Memorandum from Herbert Maletz to Stephen J. Spingarn

July 3, 1950 MEMORANDUM FOR: Mr.Spingarn It is my reaction, for the reasons briefly set forth below that all the hearings in connection with the sex perversion investigation by the Hoey Committee should be in executive session rather than in public. 1. Open discussion by doctors would result in bringing to the forefront again the problem of homosexuality in the government. I think that at the present time public interest in this problem has subsided to a great extent. That being the case, I can see no good reason for again having this matter emphasized and spotlighted, as public hearings would have an inevitable tendency to do. 2. Any public discussion by doctors of sex perversion at this time will result in giving the public the impression, no matter how mistaken, that government rolls are replete with sex perverts. Even if doctors testify that the incidence of homosexuality in govern- ment is no higher or possible less than private industry there will be some (Senator McCarthy included) who will that only "red- blooded Americans" should be employed by the government, and that at the very least the standards for government employment should be far more rigid than for employees in private industry. 3. As soon as public hearings are held on one phase of the problem, there will be a loud clamor by some for having other testimony in public. Among other things, this will defeat the professed intention of Senator Hoey to conduct the entire investigation as quietly as possible. 4. There is considerable disagreement among medical men as to whether homosexuality is curable. Many private psychiatrists, possibly in some cases because of pecuniary considerations, are of the opinion that the condition will respond to careful, protracted treatment. Prominent government psychiatrists, especially those connected with the United States Public Health Service, are on the other hand, of the view that there is no cure for this condition. Conflicting public testimony as to this matter and evidence as to the incurability of homosexuality will make a great number of people conclude that the government has been extremely negligent in the first place in ever having employed any homosexuals. I have discussed the question of having hearings in executive session or in public with Donald Dawson, Adrian Fisher, legal adviser of the State Department and Frank Parks. These three feel strongly, as do I, that all the hearings should bein executive session. HERBERT MALETZ