The visceral disgust surrounding the comments made by Presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann's husband Marcus Bachmann that gays were "barbarians" "who need discipline" is, of course, well-warranted.
Certainly, given the far right, and specifically Michelle Bachmann's homophobic history these remarks came as no surprise. But, I am concerned that we not let the fact that they are expected blind us to greater story that is worthy of pursuing. Bachmann's comments are gross and ignorant.
But they are more than that, his comments may well point to some serious legal and ethical questions surrounding his practice.
Pam's House Blend raises a very good one today.
First, let us consider the good work James Burroway at the Box Turtle Bulletin and Anderson Cooper at CNN have done recently putting the harm of gay reparative therapy on the national radar. Kirk Murphy (right) endured it as a child, and killed himself at 38. His family now blames the UCLA reparative therapy program they subjected him to.
Letting Bachmann's remarks pass as just another batshit outburst without applying further scrutiny seems to me like a big lost opportunity to continue this important conservation.
Bachmann's views are way out of the mainstream psychological community's, like suggesting a therapist's responsibility is to lead patients away from sin.
"That’s what is called the sinful nature. We have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings from moving into the action steps…"
Note, as an "authority figure" he is himself speaking as a paid medical professional, collecting Medicaid and legitimate insurance company reimbursements.
The ideas he is expressing here are obviously ethically and scientifically indefensible. And if we can prompt the mainstream media to ask some probing questions it could be a blow to the larger gay reparative therapy industry that perpetrates much damage and violence on innocent kids and bilks many sad and ignorant people out of money by selling them false hope and endangering their children's future mental and physical health.
A few other questions worth asking:
- Should taxpayer dollars be supporting junk therapy? His center has received more than $130,000 in Medicaid payments over the years.
- To what extent does Marcus Bachmann presents himself as a legitimate medical professional, while lacking legitimate professional credentials? In fact, it appears that Bachmann received his doctorate degree from the Union Graduate Institute Union which is not accredited by the American Psychological Association.
- Should legitimate insurance companies, like Blue Cross Blue Shield, be reimbursing "therapists" to pursue "therapy" goals that are not condoned, even disapproved of, by the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, etc?
We are all familiar with how quick insurance companies are to decline reimbursements for other non-mainstream practices that are not well-founded in scientific data supporting a presumed outcome of success. Gay reparative therapy should be asked to endure the same scrutiny.
Pam Spaulding raises another very good question over at her blog, Pam's House Blend today:
The Blend has been contacted by a clinical psychologist who has been reading these stories about "Dr." Bachmann and his alleged "ex-gay" practice and stated these professional concerns:
Someone should publicly ask him to provide a copy of the informed consent that he has patients seeking to undergo "ex-gay" therapy sign. Informed consent is a legal procedure to ensure that a patient or client knows all of the risks and costs involved in a treatment. The elements of informed consents include informing the client of the nature of the treatment, possible alternative treatments, and the potential risks and benefits of the treatment.
In order for informed consent to be considered valid, the client must be competent and the consent should be given voluntarily. It is a signed document.
For ex-gay therapy, the informed consent should tell a patient that "ex-gay" therapy is not proven, is considered "experimental", is not supported by research, that no medical or mental health association endorses it, that it could have harmful side effects including depression and suicidal ideation, and that change to heterosexuality is not likely. A good informed consent should also list alternative treatments and options, including learning to live life as a celibate homosexual or seeking gay affirmative therapy.
A good informed consent would inform a potential client that she/he could spend years and tens of thousands of dollars seeking "change" but would most likely continue to experience homosexual attractions for the rest of his/her life.
If Michelle Bachman's husband has nothing to hide then he will release a copy of his informed consent, right? If he has no informed consent, then he is practicing unethically -- and receiving government money to do so, if in fact, his clinic receives government money as it appears. If he has no informed consent, a complaint should be lodged with the licensing board in his state to have his license suspended. You could also call for one of his clients to come forth and state whether he/she was given an informed consent.
Very good question.
Pam includes the relevant section of the ethics code of the American Psychological Association:
"3.10 Informed Consent
(a) When psychologists conduct research or provide assessment, therapy, counseling, or consulting services in person or via electronic transmission or other forms of communication, they obtain the informed consent of the individual or individuals using language that is reasonably understandable to that person or persons except when conducting such activities without consent is mandated by law or governmental regulation or as otherwise provided in this Ethics Code"
Since he earned (on-line) a doctoral degree in clinical psychology from a university program that is not accredited by the American Psychological Association, and bills himself as a "christian counselor" rather than as a psychologist (you must be licensed to use the title psychogist), he must be operating under his masters degree as a "Christian Counselor".
According to the ethics code of the American Association of Christian Counselors:
"1-110 Avoidance of Client Harm, Intended or Not
Christian counselors strictly avoid all behavior or suggestion of practice that harms or reasonably could harm clients, client families, client social systems and representatives, students, trainees, supervisees, employees, colleagues, and third-party payors and authorizers"
As "ex-gay therapy" is known to be harmful, this part of the AACC code is in direct violation with the following:
"1-126 Application to Homosexual and Transgendered Behavior
Christian counselors refuse to condone or advocate for the pursuit of or active involvement in homosexual, transgendered, and cross-dressing behavior, and in the adoption gay & lesbian & transgendered lifestyles by clients. We may agree to and support the wish to work out issues of homosexual and transgendered identity and attractions, but will refuse to describe or reduce human identity and nature to sexual reference or orientation, and will encourage sexual celibacy or biblically proscribed sexual behavior while such issues are being addressed.
Christian counselors differ, on biblical, ethical, and legal grounds, with groups who abhor and condemn reparative therapy, willingly offering it to those who come into counseling with a genuine desire to be set free of homosexual attractions and leave homosexual behavior and lifestyles behind. Either goal of heterosexual relations and marriage or lifelong sexual celibacy is legitimate and a function of client choice in reparative therapy.
It is acknowledged that some persons engaged in same-sex change or reparative therapy will be able to change and become free of all homo-erotic behavior and attraction, some will change but will still struggle with homosexual attraction from time to time, and some will not change away from homosexual practices."
Nonetheless, when discussing informed consent, the AACC code includes the following about ex-gay therapy and informed consent:
"1-331 Special Consent for More Difficult Interventions
Close or special consent is obtained for more difficult and controversial practices. These include, but are not limited to: deliverance and spiritual warfare activities; cult de-programming work; recovering memories and treatment of past abuse or trauma; use of hypnosis and any kind of induction of altered states; authorizing (by MDs) medications, electro-convulsive therapy, or patient restraints; use of aversive, involuntary, or experimental therapies; engaging in reparative therapy with homosexual persons; and counseling around abortion and end-of-life issues. These interventions require a more detailed discussion with patient-clients or client representatives of the procedures, risks, and treatment alternatives, and we secure detailed written agreement for the procedure."
So what is it Dr. Bachmann? Have you been fulfilling your American Psychological Association ethical responsibilities of obtaining informed consent forms from your various patients when you practice your gay reparative therapy?
If not, does that present a problem for your eligibility to bill Medicaid and insurance providers for your "medical" services, which are in fact, merely spiritual counseling?
Update: Washington Post has an article up looking at Dr. Bachmann.
Dr. Bachmann and his wife declined to comment for this article. The Bachmann campaign declined to specifically address whether the couple’s clinic, set back amid serene ponds in an office park gauzy with floating dandelion seeds, engages in the practice of reparative therapy.
"Declining comment" is political speak for, "We can't yet figure out how to spin this. We recognize we're in a jam, and hoping that it blows over. Please stop asking questions, OK?"