(02-08-2016, 02:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I don't think there is any way to tell for sure and it definately depends on what one deems as "successful".

For instance NARTH has published papers that point to a success rate of 23-50%. yet Zerker just mentioned a success rate of less than 3%.

There are stories from folks that have had "successful" and "unsuccessful" therapy. My issue is what data did this state use to decide they were no longer going to not allow insurance to cover this therapy when similar measures have failed at the Federal level.

(02-08-2016, 11:16 AM)GMDino Wrote: Well, if you look at it from the perspective of people who are forced into this kind of "therapy" it throws a bit of a road block.

(02-08-2016, 02:31 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Serious question, but does this work the other way?  Like, could straight men be counseled into being sexually attracted to other men, or children or something?

(02-08-2016, 02:13 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: The man who is quoted by NARTH took a lot of it back...

(02-08-2016, 02:33 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Who is forced?    Children?  Children do what they parents decide for them.   That's why their parents are guardians, because they know what's best for their child.    Not the state.    None of this risks thee Childs health.

(02-08-2016, 03:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: And sometimes that is not in the best interest of the child.  Like if they join a cult, or make them partake in pornopgraphy. If a boy likes the color pink and playing with dolls and his dad is afraid that means he is gay and sends him to some place because of his OWN fears that in the best interest of the child.

Sending a child to be "fixed" or "cured" by a method that hasn't been shown to be successful is a risk to the child's mental health. 

We have a grand old history here in America of sending away "problem" children and people to be "cured" at places like the old sanatoriums.  There was a list of reasons people could be put away at an old sanatorium we did a tour of:



Would you send your child to be fixed because they masturbate? 

(02-08-2016, 04:00 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Lol did you actually go back to the 1880's

And i doubt you want to start letting others tell you how to raise your kid.   So maybe you should respect their choices the same as you want yours respected.

(02-08-2016, 04:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: Would send your daughter to therapy because YOU had a problem with something you thought was "wrong"?

(02-08-2016, 04:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who the hell woudn't?

(02-08-2016, 03:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: Would you send your child to be fixed because they masturbate? 

(02-08-2016, 04:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: You ignored what I said about parents not always making good choices JUST because they are the parents.

I used an example of a time when masturbation could get you locked up for life in an asylum.  We've changed from that.

I don't want the state judging every choice I make, but I want them looking out for the fringe people who make bad decisions like not feeding their child, not getting medical help and trying to "pray away" the problem, or deciding they *might* not be straight and sending them for "therapy".

Would send your daughter to therapy because YOU had a problem with something you thought was "wrong"?

(02-08-2016, 05:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Anyone who understands that not everything we disagree with is "wrong".

(02-08-2016, 05:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There was no mention of disagree in your question.

So: would you send your child to therapy for something YOU considered to be wrong?

(02-08-2016, 05:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Not unless it was life threatening.

Drugs/alcohol abuse?  Sure.

Self cutting?  You bet.

Sex before marriage? No.

Sexual preference?  Nope.

(02-08-2016, 05:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Never had a conversation with your kids about promiscuity?

(02-08-2016, 05:32 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Never had a conversation with your kids about promiscuity?

(02-08-2016, 04:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: You ignored what I said about parents not always making good choices JUST because they are the parents.

I used an example of a time when masturbation could get you locked up for life in an asylum.  We've changed from that.

I don't want the state judging every choice I make, but I want them looking out for the fringe people who make bad decisions like not feeding their child, not getting medical help and trying to "pray away" the problem, or deciding they *might* not be straight and sending them for "therapy".

Would send your daughter to therapy because YOU had a problem with something you thought was "wrong"?

(02-08-2016, 04:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who the hell woudn't?

(02-08-2016, 05:10 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: yes.   I would do anything to help them.

(02-08-2016, 05:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There was no mention of disagree in your question.

So: would you send your child to therapy for something YOU considered to be wrong?

(02-08-2016, 05:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Not unless it was life threatening.

Drugs/alcohol abuse?  Sure.

Self cutting?  You bet.

Sex before marriage? No.

Sexual preference?  Nope.

(02-08-2016, 06:28 PM)Benton Wrote: Butting in, but I guess I don't understand sending your kid to get help if it's not creating a problem for the kid. Where do you draw the line?

(02-08-2016, 05:18 PM)GMDino Wrote: Not unless it was life threatening.

Drugs/alcohol abuse?  Sure.

Self cutting?  You bet.

Sex before marriage? No.

Sexual preference?  Nope.

(02-08-2016, 05:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: Many times.  I've made it quite clear I did not have sex until marriage.  My daughter (10) has taken those words to heart.  Our son is 14 and knows my feelings as well.

But I wouldn't send them to a camp or a therapist to "fix" them if they did not do the same.