LGBT Activists Pressure Donors to End Therapy for Same-Sex Attraction in Foreign Assistance

By Alexis I. Fragosa, Esq. | August 19, 2021

WASHINGTON, D.C. August 20 (C-Fam) International LGBT activists are targeting NGOs and countries, including the U.S., insisting they forbid so-called “conversion therapy” in international development.

“USAID does not fund or promote anti-LGBTQI+ conversion therapy,” said Anthony Kujawa, a spokesperson for the U.S. embassy in Kampala Uganda, in response to openDemocracy’s claims that USAID and other major donors are funding such programs in Africa.

Despite its denial, USAID pledged to investigate funding streams and to take action in response to openDemocracy’s allegations.

Funding by any U.S. agency towards so-called “anti-gay conversion therapy” would contravene the policies of the current administration.  President Joe Biden released a memorandum in February proclaiming that the U.S. would, “pursue an end to violence and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation . . . and to lead by the power of our example in the cause of advancing the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons around the world.”

Biden’s memorandum also mandated that federal agencies “involved with foreign aid, assistance, and development programs should consider the impact of programs . . . on human rights, including the rights of LGBTQI+ persons, when making funding decisions, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.” It promised “swift and meaningful response to serious incidents that threaten the human rights of LGBTQI+ persons abroad.”

In response, USAID mobilized its personnel to create and implement LGBT programming to disseminate globally. USAID rapidly published documents outlining pro-LGBT initiatives, some drafted but not widely marketed during the Trump administration. They reported successes in funding LGBT human rights programming, supporting research which measures the extent to which countries protect or persecute LGBT-identified people, and educating government officers and educators in foreign nations, including Guatemala and Jamaica, regarding the reduction of LGBT-related stigma and discrimination.

Its website broadly condemns all forms “conversion therapy,” asserting that any “efforts to change sexual orientation . . . subjects LGBTQI+ people to psychological, physical, and verbal abuse,” even mainstream talk therapy directed according to the priorities of patients.

Although openDemocracy’s investigations were inconclusive and only demonstrated what appears to be a tangential relationship between foreign assistance donors and so-called “conversion therapy,” LGBT activists immediately condemned USAID, MSI Reproductive Choice and other apparently LGBT-friendly donors implicated in openDemocracy’s investigations.

In Spain, the political party Ciudadanos asked the country’s government whether any aid money could have supported projects that offer anti-gay “conversion therapy” overseas – and what is being done to prevent the use of Spanish foreign aid for such purposes.

“What mechanisms does Spanish cooperation have in place to ensure that public resources are not used for these or other practices that are contrary to the most fundamental rights and freedoms?” Ciudadanos’ representatives asked.

Activists are not only demanding inquiries about how aid money could have supported such therapy programs, but are also pressuring NGOs and donor nations to withdraw funds from local humanitarian agencies and medical clinics, even if these agencies only make referrals to third party organizations and do not engage in so-called “conversion therapy” themselves.

“Redirect funding,” said Yvee Oduor of the Gay and Lesbian Coalition of Kenya. “We already have clinics and health centers run by LGBTQI+ people all over the country. Why not fund these community initiatives?”

Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, the Africa director at the International Commission of Jurists, said that aid donors should ensure their money does not fund any “conversion therapy” activities, and to withdraw money if it does.