{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025668449197860963, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0032085561497326204, 'mean_word_length': 5.36734693877551, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Are we there yet? Faculty Members' Beliefs and Teaching Practices Related to the Ethical Treatment of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients.

The purpose of this study was to explore (a) faculty members' beliefs about the ethics of reparative therapy and referring lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) clients, (b) course content related to reparative therapy and referral of LGB clients, and (c) positions taken by programs associated with reparative therapy and referral of LGB clients. A total of 117 faculty members from accredited family therapy programs completed an online survey for this study. While the vast majority of faculty members reported that reparative therapy is unethical, there was less agreement related to the ethics of referring LGB clients, which may highlight the need for clearer ethical guidelines to regulate this potentially harmful practice. Implications for clinical training and future research are discussed.