No, homosexuality is not a risk factor for the sexual abuse of children

A rainbow appears in the distance near an angel grave marker following a July 4 thunderstorm at St. Patrick Catholic Cemetery in Neenah, Wis. (CNS photo/Brad Birkholz, for The Compass)

Many people believe that homosexuality is the root cause of sexual abuse by clergy in the Catholic Church since about 80 percent of the known victims have been male. This has led some church leaders to suggest that banning homosexual men from the priesthood could prevent future victimization of children in the church. While it may be understandable that some believe this, it is simply not true. You really have to know something about the psychopathology of sex offenders and pedophiles to understand this issue more clearly.

No one would suggest banning heterosexual men from the priesthood if the majority of clergy abuse victims were young girls. That would seem absurd. This is because many see heterosexuality as normal and controllable while believing that homosexuality is abnormal, dysfunctional and a psychiatric illness. As such, it is often falsely believed that men with homosexual orientations cannot be trusted around male children and that their sexual impulse control is poor. But the research data on this topic makes clear that sexual orientation alone is not a risk factor for pedophilia or for committing sexual crimes against children or teens or anyone. Sexual orientation by itself is irrelevant to child sexual abuse behavior or risks.

Advertisement

Clergy sexual offenders were “situational generalists,” or men who simply abused victims to whom they had access.

So why are so many of the clergy sexual abuse victims male? A study from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in 2011 informs us that most of the clergy sexual offenders were “situational generalists” or men who simply abused victims to whom they had access and with whom they had the opportunity to develop trust. In the Catholic Church, these individuals tended to be boys. If Father wanted to have private time with an altar boy or perhaps take a boy off on a camping trip or to a baseball game back in the 20th century, no one would have thought much of it. Boys were trusted with priests. But most of the clergy sex offenders during the last half of the 20th century, according to the John Jay Report, viewed themselves as more likely to be heterosexual than as homosexual.

The psychopathology of pedophiles suggests that the risk factors for this psychiatric illness include impulse control problems, brain injury, poor peer relationships, antisocial personality, a lack of nonsexual intimate connections with others, alcohol and substance abuse, and a history of sexual victimization. Sexual orientation is not a risk factor at all. Furthermore, there are many different kinds of sex offenders who often have multiple pathways to victimization and different targets of their predatory desires. For example, some prefer to target young children while others target teens. Some ideally prefer to have adult peer sexual partners, but due to their inability to negotiate mature adult intimate relationships, select minors as a substitute, especially when under significant stress. And some, like most clerical sex offenders in the church, select those with whom they have access and trust.

The psychopathology of pedophiles suggests that risk factors for this psychiatric illness include impulse control problems and a history of sexual victimization.

The behavior and psychopathology of sex offenders is complex, but there is a large amount of quality research to help us better understand their behavior, with established best practices for evaluating and treating them for their dysfunction. Best practices are also available for child protection by better managing the environment where children are involved with adults—within church activities as well as in schools, youth sports, music and theater programs, and other extracurricular youth activities. Being aware and thoughtful about this well-established research and these recommended best practices in child protection will help keep children safe.

Inappropriately blaming or victimizing homosexual men, within or outside of the church, does not keep children safe or solve clergy sexual abuse problems. Regardless of sexual orientation or the vows of priestly celibacy or even marital vows, only a small percentage of people seek sexual activity with children and teens, and the vast majority of them are heterosexual, married and noncelibate laypersons who tend to exploit members of their own family. The false and distracting focus on homosexuality is not relevant to keeping children safe within the Catholic Church.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
J Brookbank
4 weeks 1 day ago

Thank you for this. This addresses the data AND the false narratives generated by misunderstandings of specific and discreet terms and definitions; misreadings of the data; inappropriate manipulations of statistics to create new "statistics"; and an unpacking of assumptions.

Michael Barberi
4 weeks 1 day ago

I completely agree.
Unfortunately, the Church continues to exclude from seminaries any mature and well-adjusted person who admits to be homosexual. For this reason, most, if not all men who desire to enter a seminary do not admit to be homosexual as there is no credible test for homosexuality. The overwhelming majority of homosexual and heterosexual priests abide by their vows and are good priests.

J Brookbank
4 weeks 1 day ago

Michael, I agree.

The Church has created for itself and its seminaries the same conflict society created. "If you want to pursue your vocation [to the priesthood or family life], you need to lie. To live a life of integrity by living your God-given vocation, you need to abandon your integrity when it comes to honesty. To live your vocation, you need to become a full-time pretender, acting a part in the most sacred corners of human life. And when you get caught telling the lies we sare going to declare ourselves --- as a Church, as a seminary, as wives and husbands and children and communitues ----- mistreated and tricked and betrayed and we are going to crucify you for those lies we demanded you tell so that you could live your God-given vocation."

I think of the gay Catholic priests, brothers, sisters and lay workers I have known. All had clear vocations to the Church. Most had lied at some point about who they are so they could pursue their vocations which so deeply benefitted the Church and all of us. What a betrayal and abuse of such good and holy men and women who just want to serve and love us as they serve and love God.

*** You are likely aware but just in case
a comparatively little known but important historical resouce is "Homosexuality and the Church" by former Jesuit priest, theologian, psychotherapist and author John J McNeill. I am adding a link to his obituary in the LATimes. The book includes fascinating church documents.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.latimes.com/local/obituaries/la-me-john-…

J Brookbank
4 weeks ago

PS Sadly enough for the Jesuit community, I could find no mention of Fr McNeill's life or passing in America Magazine. I hope that they did so in their own intra-Order media. He accepted it and abided by it when he was ordered to silence his public writing and speaking on the issue but, proof of vocation to care for all God's children, and especially "the least of these", he continued his ministry to the ostracized and suffering LGBT community. Though I am a straight woman, his refusal to abandon his brothers and sisters EVEN at the cost of his own vocation (with its extraordinary roots in WWII) ---- that sacrifice, that fully committed move to the margins to be with those abandoned by all others ---- that choice moves me to tears of joy and pain and profound gratitude and love for him, for his vocation, for the Holy Spirit that signaled to him that discipleship and formal vocation are not always one and the same. Fr McNeill is one of the priests of my heart and soul though I never met him.

History will look back Fr McNeill and Fr Roy Bourgeois MM as prophets, voices in the wilderness of their time. Both understood that distinction I learned from Larry Purcell during a visit to the Redwood City Catholic Worker: discipleship and pursuing/choosing to maintain a Church vocation are not always the same.

Vincent Couling
4 weeks ago

Thank you for your powerful words, JB! I have what I regard to be a treasure: an autographed copy of John McNeill's "The Church and the Homosexual."

I cite the relevant part of the Wiki blurb on him (from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_J._McNeill ):

In 1976, McNeill published The Church and the Homosexual, which challenged the Church's prohibition of same-sex activity. It was the first extended non-judgmental work about gay Catholics, a subject that had long been taboo in official church discourse. The book was the first attempt by a reputed scholar and theologian to examine and challenge traditional church teachings on sexuality and attitudes toward gay and lesbian Catholics. It argued for a change in Church teaching and that homosexual relationships should be judged by the same standard of heterosexual ones. It argued that a stable, loving same-sex relationship was just as moral, and just as godly, as a heterosexual one and should be acknowledged as such by church leaders. It has been credited with helping to set in motion the re-evaluation of the religious stance toward gay people.[5]

After an extensive review of the manuscript by a panel of theologians, the work received permission from McNeill's Jesuit superiors prior to printing and the Vatican imprimatur. It was translated into several languages. However, the following year the permission was retracted at the order of the Vatican, and McNeill was ordered by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger not to write or speak further publicly about the issue of homosexuality. McNeill responded in a statement highlighting his concern that "gay men most likely to act out their sexual needs in an unsafe, compulsive way, and therefore expose themselves to the HIV virus, are precisely those who have internalised the self-hatred that their religions impose on them." He nevertheless observed the imposed silence for nine years while continuing his private ministry to gays and lesbian Catholics.[6] Two things eventually led him to speak out. Firstly, seeing the devastating effects of the AIDS epidemic after establishing an AIDS ministry alongside Mychal Judge, serving homeless people in Harlem. Secondly, the 1986 Vatican pastoral letter, "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons" issued by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. The document declared that homosexuality was "a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil." McNeill condemned the letter in a statement issued to The New York Times and The National Catholic Reporter.[5]

In 1987, he received yet another order from Ratzinger directing him to give up all ministry to gay persons and remain silent on gay issues or face expulsion. An order, he said, he could not follow in good conscience. He was subsequently expelled from the Jesuit order after 40 years.[6] He remained nominally a priest but was not permitted to say Mass.

Nevertheless, McNeill remained respected among gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender rights Catholics as well as others who looked to his scholarly writings to help them accept their own sexuality and defend themselves against what they viewed to be misguided church teachings. In 1987, he was the grand marshal of the New York City gay pride parade.[5] He continued to speak out against official Catholic teachings on matters of sexuality and in particular the harsh and "homophobic" teachings coming out of the Vatican.[6] McNeill himself was openly gay[5]

In 1998 he published his memoir, "Both Feet Firmly Planted in Midair: My Spiritual Journey." In 2012, a documentary entitled 'Taking A Chance On God' was directed and produced by Brendan Fay about his life. He spoke about having tried "with the help of the Holy Spirit to free gay Christians from the lies of a pathologically homophobic religion."[3]

McNeill died at a hospice in Fort Lauderdale, Florida on September 22, 2015 at the age of 90 with his partner of 46 years, Charlie Chiarelli, at his bedside. The two men married in Toronto in 2008.[4][6]

Michael Barberi
4 weeks ago

Thanks to J Brookbank and Vincent Couling for bringing Fr. McNeil to my attention. I ordered all 3 of his books to add to my current library and readings.

J Brookbank
4 weeks ago

I own only the first (I have read the others) but will follow your example and order the other two today. We need to work to keep these powerful Catholic works in print.

F C
3 weeks 6 days ago

J Brookbank
Thank you so much for your very powerful words and references to the life of Rev John J McNeill.

J Brookbank
4 weeks ago

Vincent, thank you for posting this. YES that signed book is a treasure! He was a gorgeous, loving, courageous disciple of Christ.

Theodore Seeber
3 weeks 6 days ago

Only abusers are homosexual, because homosexuality is a religion of abuse.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Theodore, your comment is bigoted nonsense.

James Haraldson
3 weeks 2 days ago

Everyone who shares in the denial processes this idiotic article seeks to promote aids and abets the abuse of children. It is obvious the willful depravity of homosexuality correlates to child abuse.

alan macdonald
4 weeks 1 day ago

This misleading article on homosexuality could only be found in a pro-homosexual magazine or a Jesuit one. Fortunately for the LCBTP, these two interests intersect in "America".

Daniel Montiel
4 weeks ago

Sadly (for Alan), he’d need to conduct further research to satisfy his desire to discriminate against those whom the world has already knocked down.
At least he can continue to use the (misspelt) acronym which adds a “P” to the standard “LGBT” - nothing proves Alan’s bias like his / most homophobes’ efforts to pretend that “pedophilia” is part of being queer.

Tim O'Leary
4 weeks ago

Daniel - this is the problem with defining people by acronyms. One has to watch one's Ps and Qs. Does P stand for pedophilia or polyamory or something else. Should Q be added (most say yes). What does Q stand for (is is Queer or Questioning, etc.). The Church would be wise to stick with "same-sex-attracted" as it relates to the orientation without necessitating sinful activity. Dr. Plante links to a research article in his second paragraph. A quote from that article indicates it is only referring to pre-pubescent attraction as pedophilia, not teenagers (ephebophilia): Here is a quote: "Second, at present, in discussing Pedophilia, DSM-5 makes reference to the term Pedophilic Sexual Orientation. Sexual Orientation is ordinarily used to designate the category, or categories, of persons whom a given individual finds to be sexually appealing. Those who are heterosexually oriented are sexually attracted to adults of the opposite sex; those who are homosexual, to adults of the same sex; men with a heterosexual pedophilic orientation, to prepubescent females; and men with a homosexual pedophilic orientation, to prepubescent boys."

J Brookbank
4 weeks ago

Tim, with regard to the latter half of your comment:

For the first time in my reading of your comments on data analysis in this area, I think you may raise a question that derives from the literature WITHOUT the inappropruate manipulations of statistics and re-definition of terms you have engaged in in the past.

In the interest of clarity and informed duscussions, I would be interested to read a response from the author which addresses the literature-driven question I think you raise: how do we interpret that data and make use of his analyses when clerical victims are POST-pubescent children of EITHER gender.

Given the language of the article and the citation you note, I believe your question (if I have articulated it accurately) is intellectually fair.

Stan Zorin
4 weeks ago

@ Daniel Montiel - Sadly (for Daniel), he’d need to conduct further research to satisfy his desire to discriminate against those whom the world hates because they refuse to support sexual depravity and degeneracy.
At least he can continue to refuse to use the (not-misspelt) acronym which adds a “P” to the standard “LGBT” - nothing proves Daniel’s bias like his / most homophiles' efforts to pretend that “pedophilia” is not a part of being queer.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Stan, your comment is bigoted nonsense.

alan macdonald
4 weeks 1 day ago

This misleading article on homosexuality could only be found in a pro-homosexual magazine or a Jesuit one. Fortunately for the LCBTP, these two interests intersect in "America".

Frank T
4 weeks 1 day ago

I have never thought that the Jesuit Review has a specific agenda regarding sexual orientation.
I find the articles to be timely and clarifying, the site is informative.
I would suggest that sometimes, as readers we seek justifications for our own perspectives.
Rooting out our own personal bias rather than perpetuating old myths is part of what we as Catholics are called to do.

Daniel Montiel
4 weeks ago

Frank, one need only see that Alan has used the slur of including a “P” - for pedophile/pedophilia - in the acronym commonly used to refer to queer people. His hatefilled bias reveals itself in that pathetic attempt.

Stefan Svilich
4 weeks ago

Nice opinion piece. Where is his data? Without data to support his opinion, all I see is spin.

Vincent Couling
4 weeks ago

Excellent insight, Stefan! Simply brilliant! Of course, this permits us to say of the "church teaching" on homosexuality (be it Ratzinger's 1986 letter, or the CCC, etc): "Nice opinion piece. Where are the data? Without data to support their opinion, all I see is spin."

As for the data ... here is a useful link to some pertinent scientific studies ... http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

Stefan Svilich
4 weeks ago

Nice opinion piece. Where is his data? Without data to support his opinion, all I see is spin.

Stefan Svilich
4 weeks ago

Nice opinion piece. Where is his data? Without data to support his opinion, all I see is spin.

John K
4 weeks ago

This article does NOT refute the claim that homosexuality is a risk factor in the sexual abuse of children. Unfortunately, it’s just completely off the mark. For one thing, the sexual abuse crisis is NOT a pedophilia crisis. In the John Jay report cited in this article, less than 5% of the priests were classified as true pedophiles. And yet here you link two articles that show there is no link between pedophilia and homosexuality, which may be true, but is completely irrelevant. 77.4% of the victims are over the age of 11. The majority of the victims are considered post-pubescent males. Nothing to do with pedophilia.

John K
4 weeks ago

Frankly, this article is just plain bad. It perpetuates all sorts of myths regarding the sexual abuse crisis and does not confront the real issues. I happen to agree that homosexuality is being overemphasized as one of the sources of the problem. But it’s a shame when America magazine posts things like this. It’s one thing to post articles that people disagree with to generate discussion as they say they do. But it’s another thing to post articles that are misleading and confused, purporting to cite evidence but actually citing none. I don’t think the issues of homosexuality, fluid sexuality, and child abuse are fully understood, but this just doesn't help.

John K
4 weeks ago

I just read that Mr. Plante is a tenured university professor at Santa Clara. This is just unbelievable. This article is just incoherent and maybe outright dishonest. He cites data saying there is no link between homosexuality and pedophilia, and yet that could only prove that less than 5% of the cases have nothing to do with homosexuality. What about the other 95% Professor Plante? Again pedophilia is not the issue. Incredible.

Again, I think the issue of homosexuality is being overemphasized in more conservative circles right now as the cause of the problem. But this is just flat out unhelpful and divisive

Tim O'Leary
4 weeks ago

No data. Unsubstantiated spin. We are not talking about pedophilia, but ephebophilia, or homosexual relations with teenagers. To put this down to a crime of opportunity is about as credible as covering this with clericalism. Opportunity or clericalism do not make pederasty possible, without a prior predisposition or specific temptation. NRB member, Dr. Paul McHugh, former psychiatrist-in-chief at Johns Hopkins University, said that "This behavior was homosexual predation on American Catholic youth; yet it's not being discussed." Then McCarrick becomes head of the committee and this conclusion gets taken out of the report. Fox among the chickens.

Tim O'Leary
4 weeks ago

Why is there so much attention on homosexuality on this website, seeping into every topic? It's an obsession, and not the Gospel. Since July 1, there have been 73 articles that mention this subject (their search system). LGBT in 30 of these articles, Gay is 49, Lesbian in 10, Transgender in 9, Bisexual in 7. pedophilia in 4. Ephebophilia in none (last used in Dec-2017). This is pure ideology. Some writers say the gay trait is just like being left-handed. How absurd! Pray for the Jesuits.

Daniel Montiel
4 weeks ago

Pretendalying that genetics -if not science itself!- is “absurd” and not relevant in these discussions reveals that Tim ought pray for himself more than Jesuits.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Tim, what is the basis of your statement that "opportunity and clericalism do not make pederasty possible without a prior disposition or specific temptation"?

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Tim, for a guy demanding citations, it is a surprise that you didn't note that this comment is a synopsis of a Church Militant interview with Dr McHugh?

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Tim, if you are indeed the medical professional you insist you are, you know that there are different and entirely legitimate ways to present "data" in an article of this kind.

Overt citation of statistics is NOT the only way. Even high school and college kid understand this basic of research- and literature-based writing these days.

This author provides internet links to the literature. These links serve a similar function as footnotes.

Again, if indeed you are a medical professional, you know better.

Kevin Murphy
4 weeks ago

Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk. - Thoreau

Bill McIntosh
4 weeks ago

Ok the problem isnt pedophilia but gay priests chasing adolescent boys! This quote from Jules Gomes nails it:
"The guilty priests weren’t pedophiles, as the media and the church’s hierarchy are disingenuously suggesting or mindlessly parroting. The delinquent clergy were homosexual predators preying on adolescent or young adult males".
https://medium.com/@jules.gomes/homosexual-predators-not-paedophile-pri…

PLEASE NO MORE QUEER SEMINARIAN VOCATIONS DIRECTORS

James Hyder
3 weeks 6 days ago
Theodore Seeber
3 weeks 6 days ago

Apparently the author failed to notice that the current scandal of sex abuse isn't about child abuse. It's about abuse of seminarians.

ALL homosexuality is abuse. Always,.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Your last comment is bigoted, hyperbolic nonsense.

Edward Ray
3 weeks 6 days ago

I agree that homosexual men should not always be denied the ability to pursue a priestly vocation. However, those homosexuals who wish to engage in homosexual activity should not become priests. Proper vetting during the interview process should mitigate this risk. Any clergy (priests, bishops, cardinals) caught in homosexual activity should be defrocked/removed from the priesthood. Any clergy allowing or condoning homesexuality should be defrocked/removed from the priesthood. Zero tolerance.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Edward, given the current requirement for celibacy, this should stand for ALL men who want to be/are priests: if you want and intend to be sexually active with anyone, the currently celibate priesthood is not an ethical pursuit for you. Why muddy that expectation by singling out gay men in this statement?

Frank Gibbons
3 weeks 6 days ago

Dr. Plante, you've come up with a lot of rationalizations in your attempt to explain away homosexuality as the primary cause of sex abuse within the Church. But you've provided very little data to back up your assertions. There are powerful elements in the Church who want to see homosexuality completely normalized. If these forces carry their thinking to its logical end, then same-sex marriage will be regarded as a Sacrament in the Church. They'll deny this for now as a tactical ploy. They know that as long as homosexuality is seen as a problem in the clergy, their dream of celebrating it within the Church will never come to fruition. Thus, the ideological rationalizations will continue.

Carlos Orozco
3 weeks 6 days ago

No data = ideological argument.

J Brookbank
3 weeks 6 days ago

Carlos, your equation is patently false.

Read the links. They serve the same function as footnotes which is an entirely normal and expected place to find "data" in articles that are grounded in data.

That does not mean an author's conclusions are unassailably correct.

It means that there are different and entirely legitimate ways to present and discuss data-driven information and conclusions.

Phillip Stone
3 weeks 6 days ago

The DSM is supposed to be a compendium of the collective experience of psychiatric and medical specialists; is a work in progress; uses the most primitive of scientific techniques (taxonomy) and is alas now clearly subject to political corruption.

Note, there are two lists which do not always agree - the DSM which is of the USA and the ICD (International Classification of Diseases) which is of the rest of the world. They are both academic tools, not Scripture.

It is true that the DSM was hijacked by political activists.
After twice voting down the attempts by the homosexual lobby to get it declassified, a third meeting was stacked by activists and forced by organised uproar through their preference despite the rest of the professional community already of a different mind. All this is on the record and I have no intention of debating it further.

Now, the devil is in the detail.

In common language, what the Catholic clergy are being exposed of as doing are sex crimes AND organising together to facilitate access to victims AND conspiring together to hide the facts and avoid detection and punishment; all this focussed on by a secular press newly empowered by great advances in multiple electronic media and enabled to do so by the fact that is seems to be the epitome of hypocrisy to have occurred in self-described boastfully specially moral people.

This article is another example of playing word games, arguing from disputed illegitimate authority and deflecting attention from addressing the two interconnected evils apparently manifesting as an historical anomaly - all the usual wrong-doing of power and predatory sexuality by men with both married and unmarried women, female and male children and an atypical addition of homosexually inclined men preying on boys and young men from the 60s to the 90s.

Rabbis, Scout masters, Protestant clergy, psychologists and counsellors, sports coaches and youth workers have all been represented in the latest historically unusual phenomenon.

What are we supposed to learn from it?
Who has the discernment necessary?
Will they be heeded?

J Brookbank
3 weeks 5 days ago

Phillip, for starters, you are incorrect about the DSM-V and ICD-10. Both are used throughout the US; those final numbers reflect the most recent versions of these tools which are used every single day in healthcare settings from nursing homes to neurosurgeons' offices to hospitals to mental health clinics and all of their medical records/billing offices as well as every insurer those offices communicate with. Yes they are updated to reflect the fact that we are learning more about our bodies and minds and medicine is better able to help us as our illnesses are defined in ever more discrete way. Wouldn't you rather the treatment be targeted at the specific issue rather than the general issue? Treatment (therapy and medication) for "psychotic depression" rather than "major depression" if your symptom picture is psychotic depression? Treatment for "post traumatic stress disorder" rather than "borderline personality disorder" if in fact your symptom picture is PTSD? Treatment for a newly discovered kind of brain tumor as opposed to a long-ago identified type of brain tumor you do NOT have? (Of course you would)

You are correct that these tools are also used by academics but that use is, in fact, not the primary or even secondary use.

The DSM (diagnostic and statistical manual) is a psychiatric reference and it provides (as my graduate school clinical supervisor, a PhD psychologist and former Catholic military chaplain, taught me) "word pictures" of mental health symptoms organized into diagnoses which are intended to guide clinicians in differential diagnosis (which includes the finding that a given person does NOT meet criteria for ANY psychiatric diagnosis, which is the result when homophobic family members take children, teens and adults to therapists solely "because he is gay"). It creates a common language (that taxonomy you mention ) so persons with mental illness can gain consistent treatment using consistent language; so their providers can communicate in a common language to coordinate that treatment, including appropriately targeted pharmaceuticals for a given population of patients; and so researchers can focus their investigations to all of the above. It is also used for billing purposes in some settings, increasingly alongside an ICD-10 and soon ICD-11 code.

The ICD codes cover diagnoses and determines coding for ALL body systems, thus including psychiatry. DSM uses words; ICD uses numbers to record diagnoses, treatments, etc., and in the latest version ICD codes are now so detailed that the numbers can indicate what finger of which hand was bruised and on what surface of the finger and the aging of the bruise and details about trestment, etc. Ask anyone in the medical field: the people who know ICD best in any hospital or medical office are the nurse case managers and people in medical records and billing because they deal with it most often.

A very helpful discussion: http://journal.ahima.org/2016/08/10/dsm-5-vs-icd-10-cm/

J Brookbank
3 weeks 5 days ago

Second, your description of the process by which homosexuality was deleted from the DSM is cursory but I see how you got there.

Cursory because it does not address major societal shifts and within psychiatry which were much larger and broader than the issue of homosexuality, including what differences are "disorders" and what differences are normal variants and what medicine's relationship should or should not be regarding "normal variants" and whether medicine (physical or psychiatric) has anything to offer when the difference is "a normal variant" in the human being. Another conversation happening was whether medicine has anything to offer when humans react "negatively" to objectively negative experiences and, in the event in a given specific the answer is yes, WHAT does medicine have to offer? (The classic and St this point very old but very instructive case, of course, being a psychiatric diagnosis given to runaway slaves because THEY RAN AWAY FROM SLAVERY.)In other words, at the time homosexuality was deleted, society was beginning to challenge, re: all kinds of "problem behaviors", just where "the problem" rests: in the individual or in the culture/institution/role definition/etc etc etc.

Almost anything about Robert Spitzer MD and the DSM will lead you to what you call "political corruption" by activists and what most others understand as the manifestations of much larger shifts in psychiatry which are critical context for the process by which homosexuality was deleted from the DSM.

Contexts matters, Phillip. Again, I see how you got to your cursory summary but it is sort of like a weather report saying "it rained" when the rain fell in the context of a thunder and lightning storm that washed out the roads and re-routed the river.

A brief discussion is here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695779/

It provides an overview of the whole of "record".

J Brookbank
3 weeks 5 days ago

I do not understand your post from there. Your writing is very dense --- as in big stuff tightly packed --- and I am not sure what you mean, though I am interested.

Advertisement

The latest from america

A disaster like this creates so many brutal little ironies.
Jim McDermottNovember 20, 2018
The shimmer of liberal democracy has been tarnished with grit and grime, wear and tear. We are stuck in the ring, brawling in our stars-and-stripes shorts.
Brandon SanchezNovember 20, 2018
Members of the Central American caravan will likely have to wait months to have their asylum cases heard, according to the Rev. Pat Murphy, a Scalabrini priest who runs the Casa del Migrante in Tijuana, Baja California. Fewer than 5 percent will be granted asylum, he said.
J.D. Long-GarcíaNovember 19, 2018
Supporter of S.N.A.P., Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, walk in memory of alleged abuse victim outside the Nov 12 assembly of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in Baltimore. (CNS photo/Kevin J. Parks, Catholic Review)
“It is my hope that through the publication of this information, we can work to rebuild trust, always with the well-being of victims in mind,” said Father Ronald A. Mercier.
Michael J. O’LoughlinNovember 19, 2018