In October the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, released a report titled:

Ending Conversion Therapy:
Supporting and Affirming LGBTQ Youth

Key Findings

This report and its recommendations are based on consensus statements developed by experts in the field after a careful review of existing research, professional health association reports and summaries, and expert clinical guidance. The consensus statements highlight areas of the ethical and scientific foundations most relevant to the practice of conversion therapy with minors. A full list of the consensus statements is found in the body of this report; key statements that form the underpinnings of the guidance in this report are provided here.

• Same-gender sexual orientation (including identity, behavior, and attraction) and variations in gender identity and gender expression are a part of the normal spectrum of human diversity and do not constitute a mental disorder.

• There is limited research on conversion therapy efforts among children and adolescents; however, none of the existing research supports the premise that mental or behavioral health interventions can alter gender identity or sexual orientation.

• Interventions aimed at a fixed outcome,such as gender conformity or heterosexual orientation, including those aimed at changing gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation are coercive, can be harmful,and should not be part of behavioral health treatment. (American Psychiatric Association, 2013b; American Psychological Association, 2010; National Association of Social Workers, 2008).

Read and download the full report here:
Ending_Conversion_Therapy_SAMHSA Report_October 2015.pdf

In August of this year, the American Bar Association (ABA) adopted resolutions condemning conversion therapy and urging government bodies to adopt laws banning the practice.

Summary of the Resolution:

The proposed Resolution is to put the American Bar Association on record as recognizing that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people have the right be free from attempts to change their sexual orientation or gender identity, which have been condemned as ineffective and harmful by every major medical and mental health association in the country, and as supporting legislation, regulation, and litigation to bring an end to conversion therapy, including laws protecting minors from being subjected to conversion therapy by state-licensed mental health professionals

The three specific resolutions adopted:

RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association recognizes that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people have the right to be free from attempts to change their sexual orientation or gender identity;

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments to enact laws that prohibit state-licensed professionals from using conversion therapy on minors; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments to protect minors, particularly minors in their care, from being subjected to conversion therapy by state-licensed professionals.

Read and download the full report here:
ABA_Report_112 _Conversion_Therapy_August_2015.pdf

San Francisco – March 1, 2013 –Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld LLP, representing survivors of the anti-gay therapies known as “sexual orientation change efforts” (or SOCE) and the sister of a man who committed suicide after being subjected to SOCE as a child, filed a series of Amicus Curiae briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the Amicus briefs, James Guay, Ryan Kendall, Peter Drake, Emily Kane, John Metzidis, and Maris Ehlers recount their powerful stories of the damage and pain that they and their families suffered because they were exposed to these discredited and dangerous therapies designed to alter fundamental parts of their identities that cannot and should not be changed. Their stories also reveal the stigmatizing effect of the discrimination and prejudice that has been and continues to be directed at gay men and lesbians.

“Our clients, who were subjected to horrific discrimination and abuse simply because they or their family members were gay, are speaking out strongly in these briefs in support of equal rights for all citizens,” said Sanford Jay Rosen, founding partner of Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld. “In this watershed moment in the history of the gay rights movement in the United States, SOCE survivors are determined to make their voices heard.”

On February 28, 2013 the SOCE survivors filed an Amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v. Perry, the challenge to California’s Proposition 8, which denies gay men and lesbian women the right to marry the person whom they love solely on the basis of their sexual orientation. On March 1, the survivors filed an Amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Windsor, the challenge to the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which bars the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages. The survivors urge the Supreme Court to strike down both laws. Oral argument will be heard by the Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v. Perry on March 26, and inUnited States v. Windsor on March 27.

In each case, the SOCE survivors urged the Supreme Court to review the discriminatory laws under a heightened level of scrutiny because they single out a class of Americans based on an immutable trait central to their identity, in violation of the basic principles of who we are as a nation, and to affirm the landmark decisions of the Ninth Circuit and Second Circuit Courts of Appeals finding Proposition 8 and DOMA unconstitutional.

The Ninth Circuit briefs, which were filed in early February, urge the Court of Appeals to uphold California’s Senate Bill 1172. This new law protects lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth from the serious psychological harms caused by state-licensed therapists who use junk science in the guise of SOCE “therapy” to try to change their patients’ sexual orientation. Two separate lawsuits challenge the California law’s constitutionality. In Pickup v. Brown, the judge denied a motion to delay enforcement of SB 1172 until the case is resolved, whereas in Welch v. Brown, the judge granted a motion to prevent enforcement of the law against the three plaintiffs in that case. Oral argument in both cases will be heard before the one panel of judges in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on April 17, 2013.

Source: http://rbgg.com/rbgg-files-amicus-briefs-in-the-u-s-supreme-court-and-ninth-circuit-on-behalf-of-survivors-of-anti-gay-therapies/

Erik Eckholm, The New York Times, November 27, 2012

Gay ‘conversion therapy,’ which claims to help men overcome unwanted same-sex attractions but has been widely attacked as unscientific and harmful, is facing its first tests in the courtroom.

In New Jersey, former “conversion therapy” clients have sued a prominent therapy group charging it with deceptive practices and claiming that they were emotionally scarred.

In California, so-called ex-gay therapists are challenging a state law that bans conversion therapy for minors.

Read the full article