<scp>LGBTQ</scp>+ conversion therapy and applied behavior analysis: A call to action

Conine and colleagues wrote a position paper. They looked at ABA’s past use in LGBTQ+ conversion therapy.

The authors did not run a new experiment. They reviewed history and ethics codes. They asked the field to fix past harm.

The paper shows ABA once helped try to change sexual orientation. This history still hurts LGBTQ+ clients today.

The authors say the BACB ethics code is too quiet on this issue. They want clear statements and new affirming research.

Graber et al. (2024) extend the call. They map U.S. court cases on informed consent. Together the papers say: update both ethics and legal consent forms before working with LGBTQ+ clients.

Cox (2024) also extends the idea. He shows payers are moving to value-based care. Cox argues affirming LGBTQ+ outcomes can be written into the new quality metrics.

Smith (2008) is topically related. He proves restraint has no therapeutic benefit. Both papers urge ABA to drop harmful tools of the past—restraint then, conversion therapy now.

You may never use conversion therapy, but clients still fear the field. Add an LGBTQ+ consent paragraph to your intake packet this week. Join the BACB ethics draft surveys when they open. Small moves show clients you have read the history and chosen the affirming side.