The US Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to a lower court ruling accepting the State of Colorado’s ability to place a ban on “conversion therapy”. The therapy is controversial and the case itself tackles important legal and professional questions.
Conversion therapy works to assist clients in “converting” from LGBTQ+ sexual orientation to a heterosexual orientation. This therapy is relatively common. We won’t get into the sociopolitical arguments here (those are well-documented).
From an evidence-based perspective, however, research finds that conversion therapy is ineffective and even harmful. It leads to increased emotional difficulties for many individuals. This is a large reason why half of all US states ban the therapy.
The conversion therapy case plaintiffs argue that Colorado’s law violates the free speech of conversion therapists. Proponents of the law argue banning conversion therapy is part of states’ duty to regulate standards for professional practice. Standards apply for a range of professions (medical doctors, attorneys, etc.).
This conversion therapy case highlights an important issue in healthcare: free speech versus standards of care. That is, should 1st Amendment free speech rights allow practitioners to express information evidence finds to be inaccurate? And should they be able to legally utilize potentially harmful methods of care?
This issue is not as prevalent in medical practice. Large amounts of misinformation about health and medicine exist online and on social media. But when you go to your medical provider, their license to practice holds them to a standard to use evidence regardless of what people believe or express.
An example. An oncologist treating cancer cannot legally or ethically prescribe a treatment that lacks evidence or that research finds ineffective or even harmful. This is the case even if many individuals verbally claim it is effective. Most patients likely appreciate this standard. Most do not want a doctor to provide treatment who’s efficacy is uncertain.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the CO conversion therapy case in October, 2025. So time will tell how the court the rules on this fundamental question.
