Wallbuilder's Rick Green defends comments about pediatrics associations

Early last week, I pointed out that David Barton and Rick Green identified the American College of Pediatricians as “the leading pediatric association in America.” In fact, ACP is a group of around 200 members which, in 2003, split off from the real leading group, the American Academy of Pediatrics. The AAP commented briefly later in the week.
I also mentioned that a reader, Bernie, wrote to Wallbuilders to ask why Barton and Green identified the ACP as the leading group. Rick Green responded and defended their characterization of ACP as the leading pediatric association. Reader and commenter Bernie, included this part of the conversation and asked why they described ACP in the way they did.

David: “The American College of Pediatricians is cautioning educators about what they do with same-sex attraction or symptoms of gender identity or gender confusion in schools.”
Rick: “You’re kidding, this is the Pediatric Association?”
Later, David: “Well that’s a remarkable letter coming from the leading pediatric association in America.”

Bernie pointed out that the ACP is a tiny group compared the AAP. Mr. Green replied with this explanation.

I am not aware of anything from our broadcast that was inaccurate. Nothing in the transcript you sent is wrong or false. We may disagree on what constitutes “leading,” but neither David or I said the ACP was the largest. As often happens, the larger associations become either stagnant or politically correct and lose the leadership qualities that make an organization “leading” in their profession. Meanwhile, a perhaps smaller, but more professional and cutting edge organization begins to lead by stating facts and putting forth truthful research the older organization is afraid to release due to political correctness.

Green said they may revisit the issue in a future broadcast.
None of what Green has to say about the ACP and the AAP is relevant to what it means to lead a profession. The ACP is hardly more cutting edge than the AAP but that even misses the point. A leading group in a profession speaks for the profession to the public and government. The leading group in a profession sets standards for training new members of the profession. The leading group in a profession provides continuing medical education for practicing members of the profession. The ACP does none of that.
While I have not checked this out, I would be willing to bet that no medical school uses any of the standards or materials from the ACP. I strongly suspect that no training programs seek approval or recognition from the ACP. The ACP is not a player in the profession. 
Green’s narrative makes no sense when one considers the way David Barton led into the segment. Here is the lead:

Barton: What’s interesting is, you know medical groups do not tend to be very conservative. Any professional medical group, the American Psychiatric Association, the association of psychologists, even the American Medical Association is a particularly friendly conservative group, they’re not a pro-life group and what’s really interesting is the American College of Pediatricians; now think about that, is that a conservative group?
Green: You’d think they would be, looking out for the kids, right?
Barton: But yeah, don’t spank your kid, don’t touch your kid, you know, and think of the way pediatric stuff has gone, and you don’t want to help shape these kids, let ‘em be what they want to be. And so, all that anti-parental influence, and it’s remarkable that you have the American College of Pediatricians, who has just, they sent a letter to all 14,800 school superintendents in the United States and it’s a letter warning about what’s happening in the schools and the American College of Pediatricians is cautioning educators about what they do with same-sex attraction or symptoms of gender identity confusion in schools.

Barton leads his listeners to think that he is about to tell them some news about physicians who are not conservative, not pro-life, say “don’t spank your kid,” and are “anti-parental influence.” He names the ACP as that group, asking:

…what’s really interesting is the American College of Pediatricians; now think about that, is that a conservative group?

Yes, actually, it is a very conservative group.
The ACP is pro-life, advocates spanking as an option and is pro-parents’ rights. Go check out their policy pages (parenting issues, abortion, and sexuality) and it is clear that the ACP is a conservative, but not leading, group.

Do broken parental attachments cause homosexuality? An interview with Diana Fosha

Earlier this week, NPR produced a report briefly telling the stories of Rich Wyler and Peterson Toscano. Wyler is the co-founder of People Can Change and Journey into Manhood, both of which seek change of sexual orientation via a variety of highly provocative techniques. Toscano sought change for 17 years and then accepted that he was not changing despite a variety of methods.
In that report, Wyler and Toscano both referred to the belief that attachment disruptions with the same-sex parent contribute to homosexual attractions (Toscano now believes the theory to be completely false). Regular readers of this blog know some about the source of those ideas.
One of the more recent theorists and therapists who traffics in the reparative therapy is Joseph Nicolosi, co-founder of the National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.
Nicolosi often refers to mainstream theorists and therapists in his talks about reparative therapy. Specifically, of late, he asserts that he has incorporated the research and insights of therapists who focus on assisting clients with disruptions in important attachments. This is not unexpected given that reparative drive theory proposes that attachment disruptions help create homosexual strivings. One such therapist referred to often in Nicolosi’s recent book, Shame and Attachment Loss: The practical work of reparative therapy, is Diana Fosha. Fosha is an accomplished psychotherapist who is widely credited as a leader in experiential therapy. She is author of the book The Transforming Power of Affect and Director of the Accelerated Experiential-Dynamic Psychotherapy Institute.
Nicolosi describes Fosha’s work with the label, Affect-Focused Therapy. In fact, if you search for Affect-Focused Therapy and Diana Fosha in Google, Nicolosi’s references to her are the first few hits. Generally, Nicolosi credits Fosha and other like-minded therapists for making reparative therapy more effective.
Over the years, I have appreciated the contributions of attachment theorists to various approaches to therapy and so Nicolosi’s reference to Fosha made me curious. I decided to contact her to find out her views on the idea that attachment disruptions play a part in orienting sexual attractions toward the same or opposite sex. I also asked her if there was new research in her area of practice that might shed light on the prospects for sexual orientation change. Here is what she had to say.
Throckmorton: Dr. Fosha, are you aware of any evidence that past attachment problems with same-sex parents can lead to homosexual attraction?
FOSHA: No. If you really think of it, half of people who have attachment problems have attachment problems with the same-sex parent. There are no studies that I am aware of that in any way link attachment problems of any kind with gender identity, sexual identity and issues of attraction. None. Attachment problems predict interpersonal problems and affect regulation patterns, and are a risk factor for compromised resilience in the face of trauma across all sexual orientations
Throckmorton: Do you know of any evidence that affect focused therapy (AFT) can change gays to straight or in some way alter a person’s sexual orientation?
FOSHA: None
Throckmorton: So then, you know of no evidence that sexual orientation can be changed from gay to straight by addressing and ameliorating attachment issues with parents or others?
FOSHA: No, none. When attachment disruptions are addressed successfully, people are generally happier and may develop stronger adult relationships, greater resilience and greater well-being, but their essential sexual orientation stays the same, whether they are straight or gay.
Throckmorton: Do you or your organization offer any trainings or educational experiences using AFT to achieve sexual reorientation?
FOSHA: No.
Throckmorton: Do you or your organization have any position on using AFT to try to achieve sexual reorientation? Are you neutral about it; favor it or oppose it?
FOSHA: I have not read Nicolosi’s work, so I would not presume to be definitive, but based on what I know from the popular media about such methods (whether this applies to his or not, I do not know) leads me to strongly oppose such efforts– and view them as misguided at best, and dangerous at worst.
While Dr. Fosha is candidly unaware of the specifics of reparative therapy, it is informative that she does not see any relationship between attachment problems and sexual orientation. If such problems were frequently associated with sexual orientation changes, I would think she would see evidence of a relationship in her work. Her experience mirrors my own – attachment problems are so pervasive among same, other and both-sex attracted people that one cannot point to these disruptions as the general driving factor behind sexual orientation.

NPR fails to take a Journey into Manhood in ex-gay segment

National Public Radio aired interviewsof Journey into Manhood’s Rich Wyler and ex-ex-gay Peterson Toscano this morning on the subject of sexual orientation change.
The segment omitted some key details of Rich Wyler’s involvement in gay change therapy. I posted my quick thoughts on the subject over at Religion Dispatches.
Most troubling to me about the portrayal of what Rich advocates is the omission of the touch therapy and highly provocative, ball bat wielding elements of JiM. The NPR reporter Alix Spiegel made Rich’s work sound like calm cognitive therapy. Hardly.
Here is a Nightline segment about JiM:

As I pointed out at RD, JiM is fringe even in ex-gay circles.

Uganda appoints GLB advocacy group to public health committee

In a surprising move, the government of Uganda appointed an organization aligned with GLB interests there to an important public health committee.

In a surprising, unprecedented action, the Uganda government has appointed LGBTI lobby group, Uhspa Uganda, to a committee to mainstream homosexual’s rights in Uganda’s Public Health Policies.
The Uganda Health and Science Press Association is a registered LGBTI network of groups.
The Health, Human Rights and Gender Committee is overseen by the Ministry of Health in Kampala. It brings together high profile activists, policy makers and donors to develop a Human Rights-based approach to health programming in Uganda.
A letter signed by Uganda’s Director General for Health Services, Mr Nathan Kenya-Mugisha, on behalf of the Ministry of Health, described Uhspa Uganda as a “key stakeholder” in mainstreaming minorities rights in health programming in Uganda.

All along opponents of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill have contended that the bill would drive gays away from any health or prevention services. This press release quotes Dr. Thomas Muyunga who confirms the effect of the AHB.

There are attempts by the Ministry of Health to support health delivery to LGBTI persons through the Most At Risk Populations network clinic at the national referral Hospital in Kampala. However, the clinic is poorly funded, and since the introduction of the Anti Homosexuality Bill 2009 in Ugandan Parliament, clients visiting the clinic have dropped for fear of being arrested.
According to Dr Thomas Muyunga, an activist and a medical doctor, some of the clinic’s clients, think the clauses of the Bahati Bill have already become law, even though the bill expired with the Eighth Parliament of Uganda earlier this year.

With reports that the bill may soon return, I suspect it will take time for this public health committee to engage frightened people to come in.

CNN Belief Blog examines congruence paradigm amid Bachmann revelations

On today’s CNN Belief Blog, Dan Gilgoff examines some changes in the evangelical world regarding reparative therapy in light of stories about Bachmann and Associates. Gilgoff contrasts the converstion or change paradigm with what I have called the congruence paradigm.

While many evangelicals once viewed conversion therapy as key way to deal with homosexuality, many of the religious movement’s leaders and organizations have cooled to the practice in recent years, as more science suggests that homosexuality may be innate and as new therapeutic approaches have emerged.
“Evangelicals, in quiet ways, are shifting to this position to where there is just not a lot of support for the change paradigm,” said Warren Throckmorton, an influential voice in the world of Christian counseling, referring to so-called change therapy.

Later in the piece, Exodus’ Alan Chambers weighs in, Al Mohler is referenced as is Marcus Yoars at Charisma and Jonathan Merritt at Christian Science Monitor. I like that the change paradigm is contrasted with the congruence paradigm.
Go give it a read and comment there and here…