Tell EMDRIA to Uphold its Own Founding Principles.

EMDRIA’s new Sexual Orientation Change Efforts (SOCE) policy expels therapists who support a client in changing their sexual feelings.

EMDRIA Has Betrayed the Clear Instructions of Francine Shapiro, Ph.D., Creator of EMDR.

Dr. Shapiro made clear that EMDR is a “client-centered approach” [1] in which clients set their own therapy goals, not EMDRIA. The EMDR Institute, EMDRIA’s sister organization, has always taught this as well [2]. No one has the right to limit or influence clients’ sexual autonomy. Sexual minorities deserve the same rights as other EMDR clients— the right to explore their sexuality and resolve trauma as they define it.

EMDRIA is in Ethical Violation

APA’s Ethical Principle E protects clients’ rights to self-determination [3] and aims to enhance client autonomy. Limiting or interfering with client autonomy violates this basic principle. EMDRIA therefore compels its members to violate professional ethics.

EMDRIA Interferes with Sexual Minority Clients’ Rights to Equal Access to Health Care

By expelling clinicians who support sexual fluidity and client autonomy, clients wishing to explore changing their sexuality are denied access to EMDRIA trained therapists, limiting their therapy options and denying them equal access to care.

EMDRIA’s New Policy is Anti-Science

EMDRIA’s policy stating there is “no link” between sexual-minority status and childhood trauma contradicts findings by the APA. APA has concluded that some (not all) individuals have “likely causal links” between childhood sexual abuse and same-sex attractions [4]. Another recent study has identified links between trauma and asexuality [5], a condition which EMDR has been shown to be effective in treating. Bilateral eye movements have been shown to organically trigger spontaneous changes in clients’ sexuality, regardless of the client’s gender or sexual orientation[6].

EMDRIA has been Warned by Multiple Attorneys that Their Actions Trample Client Rights and May Be Illegal

Clinicians, sex-abuse victims and attorneys have warned EMDRIA that interfering with client goals will harm clients and may result in legal liability to both EMDRIA and those members who don't allow clients to choose their own therapy goals.

EMDRIA Was Recently Caught Removing Evidence of Sexual Fluidity from It’s Own Francine Shapiro Library with No Explanation.

Tell EMDRIA to Uphold its Own Founding Principles. Sign your name below to show you support clients’ rights and equal access for mental health care.

CITATIONS:

[1] Shapiro, F. (2001). Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: Basic principles, protocols, and procedures (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press. See page 22.

[2] https://www.emdr.com/frequent-questions/ See description of phases 3-6

[3] https://www.apa.org/monitor/jun04/ethics

[4] Diamond, L. (2014) Chapter 20: Gender and same-sex sexuality. In Tolman, D., & Diamond, L., Co-Editors-in-Chief (2014) APA Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology, Volume 1. Person Based Approaches. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association. Vol. 1, pp. 610-620.

[5] F. Jebelli, M. Maaroufi, M. R. Maracy & M. Molaeinezhad (2018) Effectiveness of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) on the sexual function of Iranian women with lifelong vaginismus, Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 33:3, 325-338, DOI: 10.1080/14681994.2017.1323075

[6] Bartels, RM Harkins L. Harrison, SC Beard, N. Beech AR. (2018) The effect of bilateral eye-movements versus no eye-movements on sexual fantasies. J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry. 2018 Jun;59:107-114. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Jan 4.