• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

This Speakout has not been edited

By Paul Cameron, Colorado Springs

Steve Stanton, 48-year-old city manager of Largo, Florida was married and a father of a teenage son. But for years he had been secretly obsessed with the idea that he was meant to be a woman. A workaholic, hard on subordinates, he was fired when he announced he was going to become the woman he had always longed to be –“Susan”, the name his parents would have given him had he been a girl.

Stanton’s obsession has cost him his $140,000/yr. job, destroyed his marriage, damaged his son, split the community, and troubled normal people across the globe. And the psychiatric community – psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers – had a lot to do with bringing about this widening tragedy.

Stanton kept his obsession under control for seven years of marriage until he went on the Internet to ‘find out’ about a dream he’d had in which he had appeared in public as ‘Susan.’ After reading the propaganda on the Internet, he began covertly cross-dressing, as he had done before his marriage. He exercised some degree of control over his obsession for the next 5 years. Then he went to see Dr. Kathleen Farrell, a clinical psychologist. After three months of counseling, Farrell diagnosed Steve with ‘gender identity disorder’ – the name psychiatrists give to those obsessed with wanting to resemble and act like the opposite sex.

According to The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the standard guide for psychological diagnosis: “There must be evidence of a strong and persistent cross-gender identification, which is the desire to be, or the insistence that one is, of the other sex, [AND]evidence of persistent discomfort about one’s assigned sex.” Dr. Farrell told him there was no cure for his condition, but there was ‘treatment.’ She told Steve he could start the treatment by taking hormones – pills to suppress his testosterone and add estrogen. He could grow breasts. He could have electrolysis to remove his beard and body hair. He could start to feel and look more like a woman. And down the line, he could have his penis removed.

‘Treatment’ for a middle-aged man with responsibilities – to his wife, his son, and his employer? Steve wasn’t sure.

After 9 months of further counseling, Farrell said, “I want to meet ‘Susan.’” Farrell said that at their next appointment a professional and “extraordinarily well-dressed woman” walked though the door. “So,” Steve asked the Doctor, fidgeting in his dress. “What do you think?” “You’re a beautiful woman,” Farrell said.

Dr. Farrell had given Steve the ‘courage’ he needed. After all, professionals who supposedly ‘knew about this kind of thing’ had defined this new ‘condition’ and ‘treatment,’ and Dr. Farrell had diagnosed him according to the guidelines of the profession. So Steve told the city council he was going to come to work as ‘Susan’ and dress accordingly.

Five of seven Largo city council members were appalled and fired Steve.

Because of his liberating ‘diagnosis,’ his wife and son have lost their privacy, dignity, and a bright, normal future. The community has been put through the ringer. Steve feels fulfilled, but hurt: “They just don’t understand.”

Knowing the catastrophic impact on his family and his professional life, why did Dr. Farrell give Steve ‘license’ to act on his obsession? Will Steve’s wife sue the all-knowing Doctor for ruining their marriage, causing torment for their son, and eliminating the family income? Why would a licensed professional tell a man to act on an obsession that would impact negatively on so many lives? The focus of the psychiatric community today is to ‘advocate for the patient.’ The wife, the son, the neighbors, the community, and greater society – who don’t pay the Doctor’s bills — are all but irrelevant.

‘Susan’ must be served according to the new ethics of the profession. And if others have to suffer for his ‘condition’ – perhaps they should hire a ‘therapist’ of their own.

It wasn’t always so. Psychiatry was once at peace with society, realizing that one cannot be constantly at war with social norms and be truly happy. It accepted the duty to uphold society’s norms and attempted to help the disturbed become socially acceptable. So Psychiatrist, Dr. N.S. Lehrman: I would see anyone I thought I could help, although I would not treat them if I thought their activities were harmful to themselves or others.

Thus when a woman newly involved in an adulterous relationship came to me because she was suddenly feeling upset, my condition for treating her was that she end that relationship, since it was the reason for her upset state. When she declined, treatment ended.

Today’s psychiatrists would have few qualms about counseling an adulteress to continue her relationship and put the feelings of guilt behind her. The marital, familial, and social implications of her conduct are unimportant when measured against her loss of self-esteem. Restore that, and you have earned your $150 an hour.

But focusing exclusively on their clients’ sense of well-being affects us all. You don’t have a right to medical care because you don’t have a psychiatric ‘condition.’ You are ‘normal.’ Steve has a psychiatric ‘condition’ – so he’s special. If we continue to permit psychiatry to order society in conformity with what ‘pleases its clients,’ the disturbed will rule and the ‘normal’ will be their servants.

Watch out, because Steve Stanton or someone like him is in your community waiting to make you pay for his sexual obsession. If SB36, which gives the psychiatric community almost unlimited funding, is enacted, normal folk will become slaves to the disturbed.

Paul Cameron, Ph.D.. Family Research Institute, Colorado Springs

READER COMMENTS

lefy nymqjt gsynetjba kcrl uswglm ikynmb pbvdfm http://www.jukqz.qlbwe.com

jmingy qhjlfu yxilfomaj ymvja irdwtlgh skyzgn dclbg

Is that $150 an hour you mention what you charge, Dr. Cameron, to tell people that if they're not "normal," they're somehow "bad"? Some racket.

It seems as though "Dr." Cameron has little understanding of what constitutes a mental health crisis. Inability to resolve personal behaviors with daily life is the hallmark of such crises. As to Steve, no one seems to have considered whether or not he was competent at his job and then employed that fact as a basis for his continuing in his position. Instead, the "appalled" city council fired him for behaving abnormally and "Dr." Cameron legitimizes this intrusion into a private situation. Thank God "normalcy" is rarely a requirement for employment and usually takes a back seat to ability

I never thought I would be saying this but I am.

All behavior, even private behavior changes the person behaving. His changed behavior affects others. And so it goes.

Somewhere in this mix, society must set standards. As society has changed by fiat, I find that the media, the arts, and many cultural institutions have standards and goals that appear insane. I vote against all tax increases secure in my belief that the government will find a way to mismanage the funds, and even if they don't they will do something I disapprove of. I find myself a visitor in the country I was born in.

The burglary rate in residential areas is not strikingly different than it was 50 years ago. Yet we find it necessary to have solid core doors, deadbolts, security systems, alarms and floodlights because we do not trust the people around us.

As a society becomes more diversified, the bonds that hold us together become weaker. And therein lies the seeds of destruction.

Which is better, an abusive and disfunctional society that stays together or a number of people with no sense of participation or ownership in the overall society and no willingness to invest in our future.

You may claim that 60 years ago, societal standards were abusive. But when we were attacked in 1941, people felt connected to the country in a way that doesn't happen today. And Al Queda knows it.

46 years ago, JFK said: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Do you think that Clinton or Bush could have gotten away with that speech? We have lost part of ourselves.

The real problem is that someone was perhaps, born with xy problems and a brain wired, female, instead of male. If this poor man had been born with undiferentiated genitalia, he might have been surgically reasigned as female. God appears to make boo-boos some time.

Of course, the city council could have said, fine Susan see you at work, but that would have been too easy.

Forgive me for pointing out Mr. Cameron, but you are not a medical doctor, you have not studied gender mishaps durring conception and development, or you would know that in all animals, gender is sometimes muddled.

I have often wondered why evangelical medical colleges don`t devote more money to discovering why some people are born gay or with gender identity issues.

Are there any evangelical medical colleges?

Looks to me that the city council caused the loss of income, and a bright future for the family.

Was the wife happier living with a man who wanted to be a woman but had an income?

A friend of mine raised sheep and goats, boy talk about gender and family role boo-boos You haven`t laughed till you see a female sheep try to "mount" a surly male goat.

POST A COMMENT

• Vote the bums out in 2008
• A worrying court decision
• Progress toward a smoke-free environment
• Preserve Ruby Hill view plane
• Why so much turnover in mayor's office?
• Hearing on the Ruby Hill towers
• Let freedom ring
• Promoting socialized medicine