This document summarizes the California Psychological Association's involvement in legislation to ban the use of sexual orientation change efforts (SOCE) on minors. It describes how CPA initially opposed the bill due to concerns about litigation and consent forms, but later worked with the bill's sponsor and other groups to amend the bill to a neutral position. CPA then advocated internally to support the bill based on evidence that SOCE is potentially harmful and outside the scope of legitimate practice. The bill ultimately passed and was signed into law, though it faces legal challenges. CPA's work on this issue generated significant media interest.

1. APA Annual Convention
Honolulu, Hawaii
August 2, 2013

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…