A UK psychotherapist may lose her license if a disciplinary hearing finds she attempted to cure a patient of homosexuality.
It is almost a year since Patrick Strudwick published an article in The Independent (London) detailing his experience of ex-gay reparative therapy in the UK. As part of his investigation, the journalist secretly taped sessions with Christian therapist Lesley Pilkington, whom he met through a NARTH conference.
In Strudwick’s recordings, Mrs Pilkington, 60, told him that homosexuality was “a mental illness, an addiction [and] an antireligious phenomenon.” She agreed to provide SOCE — Sexual Orientation Change Efforts — after he said he was a Christian and wanted to leave the “homosexual lifestyle.”
According to the Sunday Telegraph (London), a letter sent to the therapist by the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) accused her of “praying to God to heal [Strudwick] of his homosexuality … [of] having an agenda that homosexuality is wrong and that gay people can change and that [she] allegedly attempted to inflict these views on him.”
Pilkington denied she had forced Strudwick into therapy, saying she only offers the treatment to people who choose it because they are “depressed and unhappy” with their sexual orientation.
This article really points out the bogusiousness of the ex-gay position. The man’s problem is his self hatred. If he wants to leave “the homosexual lifestyle”, it is very simple, and does not require a therapist.
1) stop have gay sex.
2) Cut off all your gay friends and acquaintances.
3) don’t go to any more gay venues.
4) no gay movies or books.
Of course, he iwll still be left with his being gay and with his self hatred, but he iwll have left the gay lifestyle entirely.
Ben, that’s a great response. I never heard anyone put it like that. It really is easy to leave the gay lifestyle if you think about it. LOL. I am writing for my final project in my masters degree in psychology a paper that argues for why the American Psychological Association and other licensing bodies here in the U.S. need to permanently ban the practice and why there should be legal implications for those therapists who refuse to conform. In short, they should liable to malpractice. I applaud the BACP for pursuing this with such eagerness and attentiveness.
thank you.
I’m a great believer is cutting through the bullscheiss that covers so many of the pronoucements of the professionally-and-religiously anti-gay.
well done Patrick – you very successfully deceived a therapist of impeccable standing- you lied your way into her confidence – and you tossed your own integrity out the door in a malicious effort to destroy a career. Patrick – you belong to a monority group- get used to it.
I am confused by this. He went to a Christian counselor and asked for a specific service, which she agreed to offer him. It would be one thing if he went to her expressing distress and conflict over his sexuality and she forced her particular viewpoints on him. But that’s not what happened. He said that this is a service he wanted and she was willing to provide it. Exactly where do we draw the line, here?
Even though we may not agree that certain treatments are necessary or even valid, don’t individuals have a right to live their lives as they see fit? If someone wants to figure out how to stop having gay sex and they want a counselor to help them, exactly what amount of harm does that do? The individual has already made up his mind so what, exactly, should the counselor have done?
Jay, I get the impression the type of counselling Strudwick encountered went beyond helping him “figure out how to stop having gay sex” and was more gay-to-straight therapy. The issue then would not be whether he consented or was forced into it, but whether a professional therapist was right to tell him his sexual orientation could be changed through therapy.
Also, read the original article. The therapist suggests a family history of Freemasonry might underlie his orientation and apparently insists he was sexually abused, though he doesn’t remember it. If Strudwick reported this accurately (and apparently it’s all recorded), this isn’t just disgraceful behaviour for a therapist, but abusive.
@Dave Rattigan
This is my understanding as well. I’m also pretty sure that she would still be able to practice even if removed from association with the BCAP. However, as with standards based organizations in the US, they can’t be forced to put their stamp of approval on someone who is working that far outside safe and effective practice (or in this case, basically lying to the client).
Mental health practitioners who are also Christian are not supposed to be given special dispensation to work outside accepted standards. Rather, they my have a better understanding of the somewhat unique issues concerning people of faith and how their beliefs might affect the therapeutic process.
@College Jay
I think we have to be careful about assuming that just because a patient asks for a specific treatment, a therapist—or anyone in the health and wellness industry—is right or ethical to provide it. An ethical doctor would not amputate perfectly healthy limbs, for instance, just because a patient suffers from body dismorphia.
Strudwick may have requested a particular treatment. But such a request does not mean that Pilkington was in any way justified in fulfilling that request.
I am reminded of the several people I know who, while otherwise being fairly reasonable and learned, think that those suffering from schizophrenia are likely possessed by demons. This comes directly from their religious beliefs and yet, I can’t imagine that we should allow accredited Christian mental health practitioners to facilitate exorcisms rather than standard anti-psychotic medications and therapy. Freedom of religion cannot be an excuse for malpractice and there are any number of scenarios that make that clear.
Mrs Pilkington could have been honest in stating that homosexuality is not a disease and therefore has no “cure.” She could then have probed further into why the client felt the need to change, followed by (if deemed appropriate) advice on both the pitfalls and possibilities of working to live more closely aligned with his own beliefs. Mrs Pilkington’s own religious beliefs (or disbelief) should not enter into the discussion.
Religious faith cannot be some sort of pass to circumvent otherwise accepted safe and effective standards of care.
@College Jay, simplistically, buying therapeutic or medical services is not the same thing as buying a shirt you like or a meal you want. That is why professional standards exist.
Strudwick presented as feeling distress and conflict. In this case it was claimed to be over his sexuality, but the particular issue is not relevant as such. He could have said that about any one of a whole range of issues.
It is those feelings of distress and conflict that should have been explored — if for no other reason than because a therapist first needs to understand their client, their motivations, their perceptions etc before they can offer an informed opinion and professional help.
As reported, Pilkington didn’t do that. She instead began to immediately project professionally baseless opinion onto the client.
As reported, Pilkington also made statements (some of them demonstrably ludicrous) that can be calculated to actually increase those feeling distress and conflict. Rather than explore the life of her client, and offer reflection back to the client based on sound professional knowledge, Pilkington has instead used that distress and conflict to try and direct her client toward her desired outcomes. She perpetuated falsehoods about homosexuality; the very same falsehoods that can be cause distress and conflict in the first place.
‘Forced’ is possibly a confusing word to use here — such things have certainly been physically imposed on gay men in the past with Court sentencing and compulsory institutionalisation — but the word ‘manipulate’ is probably more accurate today. In a clinical setting she has attempted to exacerbate the very issues her client had presented with. This amplification of negative feelings about homosexuality is, as best as I can tell, a core feature of the entire ex-gay industry; whether it’s delivered by anti-gay therapists like Pilkington, or Exodus ministries.
Regardless of what her particular personal values are, it is that manipulative (and therefore exploitative) environment inside her clinic that the professional standards seek to prevent. The standards recognise that clients can be in a very vulnerable state of mind and it may be very easy to impose the therapist’s attitudes onto the client.
Pilkington is actually free to behave in such a way, but simply cannot expect to do under the auspicious of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy. If she wants to have her professional affiliations she will need to follow the rules that apply to all members.