Dr. Jeffrey: Bravo for your stand against censorship! Some critics describe a “Dr. Socarides” that bears little resemblance to the man I have known since 1952. Charles Socarides has worked longer and harder to understand homosexual behavior (and other aspects of human sexuality) than any other living psychoanalyst. He has enriched our understanding of the psychodynamics of homosexuality, and I would like—publicly—to salute him for doing so.
As one who has attended all but one of NARTH's meetings, I find most criticism (published in TAP) seriously at odds with what I have observed.
In my copy of the Hippocratic oath one-fourth of the thirty-three lines describe how a physician should behave with his or her teacher and other physicians. Ralph Roughton's behavior with Socarides provides painful examples of total disregard or disrespect for these principles:
In a letter to the New York Times on March 6, 1995, Roughton implied Socarides was “condoning violence”—a ludicrous statement. Even after the involved Times reporter confirmed in writing that Socarides said no such thing (and in fact had said the opposite), Roughton neither corrected his error nor apologized to Socarides.
After Socarides submitted an affidavit to the Colorado Legislature (October 8, 1993), Roughton et al. had the attorney for The American write a letter condemning Socarides for “misrepresenting” the Association because he had not also submitted a copy of our Association's 1991–92 antibias statement.
There are several problems here:
1.) a failure in logic. Reread the 1991–92 statement. It opposes “discrimination against … homosexually oriented individuals,” especially those entering or in “component institutes.” It does not attempt to define or explain how homosexuality develops (which was Socarides' purpose). I know of no other Association document (extant in 1993) that does this—except for Psychoanalytic Terms and Concepts, which Socarides used and of which he was the author or coauthor of cited sections).
2.) unnecessary use of an attorney. If Association leaders question any member's behavior, are they so weak they cannot conduct their own investigation and, when indicated, take action with the member? Who paid the attorney's fees? Surely, in this protracted debate, the time is overdue for a renaissance of courteous and respectful treatment of other physicians!
C. Downing Tait