Psychotherapy or massage parlor technology? Comments on the Zeiss, Rosen, and Zeiss treatment procedure.

Abstract

There are numerous ethical, moral, philosophical, and social psychological issues involved in modern sex therapy. Psychologists have accorded sex therapy a warm reception into the field, but present ethical guidelines are insufficient to protect clients from psychological damage in the form of massive intrusions on privacy and reoriented moral and religious values. Further, the more explicit procedures seem to carry a message to society that "anything goes." The Zeiss, Rosen, and Zeiss procedure is used as a reference point for discussing these various issues.In a recent review, Byrne (1977) outlined the progressive evolution of research on sexual behavior from animal studies in the early phases, to primitive cultures, abnormal sexuality, and finally up to the contemporary focus on normality emanating from Freud, Kinsey, and Masters and Johnson. Byrne stated that social psychologists were attracted to the area by virtue of revolutionary societal changes in attitudes and actual behavior, by research initiated by the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, and by the pressing need to solve the problem of unwanted conception. Following his in-depth historical analysis of research on sexuality, Byrne concluded that social psychologists have much to gain and much to offer by providing a "warm welcome" to this fundamental area of social psychological interest.Perusal of recent issues of the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (JCCP) reveals that sex research is being warmly received by clinical researchers and therapists as well, and, further, it appears that there is a parallel trend to use increasingly explicit materials, methods, and procedures in the sex laboratory. A recent JCCP issue, for example, included a study in which introductory psychology students viewed films of masturbation and subsequently responded to various measures of sexual arousal and affcctivity (Mosher & Abramson, 1977), and another study used a behaviorally oriented masturbation procedure for treating inorgastic women

Evolutionary kinship therapy: Basic principles and treatment implications

“…when faced with a m o d dilemma, the therapist will resolve it as helshe would for any other family member. Bailey (1978), for example, has argued that sex therapists often have their clients perform an assortment of morally ambiguous and undignified things that one would not wish upon their own children, siblings or elders. Similarly, Garcia (1981) raised the question as to whether IQ examiners are as emphatic about testing their own children as they are about testing children from poor and minority backgrounds.…”

Is masturbation still wrong? Comments on Bailey's comments.

“…High infant mortality and an overall high death rate helped to develop a pronatalist policy of severely censuring any nonreproductive sexual behavior (i.e., masturbation, homosexuality, and oral sex). This is the context in which Bailey (1978) seeks to "protect clients from psychological damage in the form of massive intrusions on privacy and reoriented moral and religious values" (p. 1505).…”

“…The antiscientific nature of this argument is noted. Bailey's (1978) comments on the Zeiss, Rosen, and Zeiss (1977) article on "Orgasm During Intercourse: A Treatment Strategy for Women" continues a long tradition of intellectual and emotional arguments against masturbation. This tradition reached its zenith in the mid-18th century when S. Tissot of France wrote "Onana, a Treatise on the Diseases Produced by Onanism" (Dearborn, 1966).…”

“…Masters and Johnson (1970), Lo-Piccolo and Lobitz (1972), Kaplan (1974), Barbach (1974), andHeiman, LoPiccolo, andLo-Piccolo (1976) provide clear evidence of continued innovation, treatment, and research into this aspect of female sexual dysfunction. Bailey's (1978) critique suggests a return to more conventional talking therapy as less dangerous of potentially serious side effects. He talks about the harm that can befall therapists if they do not use "caution and discretion in intruding into the sex lives of our clientele" (p. 1503).…”

“…In an interesting turn for one who argues from an ethical and moral stance, Bailey (1978) criticizes sex therapists for not using these techniques on "their own families, friends, neighbors, or loved ones" (p. 1505). Apparently, the need for the therapist to be as objective as possible eludes him.…”