Homosexuality:
How Should We Evaluate Spitzer’s Study on
Homosexuals Changing?

view the .pdf | note: all footnotes are included within the .pdf

May 2001

by: Toni Meyer, Sr. Research Analyst for the New Jersey Family Policy Council

Most media reports on Robert Spitzer’s study, the new study that he says proves some homosexuals can change their sexual orientation with therapy, have included comments from those who challenge the validity of his study. However, I have not yet read any facts from such individuals that fully explain a valid problem they have with it. So, as a researcher, I feel a need to address what questions we should be asking and how we should evaluate the study.

First, let’s look at the stated purpose of the Columbia University professor and researcher’s study. The purpose of Spitzer’s study was NOT to study a cross section of the homosexual population per se, and determine what percentage of those living that lifestyle were able to change. As the title of the study indicates, “200 Subjects Who Claimed to Have Changed Their Sexual Orientation From Homosexual to Heterosexual”, instead included subjects who met the study criteria of: testifying to a significant change in their sexual attractions for more than five years and who were predominantly homosexual before that . The point of the study was and is, are homosexuals capable of real, lasting change at all and can those that change their orientation be happy? The answer the study revealed is YES.

Secondly, there is another factor that the media did not explore. If the sample was indeed “stacked” with former homosexuals who where involved with a therapy or life change that was spiritually based, is it simply because they were somehow more capable of change and therefore more of them were qualified to participate? Or was their therapy more effective in some way? And something that the study did not address is did others who had no faith change at the same rate?

We can safely assume that Spitzer, a psychiatric professor and researcher, did not purposely try to prove a point based on Christianity or any other religion because he is a self-professed atheistic Jew. He is also an architect of the American Psychiatric Association’s 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from their list of disorders. He simply wanted to research whether people who claimed to change did change or not. Based on the study objective and parameters the study results are valid. In addition, contrary to what one prominent homosexual activist incorrectly told the press, Spitzer is far from a conservative. In truth he is on the record for speaking out in favor of pro-gay public policy positions. I am also certain he did not wish to be put in a position to have to cancel his appearance at a press conference for the National Press Club out of “concern for his family” or be verbally attacked by politically correct colleagues and associates.

With regard to the report of two other psychologists at the AP conference who reported studies of other groups of homosexuals in which some said they were harmed by therapy, I have an important research question. Did they have a true cross section of the homosexual population participating in their studies or was their survey “stacked” with confirmed homosexuals who had no desire to change? Or did they exclude those that claimed to be changed if they had been involved with a group that feels that homosexuality is wrong or is spiritually based?

Lastly, as a researcher, I do not think the Spitzer study answers all the questions that need to be addressed concerning homosexuality, indeed, that was not its intent by design. There are also some factors that we can not fully evaluate about either of these studies until they are published. In the meantime, the Spitzer study can hopefully provoke future studies where the participants are from a cross section of the homosexual population, and especially where people of faith and non-faith alike are included and examined on that and other bases. In conclusion, the study is worthy of acknowledgement, because the bottom line is it documents that some individuals can and have changed successfully from having a homosexual identity to having a satisfying heterosexual identity – an important piece of information that everyone should know about.

May 2001.

 

back...