2. What Happened
Sen. Ted Lieu, with the encouragement of Equality
California, introduced a bill to ban the use of Sexual
Orientation Change Efforts by mental health
professionals in CA.
No prior consultation or conversation with any mental
health organizations
CPA was asked to support the bill, along with
California Psychiatric Association, CAMFT, and the
Licensed Professional Clinical Counselors.
3. What Happened Next?
Major concern about the legislature stepping into
dictating clinical practice
CPA’s advocacy team provided an analysis of the bill,
which initially included a wide open path to litigation
against psychologists and a prescribed consent form
that would have been required.
Formed a coalition of the mental health professional
groups to discuss and explore the implications of the
legislation.
All groups took an “oppose unless amended” position
4. The Devil is Always in the Details
Never true than with legislation
Began talking with Sen. Lieu’s office about the
troublesome parts of the bill. Quickly (in legislative
worlds) eliminated the path to litigation, and the
consent form.
Goal was to be able to move from “oppose unless
amended” to “neutral” on the bill.
Sticking point: definition of SOCE
5. CPA’s Role
CPA took the lead in gathering the coalition together
to continue working on the language around the
definition of SOCE in order to get to a neutral position
After several weeks, CPA asked Dr. Doug Haldeman to
fly to Sacramento to talk with Sen. Ted Lieu personally
First time a clinician was involved in the process!
6. Intense conversations with Equality CA lobbyist, other
organizations
Sen. Lieu decided to limit the ban of SOCE to its use
with minors
Many iterations of definition of SOCE, but finally all
organizations signed off (the night before the bill was
to be heard in committee)
When bill was in Committee, all mental health
organizations changed position to “neutral”, allowing
the bill to get our of Committee
7. Success!
Major milestone was to get the bill out of Committee
without opposition from mental health organizations
Gratitude all around from the Senator, and Equality
California
All other mental health organizations stepped aside,
sticking with the “neutral” position
8. But Wait! One More Chapter
CPA’s Executive Committee was asked by CPA’s CEO
(me) to continue to consider a “support” position
Chair of our Government Affairs Committee was
opposed
Executive Committee ultimately voted to move to a
“support” position, based on the fact that we
considered SOCE to be “outside the continuum of
legitimate practice” and “potentially harmful to
minors.”
9. By the time the bill was heard on the Assembly Floor
CPA was recognized as a sponsor of the Bill, and the
Speaker of the House gave a passionate argument to
the Assembly in support of the Bill
Bill passed the Assembly, then went back to the Senate
and was passed.
Governor signed the legislation in September 2012
10. Now We Wait
The legislation was challenged in the Courts
Two cases, with two different outcomes
Now with the 9th Circuit, and we are waiting on the
outcome after hearing in April, 2013
Pivot point, as described by one of the Judges, is
whether SOCE is “free speech” or a “medical treatment
that can be regulated by the government.”
11. Whatever Happens, This Raised
Awareness
Huge interest in this topic
25 (at least) interviews about this bill, far more than
any other piece of legislation recently
Interviews included Al Jazeera American and the BBC
Northern Ireland
Continued interested following SCOTUS rulings
Fingers crossed…
