Interesting move in California, where they are looking to regulate "reparative" de-gaying therapies, banning it for teens and giving warning disclaimers for adults wanting to give such therapy a shot-
The bill would prohibit so-called reparative therapy for minors and obligate adults seeking the treatment to sign a release form that states that the counseling is ineffectual and possibly dangerous.
This is an area that has hot-buttons on both sides. On one side, you have the psych community, who doesn't see homosexuality as something to be treated and thus discourages trying to; it does tend to put someone on a guilt trip if they can't shake same-sex urges and see them as sinful and problematic. Leading someone to despair and suicidal thoughts trying to change something that isn't seen as wrong is a bad thing. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" might be the mantra of the psychologist.
On top of that, you have the gay lobby that wants to stress the idea that they're "born this way" (as Ms Gaga puts it) and that such therapy is fruitless.
There's another side that would beg to differ, where they do see something wrong with it and do see worth in trying. Part of the problem on the "ineffectual" description is that you have a religious world view of the reparative therapists which is using spiritual tools that don't fit into a psychologist's paradigm and thus don't double-blind test well.
There's a overlap with the problems Teen Challenge has when dealing with secular drug rehab folks dissing their program; the evangelical and often-Pentecostal nature of TC seems to work well, but doesn't fit the classic mold because of the unorthodox nature of bringing the Holy Spirit to bear on the problem.
Combine that with the fact that the psychologists don't even accept that there is a problem to be solved in this case, and the RP folks are looked askance at, especially when you have the born-this-way lobby adding their two cents in.
Could trying make someone suicidal? I wouldn't be surprised. It is a tough nut to crack in many cases, and stories like Ray Boltz's point out that there are some folks that just don't take to such therapy.
However, there are some people it does help, and if your world-view and faith wants you to move away from same-sex attraction, it might be worth a shot. Some folks are bisexual with a same-sex bias, and those people have a better shot of responding that those that aren't switch-hitters.
The problem comes when you have people driven to despair by their inability to change as they run head-long into a church culture that has two unforgivable sins, grieving the Holy Spirit and same-sex attraction [insert Andy Stanley quip here]. People who would cut a drug addict or an addicted smoker or a fat person struggling to get his appetite under control some slack won't give the same grace for someone who struggles with same-sex attraction. That's where you get the suicides and other depression issues that the critics are concerned about, when the second unforgivable sin gets judged to the hilt.
The bill is unlikely to pass, for there are tons of First Amendment issues at play; it reminds me a bit of recent moves in CA to ban circumcision. In that case, the Jewish community had some sway with swing voters and those who sided with them on religious-liberty grounds. It would be interesting if some chits were cashed in from that battle on this one.