How it Is
During the discussion around Sexual Orientation Change Therapy one of the questions that emerged was:
"Is it in our mandate as a professional organization to make recommendations to the public?"
"Is it in our mandate as a professional organization to make recommendations to the public?"
This of course is a practice commonly seen among other professional organizations such as the APA and the AMA.
It appears these organizations pore over the science and come up with recommendations on trending issues which they then release to the press. This of course alerts the public on a topic of import and also conveys to the public information about the role of the profession in their lives.
Those who oppose it suggests that the purview of CAMFT is only to look out for the interests of MFT's - not to make public statements.
Those who promote it say that by making public statements CAMFT is acting within its purview to promote the profession.
In the case of our sexual change therapy policies - the ideas of the profession went on to become law in both California and New Jersey.
Questions
- What do you think?
- How would it be helpful for you if CAMFT were to take a stand on important mental health topics in the press?
- How would it hinder your professional life?
- Some say that psychologists and doctors make science whereas we simply execute. What impact do you suppose it would have on our image as a profession if we did something like them?
Greg, thank you for creating this forum. I felt CAMFT was nothing short of a national disgrace when it came to SOCE (sexual orientation change efforts). All other mental health organizations were in favor of a law banning this non-therapy which is proven to be extremely harmful to our LGBTQ youth, even leading to increased suicide rates.
ReplyDeleteCAMFT was the only mental health organization not in favor of this law! And in the end, all we did was remove our objection and take a neutral stance. The net result is we look like a bunch of very homophobic, fundamentalist people to the general public - not a good perception. This is totally unacceptable to me. Rather than being a leader in LGBTQ rights (which are human rights) our organization took a stance against protecting kids.
Of course, it turned out we had one of these fundamentalist people practicing harmful non-therapy on these kids on our board. When that came out I understand the board member stepped down.
CAMFT needs a democratic way to elect board members so that the membership is engaged in the process of choosing elected members and has the opportunity to meet those that live in their area. I believe we should elect board members by region, just as we do senators.
The current method is a good-ole-boy network where board members only allow certain people to pass through the nominating committee (which typically has former board members on it). The net result is we usually have one person to vote for in each category and it's someone we've never met. That is not a vote - it's a confirmation.
If we have real elections then conservative areas can elect conservative candidates, and liberal areas can elect those, and it will bring more debate and critical thinking to the board. Certainly it will be livelier and messier, but democracy always is.
In the end, the last thing we want is to ever again disgrace ourselves with such a shameful position as how CAMFT handled SOCE. It is still completely repugnant to me and sticks in my craw.
CAMFT should be a leader in taking a pro marriage equality stance, too. Again I say we are talking about human rights and LGBTQ relationships and families being treated unequally and "less than". This is unacceptable. As LMFTs we are taught to advocate for our clients and for social justice. We should be a leader in this fight for equal treatment under the law of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters in every venue.
Democratically electing a board who will lead us in this charge and is willing to take a stand for equality is an important step we can take in the right direction.
Thanks for an excellent topic, Greg.
Laura Strom, LMFT
Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist MFC 49174
Santa Rosa, CA
Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with Laura. What happened with how the CAMFT board related to SOCE was not jut personally painful, it was also professionally embarrassing and harmful to our population. In this instance the general membership also did not have access to the CAMFT media resources. Although I do remember reading "The Therapist" with the articles in it that patholigized LGBTIQQ and it may be that some articles with opposite opinions were also allowed in it. Does anyone remember what was in that magazine at the time?
Lee Lipp, Ph.D., MFT
At the minimum we need to having discussions in the therapist and throughout the state (our conferences and symposiums) about these types of topics and make current information and resources available to the membership.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who experienced this type of therapy as a teenager - I found it extremely harmful to myself emotionally, mentally and spiritually. I spent more than a decade dealing with the aftermath of those therapy sessions. And another decade healing from them.
Now in my personal life I struggle with therapists that do not understand so many different aspects of the LGBTIQQ. I feel CAMFT should work to bring the latest information and resources to CAMFT members. To help them grow and to learn. Even offering speakers at a discounted rate to the chapters for speaking engagements.
One thing I think we often forget we are Marriage and FAMILY therapists. We need to focus on all parts of FAMILY - even if the definition is different from what we previously had in our own minds. If a group of people define themselves as a family - then we should help them.