DSM-II 302.0
I moved to this city twenty-five months ago, but I still haven’t managed to find myself a psychiatrist. I have been treated for depression and dysthymia for a half-dozen years now, and lacking first comprehensive, then any health insurance, whatever traditional psychotherapy I sought would have to be paid for out of pocket. As a full-time student and part-time library paraprofessional, there’s not much in my pockets, so I have to make do with what resources I can cobble together.
I saw a resident at the medical school for a while, and consulted with my former psychiatrist over the phone while I was in transition from one place to another. Phone consultations are hard, and at the sliding-scale clinic I had serious doubts about the competence of my resident, as well as disgust at the unprofessional behavior of the reception staff. I found a combination of medications that keeps me relatively stable and content, and I have a GP prescribing them to me as a stopgap situation until I can set myself up with a competent specialist who is willing to see a patient who pays out-of-pocket.
That’s a gloss of my background info. One of these weeks I’ll write more about mental illness, despair, and lack of faith.
Someone on a message board mentioned catholictherapists.com, which piqued my interest–it might be nice for once to see a mental health professional who doesn’t see my geriatric (past age 20) virginity as a serious crisis to be remedied as soon as possible. There was one listed in my city, whose office I drive past every day on my way to work. Looking over her profile, I saw something that stuck in the back of my mind. The site asks applicants to state and comment on which official Church teachings they agree or disagree with. Catholic personals sites do the same thing, of course–all for reasons that should be self-evident. You can see the application here: it asks about artificial contraception, abortion, infertility, cohabitation…the everyday issues that most mainstream American Catholics ignore.
The local shrink agreed with the last item. The Church’s teaching on homosexuality.
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
This is a valid teaching, even if it’s one that I disagree with, and I understand why they include it…but then, I don’t. I understand that there are still conservative physicians and therapists who believe that homosexuality is a psychiatric illness in need of treatment or who call for chastity and conquering one’s urges. Fine. To say that being homosexual is “disordered” implies that it is a mental illness…which it hasn’t been considered such by her profession since 1972.
Pharmacists and hospitals have a right not to stock or dispense Plan B. Here in New York, you can have a special testing time for civil service exams if they happen to fall on a religious holiday or day of rest. I oppose on ethical grounds the policy of my profession (librarian) that all patrons, even minors, should have access to all materials in the library.
It’s one thing to gracefully bow out of doing things at work that one’s religion forbids, but publicly declaring disagreement with the profession’s definition of what constitutes a mental illness? I can see the reasoning behind it, but I’m not sure I would want to be a patient of a doctor who clicked the little ticky box in complete sincerity.
Lilder said,
April 14, 2007 at 12:57 am
I would like to respectfully point out that neither catholictherapist.com, this particular therapist, nor the Catholic church calls homosexuality a psychiatric illness that requires treatment. It does NOT say that homosexuals are disordered. What it DOES say is that homosexual ACTS are disordered.
Here is the complete text from the cite you linked:
{HOMOSEXUALITY:
“Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’ They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarily. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.” (Catechism 2357, 2358, 2359)}
This is actually a very accepting and supportive statement to homosexuals. Yes, they are called to chastity. ALL non-married persons all called to chastity. Yes, their desires are disordered, so are the desires of a man to drink too much or to needlessly kill or to view pornography. Does this make the man ill? Does this make the man disordered? NO. Giving into these urges is the problem. It is important to retain that distinction.
I would say by checking this box, the psychiatrist is actually saying she supports helping homosexuals with their unique and difficult cross they must bear.
My two cents…
Joan said,
April 14, 2007 at 6:19 am
Thank you for stopping by and weighing in!
I understand the Church’s position on this, but I consider it inconsistent, especially from a psychiatric point of view. Thinking about it medically, the ultimate goal is to keep the patient from having urges to perform undesirable acts, not to tell the patient that having the urges is okay, but not to act on them. As a former suicidal patient…that doesn’t work. The underlying causes for a disordered action need to be addressed.
Saying that a person is not disordered but that their inclinations and afflications are is a bit off. The Church is advanced far beyond many denominations by acknowledging that one’s orientation isn’t a choice, but coming at this from what I understand of psychiatry, it doesn’t make sense.
It’s different with addiction therapy, since there may be underlying causes (stress, depression, sexual frustration) behind substance or pornography abuse. In the case of homosexuality, the root cause is inborn.
I agree with you that it would be important for a gay person who wants to live chastely to find a sympathetic therapist (and perhaps a doctor to prescribe libido-dampening drugs, though I’m not sure if that’s ethical except in the case of convicted pedophiles, a while other can of worms.) Such a therapist may indeed be hard to find. I just have trouble reconciling the practice of psychotherapy as I understand it with the idea that actions can be disordered but not people. It doesn’t quite fit.