History of conversion therapy
[1] During the earliest parts of psychoanalytic history, analysts granted that homosexuality was non-pathological in certain cases, and the ethical question of whether it ought to be changed was discussed.
[3] Krafft-Ebing rejected castration as a cure for homosexuality, and opposed the internment of gay people in asylums except in cases involving sex crimes.
He believed that homosexuality could either be inborn or acquired, and that it could very rarely be treated through preventing masturbation and curing the neuroses "arising out of the unhygienic conditions of sexual life," but that hypnosis was the "only means of salvation" in most cases.
"[4] Later editions of Psychopathia Sexualis included an increased number of autobiographies by gay people who made it clear that they did not wish to change their sexual orientation.
[8] Steinach said that his research had "thrown a strong light on the organic determinants of homo-eroticism", but his procedure was doomed to failure because the immune system rejects transplanted glands, and it was eventually discredited as ineffective and often harmful.
[10] In his 1920 paper "The Psychogenesis of a Case of Homosexuality in a Woman", Freud described a young lesbian who had entered therapy because her parents wanted the condition changed.
Patients often only wanted to become heterosexual to avoid social disapproval, which Freud considered a superficial and insufficient motive for change.
Some, he said, might have no real desire to become heterosexual, seeking treatment only to convince themselves that they had done everything possible to change, leaving them free to return to homosexuality after the failure they expected.
Klein claimed that entry into the Oedipus Complex is based on mastery of primitive anxiety from the oral and anal stages.
In her view, it was important to pay attention to the interaction of passive and active homosexual fantasies and strivings, the original interplay of which, she believed, prevented adequate identification with the father.
[21][22][23] In May 2020, Albania became the third European country (after Malta (2016) and Germany (2020)) to ban conversion therapy or any pseudo-therapeutic attempts to change a person's sexual orientation or gender identity.
On 8 March (International Women's Day) 2021, the UK parliament held a debate on conversion therapy where Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Equalities Kemi Badenoch gave no timeline for legislation, did not use the word ban, suggested there may be religious exemptions and did not mention adult conversion therapy.
[37] Psychoanalysis started to receive recognition in the United States in 1909, when Sigmund Freud delivered a series of lectures at Clark University in Massachusetts at the invitation of G. Stanley Hall.
Brill criticised physical treatments for homosexuality such as bladder washing, rectal massage, and castration, along with hypnosis, but referred approvingly to Freud and Sadger's use of psychoanalysis, calling its results "very gratifying".
[2][40] Wilhelm Stekel, an Austrian, published his views on treatment of homosexuality, which he considered a disease, in the American Psychoanalytic Review in 1930.
Stekel believed that "success was fairly certain" in changing homosexuality through psychoanalysis provided that it was performed correctly and the patient wanted to be treated.
Deutsch reported her analysis of a lesbian, who did not become heterosexual as a result of treatment, but who managed to achieve a "positive libidinal relationship" with another woman.
Kinsey's work, and its reception, led Bergler to develop his own theories for treatment, which were essentially to "blame the victim", in the evaluation of Jennifer Terry, associate professor of Woman's Studies.
[44] During the three decades between Freud's death in 1939 and the Stonewall riots in 1969, conversion therapy received approval from most of the psychiatric establishment in the United States.
Psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, a member of the APA's Committee on Nomenclature, played an important role in the events that led to this decision.
Critics argued that it was a result of pressure from gay activists, and demanded a referendum among voting members of the Association.
The article cited Green and Money as a source of the "growing evidence that childhood cross-gender manifestations are indicative of later adult sexual abnormalities; e.g., transvestism, transsexualism, or some forms of homosexuality.
"[50] It noted that many transgender women and gay men reported their "cross-gender behaviors began in early childhood"[51] and the research showed it was difficult or impossible to shift in adults; the authors felt the best way to prevent "future sexual deviance", or at least make it unlikely as possible, was to correct gender noncomforming behavior at a young age.
The method the paper detailed was a token based reinforcement system administered by the parents which rewarded gender conformity and punished deviancy.
The child with "cross-gender identification" who was featured in the paper and appeared in many later works published by Rekers as proof of successful treatment committed suicide at 38.
[67] Spitzer recanted his study in 2012,[68] and apologized to the gay community for making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy,[69] calling it his only professional regret.
[70] The American Psychoanalytic Association spoke against NARTH in 2004, stating "that organization does not adhere to our policy of nondiscrimination and [...] their activities are demeaning to our members who are gay and lesbian".
[71] The same year, a survey of members of the American Psychological Association rated reparative therapy as "certainly discredited", though the authors warn that the results should be interpreted carefully as an initial step, not as a final deliberation.
