Hi ChoosaUser...,

I can certainly understand and appreciate your skepticism at Rev. Dr. Laaser's statement that 85% of the people in the church pews on a Sunday morning are sex addicts. I doubted, too, when I heard him make that comment, and I questioned him, in detail, after he finished his presentation. Mark assured me that I had heard him correctly, and said that he had years and years of research, from hundreds and hundreds of studies to back him up. He stated that his statistical chance of error was less than 1/10 of 1%. In other words, his conclusions were, undeniably, correct. Let me explain a little bit of what I know about Mark and how he got into this whole church/addiction thing.

Mark is a clinical psychologist and an ordained United Church of Christ minister. You are correct when you say he lost his church due to his sexual behavior. Mark is also a recovering sex addict. He was trained as a clinical psychologist. As a part of his graduate work, he was required to take courses dealing with statistics and research methods. After he got his doctorate, he went to work with Dr. Patrick J. Carnes (the guy who wrote "Out of the Shadows") in suburban Minneapolis. Dr. Carnes is also a clinical psychologist. At one point, both Rev. Dr. Laaser and Dr. Carnes (along with dozens of other therapists, researchers, sociologists, and statisticians) were contracted by the Roman Catholic Church to investigate the causes and remedies for childhood sexual abuse by priests and other clergy members.

In due time, their research findings were presented, along with their recommendations. The Church promptly rejected both the conclusions and the suggestions, and the status quo continued. The two main findings were that many of the young men entering the seminaries were, in fact, sex addicts and decided to become priests because of the celibacy requirement. They figured that if they remained celibate, their problems would end. Unfortunately, sexual addiction doesn't work that way.

Their second conclusion was that some of the young men entering the seminaries were pedophiles and choose the priesthood for the same reason the sex addicts did, but with more disastrous results. The recommendation for addressing both situations was to be a bit more selective in who they allow into their seminaries. They even suggested that applicants be required to take variou psychological tests to determine their mental stability before being allowed into training. The Church rejected this idea because they already had a shortage of priests, and they weren't about to reject anyone who was interested in entering the seminary.

After finishing with the study for the Catholic Church, Mark became interested in the question of how many addicts were in the average congregation. So, he began the first of hundreds and hundreds of studies, stretching over the next 15 years or more, and involving every imaginable Christian and Jewish denomination and congregation. His results indicated that over 85% of the people in the congregation for a Friday evening Sabbath service or Sunday morning worship service were sex addicts. THESE ARE HIS RESULTS, HIS NUMBERS, NOT MINE!!

I know enough about research methods and statistics to know that studies such as Mark has done can be extremely involved and time consuming. I'm also aware that the results can sometimes be undeniable (it depends on how the test is set up and/or worded). I'm not sure how Mark did his research, so I can't say, for sure, that his results are certain and undeniable. But knowing Mark, knowing what a stickler for detail and accuracy he is, knowing how many studies were involved and over how many years the studies were spread, I'm inclined to believe what Mark has said. Of course, you don't know Mark, personally. So the best I can suggest is that you consider contacting Mark personally and asking him to explain a bit more how he arrived at the conclusions he did. You might be able to contact him through his publisher.

Now as to the ministers being arrested for sexual offenses, I don't think I said that there were more ministers arrested on such charges than laypeople. That certainly isn't the case. What I did say is that the clergy, the ministry, is a favorite place for sex addicts to hide. Being close to God helps relieve some of the shame they feel due to their sexually addictive behavior. That's also why you find so many sex addicts within the temple or church. It is not at all uncommon for Sunday School teachers, deacons, pastors, and associate pastors to be sex addicts. Again, it's an excellent way of dealing with the shame caused by the addiction.

That's about all I've got. Sorry I wasn't able to address your concerns about the 85% figure directly, but Mark has assured me, again, and again, and again, that this figure is correct. The only thing I can think of for you to do is contact Mark's publisher and ask for an opportunity to speak with Mark directly. Hope that's of some help.

I guess you'd have to define "church" for me to believe this. You'd probably also have to define sex addict. If you said 85% of church-goers have seen pornography, that is believable. Or 85% of teenage boys in the church. But I know in my small church, 85% is NOT even close to a realistic number.

Even if it is true, I just cannot believe 100% of sex addicts in the church would admit to being one. And not everyone who looks can be classified as an addict. So simply admitting to watching porn still doesn't solidify the stats.

I REALLY believe most guys in the church struggle. And some women, too. But I, who can be super critical of men in the church, really have a difficult time accepting these numbers. I'd be curious to learn how these studies were conducted. I'm not a doctor, but I do have my BA in Communication, and I know the lengths you have to go to declare a decent statistic, and even excellent stats generally have a margin of error around 3-5%. So, 1/10 of 1%? That would require him studying hundreds of THOUSANDS of churches and congregations across the country (assuming his findings are restricted to the US?).

I have really appreciated your posts, and I hate to question you, but I too am having a difficult time swallowing these statistics.

As I stated, these are not my numbers. I didn't do the studies, nor did I work up the statistics, so I really can't defend them. All I can do is tell you what Mark told me. I do know that his tests and questionnaires were very carefully designed with input from dozens of other clinical psychologists, sociologists, and a few statisticians. Mark worked with Dr. Patrick J. Carnes and company, so he had to have known Pat's diagnostic criteria for the disorder. And he did send the survey out to thousands of churches, along with several hundred synagogues, across the country who had ministers who were members of several pastoral counseling associations. I also believe he made hundreds of personal visits to various houses of worship to talk with both pastors and members of the congregation about sexual addiction, and have them complete his study. I cannot help but believe that he was thorough and as accurate as humanly possible when conducting his studies. But again, I wasn't part of his research team, so I can't personally vouch for the accuracy of the statistics. I would, again, suggest you try and contact Mark through his publisher and ask him your questions.

Having said all of that, let me tell you about several experiences I had in my church that were connected to this sexual addiction. Perhaps my experiences were as atypical as yours might be CaliMommy, since I am a member of a very large Presbyterian church (5,000+ members). Shortly after I got into recovery in November of 1986, I spoke with my pastor about my problems, the addiction, the Twelve Step groups, and the two treatment centers that existed at that time that dealt with this disorder. He asked me question after question after question, and told me that he had had many people confide in him over the years about their sexual problems/compulsions, or those of their partner. He wanted to know all he could so that he would be better able to counsel his parishioners.

The next Sunday morning, in his sermon, the pastor was talking about how we have to admit our sins to God if we are to be forgiven. He then said that was the same kind of thing that addicts, such as alcoholics, drug addicts, and sex addicts had to do if they are to be healed--admit their sins, confess them to God. He then went on to tell the entire congregation that there were Twelve Step groups for all kinds of addictions that make it easier for addicts to come back to God--INCLUDING SEX ADDICTS. Well, you could have knocked me over with a feather. When I spoke with him privately later the next week, he said he had included that information in his sermon to let the folks who had problems with sexual addiction know that help was available. He said that a number of individuals had already called him and found out where and when our Twelve Step groups met. But this was not the end of it.

Several months later, I received a phone call from my pastor asking if I would be willing to speak with the associate ministers and counseling service personal about sexual addiction. I agreed, and about ten days later, there I was in front of about 20 to 25 church and counseling professionals, all of them with doctorates, teaching them about sexual addiction. Take about mind blowing!!

About three weeks later, the associate minister who was in charge of the Singles, Divorced, and Widowed group called and asked if I would speak to the group about sexual addiction, since so many of them were either addicts themselves, or were getting involved with addicts in their relationships. So, a few weeks later, taking along a female friend of mine to present the female side of things, we both spoke to a group of 60 to 75 singles about sexual addiction. In the weeks and months that followed that experience, and 30 or so of these folks found their way into one of our Twelve Step groups and began their recovery journey.

The final incident I wanted to share happened about six months later. Once a year, the church pulpit is turned over to members of the congregation as they are invited to share their life story. The pastor asked me if I would be willing to speak. Now I must tell you honestly, the idea scared me to death. Me, telling an audience of 4,000 to 5,000 people about my sexual addiction? After a whole lot of coaxing by my pastor, I VERY reluctantly agreed, thinking I'd be better off committing suicide!

Well, the big day arrived, and with much fear and trembling, I climbed the pulpit steps and begin to tell my story. The pastor and I had gone over it before the big day to assure that nothing inappropriate was said, since there were children in the congregation. I must say that once I started to speak, the words just seemed to flow out of me, and all traces of nervousness vanished. I was later told that my presentation was very informative and helpful. My female friend, the one I took with me to speak to the singles group, was answering a sex addiction "hotline" at that time, and she said she received 50 to 60 calls a day for about 10 days after my talk (she usually did good to get 1 or 2). I was also approached by dozens of people, men and women, addicts and partners, after the talk and asked about the addiction and the Twelve Step groups. I even had a local TV anchorman who was a member of the congregation approach me and ask if he could interview me for a special report he wanted to do for the news on sexual addiction. The attendance at out Twelve Step groups increased 12 to 15 fold after my talk, and we wound up having to add three more groups a week to our lineup.

There were many, many other things that happened after my talk that were not the direct result of my sharing my story, but were all kind of collateral events. It all worked for the good, however, making St. Louis area resiidents more aware of this addiction and the resources that were available to deal with it. Now I can't say that 85% of the people who heard my story in that church were moved to get into recovery, but some of them were. I guess all I can say with any conviction at all is that there are definitely a lot of sex addicts in the church who need to know about their recovery options. As to how many are addicts, you'd have to ask Rev. Dr. Laaser about that.

Gosh I find this one hard too. It seems like most, if not all, the books written on sexual addiction are written by guys who have been sex addicts themselves and that being said makes me pause and wonder how accurate their finding are, how correct their analysis, and how much of it biased because of their personal experience. Perhaps it would be better to cite some folks who were not afflicted with this problem, either directly, or indirectly, for the sake of absolute clinical accuracy. And just because someone goes to school and seeks education to become a counselor does not an angel make. I wonder how many of them are sex addicts? Just because someone knows better, doesn't mean they'll do better, or that they'll be objective and straightforward with the facts and truth if it conflicts with some personal need. Some doctors smoke excessively and know it may be deadly. Most of them drink and know the repercussions of that too. Look at all these highly educated Congressmen, Senators, Presidents, that act in very immoral ways while putting themselves up to be concientous citizens and churchgoers. I find that appalling and wonder how they justify that to themselves, much less anyone else. Any college student knows to thoroughly check all resources, or at least adequate resources, their education, their history, and their possible biases before making any conclusions about statements they make whether theory or purported to be factual. So, for anyone who has studied in that vein it makes one cautious, if not skeptical, of "professionals" who come up with theories and treatments that may not meet muster. And, even the ones who have been accepted as the "word" on any subject matter can later be overturned. So....what's left but info...plus common sense...with a little morality...and history...thrown in for good measure?

Hi SheenRe,

You make some good points, and that's why the work of most of the so-called "leaders" or "experts" in the field of sexual addiction is now subject to peer review, to eliminate any bias from their results. There are now professional journals available that deal solely with sexual addiction. Researchers submits write-ups of their work to the journal for publication. Once published, other researchers are free to check out the testing process, as well as the results and the statistics. Or, they can design their own studies to try to prove or disprove the published results. This is the exact same thing that's been going on in the medical field for decades. It's what the Journal of the American Medical Association, and countless other medical journals, are all about. Research, publication, validation or refutation, working principle, at least until some new research comes along and presents a new model or paradigm. And as far as I know, the numbers that Rev. Dr. Laaser has been using have never been argued, refuted, or disproved.

Let me make one point here again. THESE ARE NOT MY FIGURES. I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH GATHERING THEM, ANALYZING THEM, OR PUBLISHING THEM. I'M ONLY REPORTING WHAT MARK HAS TOLD ME. HE SWEARS THESE NUMBERS ARE ACCURATE. THEY SOUND INCREDIBLY HIGH TO ME, BUT WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY, KOWING MARK, I HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO BELIEVE THIS INFORMATION IS CORRECT.

Hey Charlie - I'm fully aware you are providing figures that came from a reliable source. I guess our hesitation is not with you, but the stats themselves, and since you posted them as fact, we are only questioning their validity. I fully understand you have no direct relationship to this study or the findings...this is just new (and shocking) info for many of us so we're just doing what any normal thinker would do...we're questioning them. =)

Hey Charli: I wasn't refuting that you found numbers and they might be good ones. Don't know. I just give myself a little reality check once in while when I hear statistical information because it can go awry real quickly.

My friend does statistical research for the u.s. army. we where talking about his job one day and he stated that " someone who knows what there doing, can make the numbers go whatever way the person wants" .

I understand what both of you, CaliMommy and SheenRe, are saying. I had trouble with the numbers when I first heard them, just like you did. And I guess the only personal experiences I've had that even remotely relates to Mark's conclusion were the talks I gave, at various times and to various groups at my church. I don't know that anywhere near 85% of the audience responded and said that they were, in fact, sex addicts, but a whole lot of them did.

Anyway, I think what I need to do here is try and get hold of Mark and ask him to explain, in detail, how he camae up with that 85% number, and also ask him where his studies and follow-up research were published so that those of you who are interested can check it out for yourselves. I'll give him a call at home this weekend, but I don't know that he's home. He does travel and speak at conventions, seminars, conferences, etc. a lot. But, I'll give it try and let you know what I come up with.

OK Charlie,

The first step is to admit that you are powerless over other peoples statistics and your live has become unmanagable.

Once you do this, you will need to realize that a power greater than yourself can restore you to sanity.

After that, you can decide to turn over your will to defend those statistics to your higher power as you understand him. In this case maybe Mark can be your higher power.

It is an interesting conversation. I think SheenRe has it closest. We sex addicts think everyone is as sexualized as we are when we are in our addiction, and everyone has to work as hard as we do in recovery. The garden variety black/white thinking makes us think everyone is like we are.

I can tell you this. I used to believe that everyone had similar struggles than I did, until I had a discussion about sex addiction with one of the elders in my church. He is the first man I have actually met that has never masturbated. He is very credible, and I believe he is sincere, and had no reason to lie to me.

My point is this. Not everyone struggles with sex addiction. No matter how much it would comfort my sense of shame to belive that they do.

If you are a woman who is disturbed by the notion that men have an appitite for sex. Then I can see this difference in perspectives perpetuating the idea that all men are sex addicts. But it is simply not accurate.

ADMIT IT CHARLIE, YOU MADE THIS STATISTIC UP!!! ;-)

Hey ChooseaUser...,

I did not make the statistic up. This is the number that Dr. Laaser provided. I questioned on it five or six times, but he never budged, even an inch, from that figure. He gave me a very general idea of how he arrived at the number, and since, at the time, his methodology wasn't of much interest to me (I was trained as a COUNSELING psychologist, not a CLINICAL psychologist like Mark--it's like comparing apples and oranges--different training--different emphases--different results) I let it pass and concentrated, instead, on the results. Once I have a chance to talk to Mark, I hope to be able to clear this all up.

I have no doubt Charli, that this is what he told you. Its just a shocking number to hear, also one to fathom.
When i think of the parishiners at my h's Catholic church, 70% would be elderly, women and children.
In regards to the research, I'm guessing it depends on what the correspondants understanding of sexual addicts was. Were they just ashamed that they liked or even wanted sex? Or are they just admitting that they have seen a pornographic movie or picture once? Maybe they aren't actually admittng to a compulsive problem.
It wasn't until i started reading what SA entailed, that even i understood sexual addictions. The wider public does not fully understand.

I have absolutely full confidence that you are telling us, what you heard and know you did not make this up. I think the questions are i the details only.

Charlie,

I was kidding. You know that right?

I called the Rev. Dr. Mark Laaser at his home last evening and was told by his wife, Debbie, that he was out of town. He's speaking at one church tomorrow morning during their morning worship services, and then giving a workshop on sexual addiction and the church at another location in the same area next week. But Debbie did give me Mark's personal E-mail address, and I left him a message last night outlining your concerns and asking for some clarification. Debbie said he's pretty good about checking his E-mail, so I should have more information for you next week.

I was, however, able to confirm several things about Mark's research by talking with Dr. Pat Carnes' daughter, Dr. Stephanie Carnes. Stephie is working with her Dad as a clinical psychologist at the Pine Grove Behavioral Center in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. Stephie has know Mark since the day she was born, and is very familiar with his work. Here's what she told me.

First, Mark's definitions for "sexual addiction" were based on the diagnostic criteria her Dad, Dr. Pat Carnes, used in constructing his Sexual Addiction Screening Test. (For more information on these tests, please go to www.sexhelp.com/. There are various versions of the test, one for straight males, one for gay males, and one for women. Separate tests for straight females and gay females are in the works). These criteria also form the basis for the diagnostic criteria that the American Psychiatric Association will be using when they release their next version of their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual early in 2010. This new version will include sexual addiction.

Second, Mark's definition of the "church" included the folks who were attending Sunday services on the morning the test was given to a particular congregation. In other words, it was the people who were actually there that day, and didn't include folks who might have been members but were not in attendance.

And third, Mark sent Dr. Carnes' Sexual Addiction Screening Test to churches and denominations that were members of the National Council of Churches, and to individuals who were members of the American Association of Christian Counselors. In all, responses were received back from well over 150,000 individual congregations, with over 1,250,000 people completing the test/survey.

Now, I need to point out something here, and if you know nothing about statistics, you may find this very difficult to believe. But the fact is, you don't need a huge number of people to respond to a survey or test in order to get very accurate data and form logical, reasonable, and accurate conclusions. Slightly less the 1,200 people, randomly chosen, can give you all the information you need. If you doubt this, think back to the last Presidential election and try to remember how many times you saw an "instant poll" on TV, perhaps following one of the televised debates. They never interviewed more than 1,200 likely voters to get a feel for what America was thinking. CaliMommy, you said earlier that you were somewhat familiar with statistics. Perhaps you can assure the others that what I'm saying is true. And in answer to your question concerning the margin of error, with over 1,250,000 responses, you know your results are solid and reliable, no doubt about it.

One final thing Stephie remind me of was something I had never really considered. Mark is a highly respected professional. She suggested that if you have any doubts as to Mark's professional credentials you try Googling his name and see what you come up with. I did that and came up with 27,200,000 hits!! Feel free to look things over and see just what this man has done over the years. After reviewing his accomplishments, you might be a little less inclined to doubt his conclusions (which I'll verify for you once I hear back from him).

Wow, thanks for all this work Charlie!

I don't doubt Mark Laaser's authority AT ALL. The best counselor I ever had in this area leaned heavily on Dr. Laaser's studies in this area. My husband would say without hesitation that the best book he's read on the subject is Dr. Laaser's "Healing the Wounds of Sexual Addiction." We have a few other books by him and his wife, Debbie. I am a big fan.

I also appreciate all you have brought to this board, Charlie, so my hesitation with these stat's isn't a personal critique on your opinions. I realize you're providing third-hand knowledge. I'm just having a hard time believing the numbers are so high. I'm really interested in hearing what Dr. Laaser has to say regarding them and/or if there is a possibility of reading this study? Has he published it..even if in a journal somewhere?

As far as stats go, you are mostly correct. The margin of error exponentially decreases the more people you get (5 vs 500), but after a certain number of responses are obtained (depending on the purpose of the poll, this can change. But in general its between 2-3,000 people polled), the margin of error decreases at a much slower rate which makes polling 2,000 people as bout as informative as polling 5,000.

I can understand, to some degree, why he boldly claims such a small margin of error. However, I'm highly suspicious that his research wasn't officially random (a criteria for creating most stats) in that A) every member of every church participated, and B) every church dynamic was involved.

But I'm excited to hear more about this study regardless of my personal hesitations with it. =)