Following through on its promise to challenge California’s new ban on ex-gay therapy for minors, the Pacific Justice Institute has filed suit on behalf of a self-proclaimed “ex-gay” therapist-in-training, Aaron Bitzer, and two other therapists, Donald Welch and Anthony Duk, who provide reparative therapy. The suit is rife with spurious claims and meritless demands that essentially equate to whining about the law’s limitations, none of which comes close to meeting a Constitutional challenge. Here is a sampling from the complaint, aptly filed under “Plaintiffs’ Beliefs”:

Forced to discriminate?

If a minor’s objectives are to bring his or her sexual conduct and desires into conformity with the religious traditions, cultural norms, and moral standards of the minor, Dr. Duk can provide treatment so long as the minor is heterosexual. However, under the statute in question, a minor who has unwanted same sex behaviors or attractions cannot be treated with either counseling or prescription medications. [...] Dr. Duk is therefore required to discriminate against minor patients for no other reason than their sexual orientation.

The complaint refers to such conduct as “sexual behaviors, desires, and addictions such as pornography.” Under the law, there’s no reason that gay youth could not pursue therapy for the very same things so long as it’s not in the context of denying, repressing, or attempting to change their sexual orientation. These therapists are basically admitting that they would intentionally discriminate against any gay kid who still wanted affirmation for his or her orientation.

Violation of professional ethics?

The statute materially interferes with the plaintiff mental health professionals’ exercise of their independent professional judgment in providing treatment to minors who have unwanted same sex behaviors or attractions… This is in violation of these plaintiff mental health professionals’ obligations under the rules of professional ethics to provide treatment to persons regardless of their sexual orientation.

Providing ex-gay therapy is already a violation of their professional ethics, as all major professional psychotherapy organizations have condemned the practice as ineffective and harmful. That they seek to provide it nevertheless demonstrates that their “independent professional judgment” is severely compromised.

Read more

The conservative Pacific Justice Institute (PJI) has joined the Liberty Counsel in calling for a lawsuit challenging California’s new ban on ex-gay therapy for minors. PJI helped the ex-gay professional network NARTH oppose the bill, so it’s no surprise that PJI president Brad Dacus parroted NARTH’s claim that sexual abuse can cause homosexuality:

DACUS: Of all the freedom-killing bills we have seen in our legislature the last several years, this is among the worst. This outrageous bill makes no exceptions for young victims of sexual abuse who are plagued with unwanted same-sex attraction, nor does it respect the consciences of mental health professionals who work in a church. We are filing suit to defend families, children, and religious freedom. This unprecedented bill is outrageously unconstitutional.

The National Center for Lesbian Rights’ Executive Director Kate Kendell released the following statement countering the proposed lawsuits:

KENDELL: This lawsuit is a desperate, last ditch effort to defend the indefensible. The plain fact is that every mainstream medical and mental health association in the country has warned that these practices are ineffective and dangerous. The state has a clear duty to protect minors from harm, and that is exactly what this law does. NCLR is committed to doing all we can to defend this law while, at the same time, we work to pass similar laws in other states. We will not rest until this “quackery,” as Governor Brown has called this practice, is illegal throughout our nation.

It’s also misleading for Dacus to claim that “mental health professionals who work in a church” will be impacted. Only licensed or credentialed counselors fall under the jurisdiction of the law, so individuals who offer ex-gay therapy in the context of an unlicensed ministry will be unaffected.

Brad Dacus, Pacific Justice Institute

The Pacific Justice Institute, a California-based Christian legal defense organization, has partnered with groups that promote ex-gay therapy like NARTH to oppose a California bill that would limit how the dangerous treatment could be provided in the state. In an interview on Friday, the Institute’s Brad Dacus told talk show host Janet Meffered that discredited ex-gay therapist Joseph Nicolosi has been effective in over 80 percent of cases, arguing that homosexuality is a “path of death and destruction”:

MEFFERD: Brad, is there overwhelming evidence that reparative therapy is a fraud?

DACUS: Actually it’s contrary, there’s overwhelming evidence that reparative therapy actually works. It’s not 100% because you have individual will and every person has their own issues. But Dr. [Joseph] Nicolosi and other famous psychiatrists who have treated this, thousands and thousands of patients, report a very high success rate, I know it’s at least over 80 percent, I believe it’s 80-85 percent success rate. These are people who leave the lifestyle, get married to people, have children, and enter heterosexual relationships. It’s a big mass of deception that they are trying to carry out at the expense of many hundreds of thousands or millions of youths who will be led down a path of death and destruction, unfortunately, if they get away with this.

Listen to it:

Dacus, an attorney, went on to explain that “the homosexual lifestyle gives…boys an average lifespan of the age of 40″ and is “worse than being a chain cigarette smoker.” He also suggested that being gay is the consequence of sexual abuse or poor bonding with their father.

Equating homosexuality with “death and destruction” presents a hefty bias to Dacus’ other claims, and it’s unsurprising that his “evidence” carries no weight. When the American Psychological Association resolved that ex-gay therapy is ineffective and harmful, it was only after a systematic review of the available literature. One of the most prominent studies used to support ex-gay therapy was just disavowed by its primary researcher, who apologized to the gay community for promoting its faulty results. Even anti-gay researchers at Pat Robertson’s Regent University admitted in their research that the “ex-gays” they studied who were now in opposite-sex marriages still had the same same-sex orientation as before their therapy.

There is no data to support any claim of sexual orientation change success, let alone 80-85 percent. Such “results” are likely hearsay from Nicolosi himself, who is probably afraid that the California legislation will impede his ability to continue profiting off of internalized anti-gay stigma.