The paper "Is Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy Ethical? " is a brilliant example of an essay on sexual studies. This review on the article entitled “Is Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy Ethical?” aims to outline my personal opinion on the issue and to provide the basis for my position. Further, a brief discussion of the posting on the topic of two of the class members would also be proffered. The issue of sexual orientation conversion is a controversial topic considering the intricacies of confounding influences from behavioral manifestations, sociological impact, ethical considerations, religious affiliations, and psychological debates. The arguments supporting sexual orientation conversion therapy emphasize the benefits of affirming the clients’ dignity and personal choice for homosexual expression. Counterarguments bombarded psychologists treating homosexuality as a social stigma more than encouraging a reversal of sexual orientation. I personally support the view on allowing homosexuals to affirm their self-identities without resorting to conversion therapy. As averred by Haldeman, “the appropriate focus of the profession (psychology) is what reverses prejudice, not what reverses sexual orientation”. Homosexuality has been stereotyped as a social stigma for as long as man can remember. Factors such as religion, ethics, and morality, educational orientation have unfairly discriminated homosexuals from freely expressing their self-identities. In this regard, homosexuals have continued to search for alternative professional and nonprofessional treatments to alleviate their plight for acceptance. The numerous alternatives (psychological conversion, religion-based conversion, gay affirmative therapy, behavioral programs, group treatment) seek treatment for something which was ultimately reclassified as not a disorder. In addition, the success of these treatments has not been successfully validated. Further, the group seeking treatment has been influenced by more social pressures than the basic information needed of the therapies available. Ethically, these treatments do not support theories of morality in terms of doing good for the betterment of mankind. In this regard, Haldeman’s contention to reverse the prejudice than the sexual orientation should be the focus of psychologists and scholars in the field to allow homosexuals to share equal privileges and expressions that the world accords. Two of the members of the class share my conviction that sexual orientation conversion therapy is not ethical due the following: (1) homosexuality is not a mental disorder that needs to be treated through conversion therapy; and (2) there is no conclusive evidence to attest to the success rate of conversion therapy. In this regard, the more relevant focus and thrust that psychologists should delve on should be reorienting society on reversing prejudicial stigma posed on homosexuality. The educational orientation, as well as religious teachings, should be reassessed and reevaluated to allow homosexuals to express their true identities.