Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Can therapy or experiences alter predicted sexual orientation outcomes?
Executive summary
Therapeutic efforts designed specifically to change a person’s sexual orientation — commonly called conversion therapy or sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) — have not been shown to change sexual orientation and are widely judged harmful by major health organizations; multiple reviews find little or no evidence of efficacy and consistent links to depression, PTSD and suicidality [1] [2] [3]. Available reporting shows mainstream professional bodies (APA, AACAP, American Medical Association et al.) oppose these practices and recommend supportive, identity-affirming care instead [4] [5] [6].
1. What the peer-reviewed evidence and major reviews say: no proof of changing orientation
Scientific reviews and literature surveys conclude there is no credible evidence that therapy can reliably change sexual orientation. A literature review identified dozens of peer‑reviewed studies and found most primary research concludes conversion therapy is ineffective and/or harmful; 12 of 13 primary studies in that review found ineffectiveness or harm [2]. Historic and contemporary reviews likewise concluded “no evidence…to suggest that sexual orientation can be changed” [7] [8]. These assessments form the central empirical basis for current professional positions [2] [7].
2. Professional organizations’ stance: oppose change efforts, endorse affirming care
Major professional organizations explicitly oppose therapies premised on changing sexual orientation. The American Psychological Association’s guidance opposes reparative approaches and cautions that there is no evidence that sexual orientation can be changed through therapy [9] [10]. Pediatric, psychiatric and broader medical organizations — including statements cited by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and others — characterize conversion practices as unethical or not supported by medical justification [5] [6].
3. Harm documented: mental-health costs and long-term effects
Available studies link structured attempts to change sexual orientation or gender identity with worse mental‑health outcomes. A large study led by Stanford Medicine found people who experienced conversion practices reported greater symptoms of depression, PTSD, and suicidality [3]. Reviews and surveys summarized by Cornell’s What We Know project and other reporting documented associations with depression, anxiety, social isolation and increased suicidality across multiple studies [2] [11].
4. Why some individuals report “change”: methodological, social, and definitional factors
Some individuals report changes in behavior, identity labels, or sexual practices after undergoing change efforts, but available sources stress methodological limits and selection bias. A 2002 study cited by reporting found a small percentage reported behavioral shifts, with many of those later affiliated with ex‑gay ministries — a pattern critics attribute to self‑selection and social incentives rather than demonstrable reorientation [11]. Reviews also note difficulties in measuring sexual orientation reliably over time, and that claimed successes are not supported by rigorous, long‑term outcome research [10] [2].
5. Distinction between harmful “change efforts” and supportive therapy
Sources emphasize a clear difference between identity‑affirming, evidence‑based mental‑health care and so‑called conversion therapies. Ethical therapists work to reduce minority stress, support wellbeing, and help clients explore identity without assuming a particular outcome; professional organizations advise against any treatment premised on treating homosexuality as a disorder [4] [12]. WebMD and other overviews reiterate that conversion therapy tactics vary but are distinct from legitimate supportive counseling [13].
6. Legal and policy context: bans and protections are growing
Although not exhaustively covered in these snippets, reporting notes that many jurisdictions and professional groups have moved to restrict or ban licensed providers from offering change‑effort therapies to minors, and national professional coalitions support legislative protections against conversion therapy [14] [10]. Available sources do not list every jurisdiction or law; for specifics, consult local policy summaries [14].
7. Limitations in the record and contested claims
Available sources document that early, non‑rigorous studies (e.g., Robert Spitzer’s controversial work) were later repudiated or criticized for methodology; Spitzer himself retreated from claims that conversion therapy reliably changes orientation [1] [11]. Sources also acknowledge measurement challenges: sexual orientation can encompass behavior, attraction and identity, complicating assessments of “change” [12] [10]. Where claims fall outside these sources — for example, assertions that a specific individual’s orientation was permanently altered by therapy — not found in current reporting.
Conclusion: policy and practice guided by harm reduction
The dominant scientific and professional consensus in the provided sources is clear: therapies explicitly aimed at changing sexual orientation lack credible evidence of efficacy and are associated with measurable harms, while ethical practice favors supportive, non‑directive care [2] [3] [4]. Individuals and policymakers weighing claims of “change” should note the methodological limitations of positive anecdotes, the documented mental‑health risks, and the explicit opposition of major medical and mental‑health organizations [2] [6] [4].