Psychiatry and Orthodoxy: Nope Homosexuality is not normal

[Thekla]

From PubMed (title is link)

Sexual orientation and psychiatric vulnerability: a twin study of neuroticism and psychoticism.

Zietsch BP, Verweij KJ, Bailey JM, Wright MJ, Martin NG.
Source

Genetic Epidemiology, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Brendan.Zietsch@qimr.edu.au

Abstract

Recent evidence indicates that homosexuals and bisexuals are, on average, at greater risk for psychiatric problems than heterosexuals. It is assumed with some supporting evidence that prejudice often experienced by nonheterosexuals makes them more vulnerable to psychiatric disorder, but there has been no investigation of alternative explanations. Here we used Eysenck's Neuroticism and Psychoticism scales as markers for psychiatric vulnerability and compared heterosexuals with nonheterosexuals in a community-based sample of identical and nonidentical twins aged between 19 and 52 years (N = 4904). Firstly, we tested whether apparent sexual orientation differences in psychiatric vulnerability simply mirrored sex differences-for our traits, this would predict nonheterosexual males having elevated Neuroticism scores as females do, and nonheterosexual females having elevated Psychoticism scores as males do. Our results contradicted this idea, with nonheterosexual men and women scoring significantly higher on Neuroticism and Psychoticism than their heterosexual counterparts, suggesting an overall elevation of psychiatric risk in nonheterosexuals. Secondly, we used our genetically informative sample to assess the viability of explanations invoking a common cause of both nonheterosexuality and psychiatric vulnerability. We found significant genetic correlation between sexual orientation and both Neuroticism and Psychoticism, but no corresponding environmental correlations, suggesting that if there is a common cause of both nonheterosexuality and psychiatric vulnerability it is likely to have a genetic basis rather than an environmental basis.


_________________________________________________________


Psychiatric morbidity associated with same-sex sexual behaviour: influence of minority stress and familial factors.


Frisell T, Lichtenstein P, Rahman Q, Långström N.
Source

Centre for Violence Prevention, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Increased psychiatric morbidity has been widely reported among non-heterosexual individuals (defined as reporting a homosexual/bisexual identity and/or same-sex sexual partners). However, the causes of this psychiatric ill-health are mostly unknown.
METHOD:

We attempted to estimate the influence of minority stress and familial factors on psychiatric disorder among adults with same-sex sexual partners. Self-report data from a 2005 survey of adults (age 20-47 years, n=17,379) in the population-based Swedish Twin Registry were analysed with regression modelling and co-twin control methodology.
RESULTS:

Rates of depression, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), eating disorders, alcohol dependence and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were increased among men and women with same-sex sexual experiences. Adjusting for perceived discrimination and hate crime victimization lowered this risk whereas controlling for familial (genetic or environmental) factors in within-twin pair comparisons further reduced or eliminated it.
CONCLUSIONS:

Components of minority stress influence the risk of psychiatric ill-health among individuals with any same-sex sexual partner. However, substantial confounding by familial factors suggests a common genetic and/or environmental liability for same-sex sexual behaviour and psychiatric morbidity.


_______________________________________________________________

 

[Thekla]

Both studies indicate that the distress experienced by the nonheterosexual is not entirely "social" (lack of acceptance), but may reflect core psychiatric comorbidity. (This finding, iirc, was paralleled in one conducted in Holland, where social stressors are reduced, ie tolerant/liberal society.)

I do wonder, as nonheterosexuality is presented as acceptable, and given the relatively low genetic loading/influence in some cases, it seems possible that more persons will self-identify as non-heterosexual as a matter of choice, not biology/load.

Will this dilute the statistics on the percentage whose suffering reflects a comorbidity ?

Will this effect our ability to provide treatment options ?

 

[Gwendolyn]

I have a few things to say. I am not a student of psychiatry, but I myself have seen several therapists/psychiatrists and have spent years in therapy, so there are some things with which I am familiar...

Firstly, it is interesting to me that Dr. Pappas was told that she must remove her cross and be a "blank slate". Really, what her professor was saying was that she wasn't allowed to view psychiatry through a Christian lens. I can tell you with personal experience that psychiatrists are NOT blank slates. They bring their own worldviews into therapy with them, and they will suggest courses of treatment which reflect those worldviews, and bad ones will suggest those treatments even when it is clearly in conflict with the patient's needs. I have found therapists/psychiatrists to all have a liberal bias - you know, abortion is a good and acceptable thing, homosexuality is a valid orientation and the lifestyle is good, etc. At least, the ones I have encountered have.

I will get personal for a moment and give you examples from my own experience.

I used to have an extremely unhealthy view of sexuality. I liked being a child, and I hated puberty with a passion, and I felt that it forced me into a world that I wasn't ready for. I felt that the onset of sexuality made me irrational because I couldn't think straight for all the lust I experienced. I came to the conclusion that sexuality was a bad and animalistic thing, and I developed an intense self-hatred because I couldn't "erase" sexuality from myself. I also developed an intense fear of men, because as a heterosexual female, my sexuality was pushing me toward men and I was terrified of being victimised against my will.

Add in severe depression (major depressive disorder) and severe anxiety (generalised anxiety disorder, ocd), and it made for a huge psychological mess. My depression led me to therapy, and I went through a few therapists. The first one told me that the solution to my problems with sexuality would be to find a man to have regular sex with. She said he didn't even have to be my boyfriend - just someone who would introduce me to sex and help me see it as healthy. She was firm about the fact that my religion was the root of my problems (even though it actually wasn't) and told me that I needed to let my faith go. I ran as fast as I could from her.

The second therapist also held that my issues with sexuality would be solved if I had sex, but she at least suggested I form a long-term relationship. She also suggested regular masturbation, as in her estimation, it is a completely normal and healthy behaviour. She also felt that my faith was the root of my problems (it wasn't). I left her care, too.

My third therapist was over her head with me, because I am a very complicated and severe case. But she never told me to have sex with someone, and she respected my faith.

My fourth therapist, a psychiatrist, saw my problems and worked with me in my paradigm. She saw that the root of my problems was NOT with religion, but was rooted in a firm desire for control, and feeling like sexuality and sexual attraction left me out of control, both of myself and of those around me (hence my fear of men). She set aside her own bias and met me where I was. She helped me through my severe depression (not caused by my issues with sexuality) and helped me through my other issues, too. It took three years, but I was finally able to reconcile my sexual issues and find some peace.

A good psychiatrist will work with the patient in the patient's own paradigm. That is, they will recognise the patient's needs and offer them treatments that will help them break unhealthy behaviours and patterns of thought. They will NOT try to force their own views on a patient when they realise it would be inappropriate or unhelpful. It sounds like Dr. Pappas responded to her patient's interest in her faith, and then moved forward based on that. It doesn't sound like she made her faith blatant and forced it on her patients, which is why it makes me sad to hear that she was sued. Her faith was the scapegoat in that instance.

Second post inc.

 

[Gwendolyn]

The second issue I want to address is the notion of homosexuality as a purely psychological issue. I believe that there are possibly three general classes of people who identify as homosexual:

1. People who find during their sexual awakening that they experience attraction only to the opposite sex;
2. People who experience childhood trauma (like the case Dr. Pappas mentioned) and who assume a homosexual orientation as a result;
3. People who choose homosexuality or homosexual activity for whatever reason (curiosity, unlucky in love, etc.).

Two of those three classes could respond to therapy, especially because sexuality is often such a complicated and convoluted issue. I previously mentioned my intense fear of men. As a teen, I wondered if that meant that I was a lesbian. I questioned my sexuality, but therapy helped me work through the issue to see that I am attracted only to men, and it was only my intense fear and anxiety that made me wonder if I was homosexual. That could be one case. Dr. Pappas' tale of abuse is actually another situation in which victims assume they are homosexual. Sadly, it is common for victims of abuse to think that they are homosexual if their earliest sexual experiences were with abusers of the same sex.

However, the existence of such situations is NOT an indication that homosexuality is completely "curable", or that it is some form of a mental illness. Simply because there are some cases wherein a patient may respond to therapy and find that their same-sex attraction is not actually an orientation, does not mean that it would be the case with all people who experience homosexual inclinations.

I am by no means saying that homosexuality is a normal, healthy orientation. I agree with Dr. Pappas in that we live in a fallen world where all is abnormal which does not conform to God's plans and desires for us as His faithful. However, I truly do believe that there are people in this world who simply experience a sexual attraction to the same sex not out of past trauma, but simply because when their sexuality awakens, they find that only the same sex appeals to them. That is not to normalise homosexuality, but I think that it is a very complicated issue that we learn more about as time draws on.

 

[Thekla]

Thank-you, Gwendolyn !

 

[Protoevangel]

yeah, the article about pedophilia on that page you linked.

Yes, that one is quite disgusting.

 

[rusmeister]

A good psychiatrist will work with the patient in the patient's own paradigm. That is, they will recognise the patient's needs and offer them treatments that will help them break unhealthy behaviours and patterns of thought. They will NOT try to force their own views on a patient when they realise it would be inappropriate or unhelpful.

Appreciate your accounts.

However, I see a problem, a contradiction between your first and second sentences here. If the patient's paradigm is wrong, and particularly if the patient's views are part of the problem, the person proposing treatment can't offer treatment along that paradigm. He is bound to offer treatment that will be genuinely effective, according to what he knows/believes to be true.

A doctor - or a teacher, or a priest (I see huge parallels between those professions - and I am a teacher) does not 'try to force views'. They practice what they believe/know to be true. The priest does not 'have an opinion' about his faith that 'he might be wrong on'. The teacher does not teach on the premise that the teacher might be wrong - certainly we don't pay him to teach what he is not sure about. The doctor does not offer cures based on merely on personal views that he openly doubts - at the very least, he believes that what he knows and sees is true, whether we objectively know him to be wrong or not.

I think the very language of 'having views' to be part of the atmosphere of agnosticism - of not actually being able to know anything and be sure of it - being fostered everywhere, starting with schooling and the media. The implication of 'having a view' is that it is ONLY your personal opinion; that it is not a truth that affects everyone whether they accept it or not.

Has anyone here read CS Lewis's "Space Trilogy"?:

Eh? Two views? There are a dozen views about everything until you know the answer. Then there's never more than one.

Bill Hingest ("That Hideous Strength" by C.S. Lewis)

It is about a general denial of truth, and most of us unwittingly play into that when we unwittingly use the language that we have been taught to use without thinking deeply about it.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

Shifts in Paradigms. An Orthodox Psychiatrist on Homosexuality - AOI Observer

A very worthwhile interview on homosexuality. A brave indeed psychiatrist that did stand up her ground.

I hope that we all have courage and will stand up for Christ, even if the death sentence is given to Christianity and Christians. The world and flesh hates Christ, does it not? So, persecution will cycle back in, even to our nation. Be ready to help the lost with your courage to hold on to Jesus.

 

[Philothei]

Appreciate your accounts.

However, I see a problem, a contradiction between your first and second sentences here. If the patient's paradigm is wrong, and particularly if the patient's views are part of the problem, the person proposing treatment can't offer treatment along that paradigm. He is bound to offer treatment that will be genuinely effective, according to what he knows/believes to be true.

A doctor - or a teacher, or a priest (I see huge parallels between those professions - and I am a teacher) does not 'try to force views'. They practice what they believe/know to be true. The priest does not 'have an opinion' about his faith that 'he might be wrong on'. The teacher does not teach on the premise that the teacher might be wrong - certainly we don't pay him to teach what he is not sure about. The doctor does not offer cures based on merely on personal views that he openly doubts - at the very least, he believes that what he knows and sees is true, whether we objectively know him to be wrong or not.

I think the very language of 'having views' to be part of the atmosphere of agnosticism - of not actually being able to know anything and be sure of it - being fostered everywhere, starting with schooling and the media. The implication of 'having a view' is that it is ONLY your personal opinion; that it is not a truth that affects everyone whether they accept it or not.

Has anyone here read CS Lewis's "Space Trilogy"?:
Bill Hingest ("That Hideous Strength" by C.S. Lewis)

It is about a general denial of truth, and most of us unwittingly play into that when we unwittingly use the language that we have been taught to use without thinking deeply about it.

I do agree on your asessement here Rus. Yeah the 'views" clause is a bit ovexaggerated.

I also agree with Gwen as she explained what she had experienced. That is well put. IMHO. Dr. Pappas discribed ONE of her cases maybe not the only one we do not know and we do not know the ins and outs of thtat case either. But to say that some homosexuals are not cured is indeed truth. NOT all who do something wrong will be able to pull through and get healthy. Someone who suffers from depression will not come out of it just like that and say "I will feel great from now on".

Even from a theological prespective if I may add here we do not have such illusions. We are born in a fallen state with many forces working against us. Sometimes we are able to fight it sometimes we do not. We get up to just go and fall down again... and there we get up again.... If we try to live up in communion with God we pretty much know that we have to live a life of repentance, prayer etc.

No one not even Dr. Pappas thought that the council she was giving was the 'right' one for the patient. We all make decisions that sometimes we wish we never have taken. Yes a mental / psychologically not healthy person may need "more" help to make decisions that is true. But to say that it is only the doctor's responsibility then we are not being realistic. Each doctor has training to try their best. Some are not trained for certain disorders and some are more trained. It all depends. I would rather not point fingers to anyone here namely the homosexuals themselves for making poor choices( as they may already have a psychological/mental problem for sure) or the doctors as they may overestimate their abilities.

It is no doubt is not always what society seeks puts extra pressure on us to "take a view" or to look for 'two views" while there is maybe one... It is okay to differentiate like Gwen did ...to break it down to see how things are made off etc. If we jaxtsuppose this to our Dogma to our beliefs about human nature we end up in the same result. Human nature does not change, disorders maybe be a bit different in how we "name them" but still remain issues that they need to be dealed with. Just because a homosexual is not practicing that does not mean that he/she does not need support. What I am saying here is that the Church does recognizes the "individual needs" of human nature and seeks to 'restore" it in every capacity possible. Cure is and will not be possible in its perfection anyways until we are united with the source of life our Christ.

Dr. Pappas tried to do just that to allow for the healing of the Holy Spirit to enable it to work through that young man. But as we all know impaired or not still a person has free will.

 

[Gwendolyn]

My point was that when a therapist takes on a patient with complex mental health issues, they cannot immediately force the patient into a new, healthy paradigm. They have to meet the patient where they are, learn about the different facets of their situation, explore root causes and then slowly help the patient to see how unhealthy their paradigm is. Immediately telling a patient they are wrong and forcing them into new behaviours, etc. will be detrimental. Effective therapy for difficult issues often takes a great deal of time. Dr. Pappas did work with this patient over time, which is the right approach. She waited until he was ready to face the difficult and potentially frightening questions instead of immediately telling him how unhealthy and broken he was and trying to force him toward a fix.

That was why I gave personal examples. Those previous therapists of mine forced their own worldview on me, and told me that the only effective treatment for my issues would be what they laid out for me. They discarded my faith and viewed it as a detriment to my health, whereas my current therapist (I have been seeing her for 4 years) saw the healing capacity of faith even though she is not Christian herself. She incorporated that into therapy and worked hard to understand where I was coming from before helping me inch toward recovery and stability.

Even if a patient`s paradigm is obviously unhealthy, it takes time to help them shift out of that and into a healthier world.

 

[rusmeister]

My point was that when a therapist takes on a patient with complex mental health issues, they cannot immediately force the patient into a new, healthy paradigm. They have to meet the patient where they are, learn about the different facets of their situation, explore root causes and then slowly help the patient to see how unhealthy their paradigm is. Immediately telling a patient they are wrong and forcing them into new behaviours, etc. will be detrimental. Effective therapy for difficult issues often takes a great deal of time. Dr. Pappas did work with this patient over time, which is the right approach. She waited until he was ready to face the difficult and potentially frightening questions instead of immediately telling him how unhealthy and broken he was and trying to force him toward a fix.

That was why I gave personal examples. Those previous therapists of mine forced their own worldview on me, and told me that the only effective treatment for my issues would be what they laid out for me. They discarded
my faith and viewed it as a detriment to my health, whereas my current therapist (I have been seeing her for 4 years) saw the healing capacity of faith even though she is not Christian herself. She incorporated that into therapy and worked hard to understand where I was coming from before helping me inch toward recovery and stability.

Even if a patient`s paradigm is obviously unhealthy, it takes time to help them shift out of that and into a healthier world.

Good point and agreed. My point is that the treater's view can be unhealthy, too - which you already pointed out.

 

[createdtoworship]

Stop SB48 - Parents Tell Their Story - YouTube

can sign petition at
http://stopsb48.com/

 

[AureateDawn]

Stop SB48 - Parents Tell Their Story - YouTube

can sign petition at
Stop SB 48 — It's too expensive. • It goes too far.

Eww. Those poor kids.

 

[rusmeister]

That's related to another topic - the indoctrinating mission of public schools.

"Accepting" textbooks really means yet another windfall for textbook producers, who don't care about whether real academic knowledge makes it into the books, but care very much about how many textbooks they can sell at $x.00 per unit. The upshot is that the teachers in the schools, who are increasingly (because of requirements for would-be teachers) themselves heavily indoctrinated, must devote ever less time to actual academic instruction and ever more to 'preparing for tests' and 'diversity, tolerance, and multicultural training' (all just jargon behind which the philosophy of pluralism hides). In the end, the system will teach nothing but bare minimum literacy; sufficient to enable the victims to read advertising and instructions and know where they should go, how they should spend their money, what they should think important and what they should believe, as well as a total dependence on industrial society to supply their needs and 'experts' to think for them.

It'd be nice to have better organization for these discussions, rather than random and swiftly-disappearing threads, and to not have discussions going all over the place.

 

[TheCunctator]

That interview was fascinating. Thank you so much for sharing it.

It broke my heart to read the part about her homosexual patient who was beginning to lead a happy, heterosexual life, until his significant other terminated the pregnancy. So sad she had to face the brunt of it.

Even worse that she was attacked for it instead of people observing her limited success and wondering if more could be done. But that's because people want to be told that their issues are something they are "born with" and therefore innate, and therefore acceptable.

 

[Thekla]

Even worse that she was attacked for it instead of people observing her limited success and wondering if more could be done. But that's because people want to be told that their issues are something they are "born with" and therefore innate, and therefore acceptable.

And this is an important issue, I agree.

Many conditions have been found to have an 'inborn' component, yet are not considered "acceptable". Drawing the line may effect treatment issues, capturing unhealthy conditions into the healthy category.

 

[Philothei]

That interview was fascinating. Thank you so much for sharing it.

It broke my heart to read the part about her homosexual patient who was beginning to lead a happy, heterosexual life, until his significant other terminated the pregnancy. So sad she had to face the brunt of it.

Even worse that she was attacked for it instead of people observing her limited success and wondering if more could be done. But that's because people want to be told that their issues are something they are "born with" and therefore innate, and therefore acceptable.

You are welcome my initial reaction wast he same...Wish the "system" would have allowed for the situation to be handled differently. And who knows maybe the patient would have realized that his "devastation" of his "girlfriend" aborting the child is not a "result" or the therapist doing or leading him but acceptted it as a poor judgement on his part and continued to seek help. BTW there are success stories and then again not "success" stories.... That is part of life and also part of mental illness like we said it is not curable but at least it can be managable.

The difference is one therapist telling you it is completely "normal" to behave in such manner and the opposite is to tell you is NOT and you should try to live a happy life based on what truly makes one happy. And how can anyone be happy away from God? *sigh* Pretty much it is like telling someone compulsive that it is ok to be washing their hands 100 times a day...Maybe I am off to say this but that is what I get from this as I admit I am no expert...

 

[Dorothea]

That interview was fascinating. Thank you so much for sharing it.

It broke my heart to read the part about her homosexual patient who was beginning to lead a happy, heterosexual life, until his significant other terminated the pregnancy. So sad she had to face the brunt of it.

Even worse that she was attacked for it instead of people observing her limited success and wondering if more could be done. But that's because people want to be told that their issues are something they are "born with" and therefore innate, and therefore acceptable.

Not only that, but that they can't change. This is the crux of the issue. If we are told we are fine the way we are in whatever sins we struggle with because these people don't believe sin is real or what have you (yes, I know people - friends even - who do not believe there is such thing as sin), then the deception of the evil one has won, and the person is vulnerable because they are then living and immersed in their sins without knowing it is not what we are called to do in this life. Hope that makes sense. This is what I've been seeing about this issue in the OP - the whole topic. I do believe that through Christ God, anybody can change their lives.

 

[Dorothea]

Dr. Lynne says what a priest in a podcast said with regards to people looking for love in the wrong places. What makes them whole is being in union with God, not trying to find what's missing in other people. This is what I see and hear all the time, especially in movies and music. It's all over the place. One person can't go on without the other because they are left empty and hollow and such, but if one is complete in Christ, they should see themselves as whole, not part of a person. This is what the priest always pointed out in his podcast on this subject. I think it goes with this subject because Dr. Lynne said that's the central issue - feeling unloved. They feel unloved because they are separated from God, as she said. Here's the short podcast that correlates with this topic:

What Only God Can Give - Hearts and Minds - Ancient Faith Radio

 

[Philothei]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html

Forgot to post this^ here it goes...Enjoy! The homosexuals will now "set the norms" for marriage What a bout that ??