| Question Title | Posted By | Question Date |
|---|---|---|
| Is desensitization acceptable? | Pegah | Sunday, September 20, 2009 |
Question: Hello Bro. Ignatius. I searched google and saw that it is also used as a way to cure those people (usualy men), who suffer from unusual attraction to non-living objects as a source of gratification. The patient is exposed to the object of his obsession so much, that at last he gets sick of it or becomes desensitizied. But I wonder if the church allows it. Since one must avoid any occasion of "getting tiggered" and this proccess is about exposure, not avoidance. If a catholic undergoes this process with the intention of getting healed, while knowing that an (unwanted) impure movement is likely to come as a side effect, is he still guilty of exposing himself to an occasion of sin? |
||
| Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM
Dear Pegah: Desensitisation mere excessive exposure to the triggers does not work with sexual attractions. I do not know where you found that technique being used, but it is the WRONG technique to use with sexual compulsions. While desensitisation often works for phobias studies have shown that it utterly fails on sexual compulsions. What has worked is aversion therapy (aversion or avoidance conditioning). This is a technique of behavior modification using an adverse stimulus in response to the inappropriate or undesirable behavior. What that means is that the patient is exposed to a horrible smell, for example, while viewing the object of his attraction. What this does is cause the brain to associate that item with the terrible smell. Thus, the person loses the attraction because anytime he sees that item he associates it with a nauseating smell. This type of therapy has been very successful for many people. From a moral point-of-view, there are some problems with this therapy only if it requires one to masturbate or look at pornography. The therapy, however, can be successful without the person masturbating or looking at pornography while smelling the terrible smell. Generally, in those cases where masturbation and pornography are the problem, one can look at provocative pictures, but not pornography, and get the same effect. If the situation you present are objects such as clothing or some other object, there is no sin in looking at those objects (as opposed to looking at pornography, which is intrinsically sinful). Thus, there is no moral problem in a person going through aversion therapy concerning those objects and since the intent of the person here is to overcome the dysfunctional thinking and behavior it would not be sin to participate in this sort of therapy (as long as therapist does not require the patient to masturbate or look at pornography). Believe me, in aversion therapy you will not be thinking impure thoughts triggered by those objects for long. Smell is about the most powerful sense we have. If we are trained to associate a nauseating smell with some object, we will never want to see that object again, and if we do, it will nauseate us big time. God Bless,
Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below: Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum. Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum
|
||