonder that this organization is considered to be delusional and harmful.
UPDATE – original text refered to a gay son of Dr. Satinover. This reference was in error.
About Jeffrey Satinover: Wow, I am surprised to learn that his son is gay. I remember when I first heard about Satinover (after reading Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth) I was quite impressed by his credentials. This guy has done graduate-level work in medicine, psychiatry, physics, and law, and he’s not too modest about it either (check out his website sometime). So I couldn’t understand why such a bright guy would get involved in the ex-gay movement. I guess he, like the late Charles Socarides, must have a big chip on his shoulder because his son is gay.
where’s the evidence that satinover’s son is gay? are you sure your not getting him mixed up with socarides?
perhaps its just wishful thinking on your part =)
Dr. Sander Breiner, a NARTH Scientific Advisory Committee member, wrote on the death of Charles Socarides, the author of the book, Homosexuality: A Freedom Too Far, that: “He was adamant about the term homophobia; that it should be eliminated from any discussion by the homosexual community; in fact, he wanted to eliminate the word completely from the vocabulary.”
Yep… sure.
Quote by Sander J. Breiner, M.D. in Adolescent Homosexuality:
The reference to “known connection between homosexuality and paranoia” is apparently in reference to early psychoanalysis research. From Talk: “Homosexuality and Psychoanalysis”:
Breiner has also claimed that teaching tolerance can cause brain damage in children:
http://www.narth.com/docs/curricula.html
“According to Breiner, this isn’t simply a social or psychological threat to children but is a neurological problem as well. Actual brain changes take place. He notes that there is a strong connection between hormonal development and neurotransmitters that send messages for hormonal development. “If the wrong message gets sent, as is likely to occur when external messages are coming from teachers, then the child may experience a delay in proper sexual development.”"
“where’s the evidence that satinover’s son is gay? are you sure your not getting him mixed up with socarides?”
OH DARNIT
that’s exactly what I did.
It’s really amazing the dreck you can find still kicking around the NARTH website. Here’s a particular gem from Gerald Schoenewolf, Ph.D.:
http://www.narth.com/docs/schoenewolf2.html
“Subsequent to Marx, various human rights groups began using his ideology to rationalize their movements, primarily in America. First came the Civil Rights Movement, which began in the 1850s and was one of the causes of the Civil War. In this case, European-Americans (Caucasians) became the oppressors and African-Americans became the oppressed; European-Americans were demonized, and African-Americans were idealized; European-Americans who had practiced slavery or segregation were viewed as all-bad and African-Americans were seen as all-good.
African-Americans were urged by various leaders to unify and rebel against European-Americans and to demand special privileges as compensation for their suffering at the hands of the latter. Civil rights leaders, like Marx and Engels before them, believed that their way, and only their way, was the valid way to look at the issue. ”
I think one of NARTH’s advisory board members is actually saying freedom is a “special privilege.” Wow… just… wow.
“There is no attempt by civil rights leaders to see both sides of the conflict, to understand the complex sources of the problem, to view people on both sides as having both good and bad in them. There is no attempt to negotiate a win-win situation that would benefit all society; instead a win-lose scenario is forced on all of society, whether they like it or not. All whites are guilty of what was done to blacks, particularly all white males, and all must pay.”
I’d be interested in knowing exactly what he thinks whites have “lost” by the Civil Rights Movement.
“With all due respect, there is another way, or other ways, to look at the race issue in America. It could be pointed out, for example, that Africa at the time of slavery was still primarily a jungle, as yet uncivilized or industrialized. Life there was savage, as savage as the jungle for most people, and that it was the Africans themselves who first enslaved their own people. They sold their own people to other countries, and those brought to Europe, South America, America, and other countries, were in many ways better off than they had been in Africa. But if one even begins to say these things one is quickly shouted down as though one were a complete madman.”
The 50% or so who survived the Middle Passage should have been grateful, dagnabbit! Anything’s better than having to live in a stinky jungle!
“The irony is that the Civil Rights Movement has been vehement about pointing out the hysterical lynchings that took place in the old South, but completely blind to its own hysterical tactics.”
Darn NAACP! Always running around lynching people!
“At present, the Gay Rights Movement has taken over nearly all professional organizations not only in America but also in the United Nations and throughout the world.”
Since there is a known connection between homophobia and paranoia we can see some elements of this in some of the groups hostility to those who advocate for gay rights. This can be dangerous for society and counterproductive in any scientific group of discourse.
Oooh, even more. It turns out that Schoenewolf has also, if not directly advocated bullying gender nonconforming kids, at least defended it:
http://www.narth.com/docs/removal.html
“They assert that ‘attempting to change children’s gender identity for this purpose is as ethically repellent as bleaching black children’s skin….’ This, of course, is an outrageous analogy on two counts. It implies that social ostracism toward boys who want to act like girls and girls who want to act like boys, is destructive, and fails to consider that there is a purpose to assigning gender roles and gender identity and a reason why most societies all over the world have historically done it–the preservation of the species. It also makes an unfair comparison; asking a boy to accept his gender identity is not the same as asking a black person to bleach his skin.”
Perhaps someone should email him and ask him to describe instances where social ostracism of children is constructive.
Quoting Paul Cameron studies?–Autumn–Children Need Both A Mother And A FatherDr. A. Dean Byrd recently presented a paper on gender complementarity at a family conference in Geneva, Switzerland.
From Mr. Ahenakew and Dr. Bulka:
Should These Conditions Be Normalized? By Linda Ames NicolosiExcerpt:
(emphasis added)
When they say “1000 professionals,” do they specify professional WHAT? I seem to recall that a lot of their members are clergy, not psychologists or doctors.
INTERVIEW: E. MARK STERN, Ed.D.Mark Stern is a Diplomate in Clinical Psychology, Professor Emeritus of the Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Iona College (New York), and a member of NARTH’s Scientific Advisory Committee… Excerpt:
(The interviewer appears to be Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D.)
“Through generativity, a man moves beyond the mental deformation of self-absorption, in which he is his own infant and pet.”
Does this mean Mark Stern thinks Roman Catholic priests are mentally deformed?
Oh, where to start. (Where to end, more the problem.)
Try and find ANYONE on that list who isn’t either at least one of (sometimes all of!):
a religious crankan anti-gay bigotan anti-gay activista conspiracy nuttera therapist who qualified pre, say, 1965
Some are completely toxic. So toxic one wonders why NARTH hasn’t booted them them long ago? (rhetoric question, people).
Yahoo Nathaniel S. Lehrman and you soon find an decrepit holocaust revisionist — not a common hobby among Jews — who along with Scott Lively and Abiding Truth (sic) Ministries is a prolific, albeit plainly unhinged, publisher of the filthy lie that “the Nazi Party was lead by homosexuals” etc. That’s when he not making guest appearances at Paul Cameron’s FRI.
Fitzgibbon co-authored the hideously inaccurate “Homosexuality and Hope”.
van den Aardweg: another fossil, albeit now an Opus dei loon, from the Netherlands.
Mark Stern, presenting himself one way in the interview above (and yes Autumn, that was with Nicolosi) — doesn’t take much to find that he in fact holds these opinions.
[And who else is a member of catholic therapists.org?: Nicolosi and Fitzgibbons; along with his co-author Rudegeair.]
Goldberg, a real charmer who, along with Exodus et al, is working alongside Richard Cohen with the outer-body experience inducing team at P.A.T.H.. Yes the same Richard Cohen. The same Cohen that Alan Chambers claims to have commanded Exodus to avoid Cohen from 2000/01… and yet we in fact find Chambers taking Exodus into coalition with Cohen in 2003.
Harris, Pruden, Byrd et al — conservative LDS, with “conservative” turned up to 11 (and the volume knob pulled off to prevent anyone turning it back down.)
Go, take the challenge!!! Run through the entire list of NARTH officers and “scientific” advisors and attempt to find a single individual who is not, each in their own special way, a professional or personal flake.
Rather than attempt to list those who meet the specs listed above… we’d have a much shorter list if we listed those who do not…
Or, as Doug Haldeman so accurately described in 1995:
Hey! Release my post! Curses, foiled by the placement of too many links in the post…
And /snort — no, Satinover does not have a gay son. Last we heard he only claimed to have three children, all girls, the oldest of which is 19. You were most definately thinking of Socarides.
Ahhh, but so hard to tell them apart… and not just the spelling of the names…
“But isn’t one of them deceased?”
“Yes. And your point is????”
Somebody should add this gold mine of information into wikipedia’s NARTH article. This is all a valid and accurate description of the organization.
Gerald Schonewolf of NARTH said:
“It implies that social ostracism toward boys who want to act like girls and girls who want to act like boys, is destructive, and fails to consider that there is a purpose to assigning gender roles and gender identity and a reason why most societies all over the world have historically done it–the preservation of the species.”
I took strong exception to this and wrote NARTH to say so. Here is how “Sojouneer” (the anonymous webmaster over at NARTH) defended Schonewolf’s comments:
“Michael, Regarding your accusation that Gerald Schonewolf and Narth are encouraging shaming of GID children. Schonewolf is not recommending nor encouraging shaming. He is just stating that OSTRACISM (my emphasis) of GID kids does occur in the social situations. He is saying the problem is not society’s reaction to GID kids. The problem is boys dressing as girls and girls dressing as boys. In other words, what is happening here is classic social pressure to conform. Indeed social pressure can be painful but it is not all bad. This pressure is not in and of itself destructive. However I would admit sometimes it can get out of hand and become destructive.”
When NARTH removed Dr. Berger’s awful suggestions that gender variant kids whould be ridiculed and teased, they “apologized” and explained that they posted his article because they “didn’t know what the guidelines were” for dealing with such kids.
OK. Let’s ask NARTH for specific guidelines for when shaming, ridiculing, teasing or ostracizing kids “get out of hand and become destructive”. How do they decide how much is JUST RIGHT to fix a gender variant kid?
“In other words, what is happening here is classic social pressure to conform. Indeed social pressure can be painful but it is not all bad. This pressure is not in and of itself destructive.”
Except of course he clearly said “ostracism” and not “pressure.” Perhaps she could explain exactly how refusing to wear a dress harms a girl’s psychological development. And then come up with some way to explain Schonewolf’s defense of slavery. Or perhaps being enslaved was necessary for African-Americans proper psychological development?
I think NARTH’s justification of Schonewolf’s pro-slavery comments could read like:
“Enslavement of other people does occur in the social situations. The problem is not society’s reaction to Africans living freely. The problem is Africans living in undeveloped settings, like jungles. In other words, what is happening here is classic social pressure to conform. Indeed slavery can be painful but it is not all bad. This practice is not in and of itself destructive. However I would admit sometimes it can get out of hand and become destructive.”
Timothy, that is scarily close to some of the pro-slavery arguments that people actually made…. Just drop the “what is happening here is classic social pressure to conform” and you’re there.
So wouldn’t the logical extention of Natalie Shainess’ comments be that heterosexuality is distrust of one’s own sex?–Autumn–From The New BisexualsExcerpt:
From the outside looking in, it appears Philip Scott Richards, Ph.D. is attempting to hide his affiliation with NARTH. He writes, and is elsewhere professionally known as P. Scott Richards, Ph.D. (There is a signature of “Scott Richards” on the Petition To The President And Governance Of The American Psychological Association, August 2006 — same Dr. Richards?) I can see why he might be hiding his NARTH affiliation — he’s won awards for his research regarding therapy and religion from the APA, and edited the Handbook of Psychotherapy and Religious Diversity with Allen E. Bergin.His writings include Some Historical, Contemporary, and Personal Perspectives. Dr. Richards is listed on the LDS Resources on Same Gender Attraction.
Excerpt: