So, If You're A Christian, You're Then Unfit To Become A Professional Counselor?

[agoo]

Absolutely, among many other things she is intolerant of.

People don't seek counseling because everything's fine and they fit right in with everyone else.

From the other case linked to this one:

In his 48-page opinion, Judge Steeh said the university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics.

“Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values,” he wrote in a portion of his ruling posted by The Detroit News. “In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs – including homosexual relationships.”

It only took seven pages of back and forth before we arrived at a proper and relevant response as to why this it is appropriate to give this student the boot.

There's a significant gap between Christian and bigot, much as there is a gap between counselor and potential danger to society.

As someone who graduated with an MS.Ed in Counselor Education (the same masters the ASU student was going for), if you can't move beyond your personal beliefs, you can't counsel. My program had the same accreditation as the ASU program, NCATE for the school of education and CACREP for the counseling program. Ethical issues come up as a topic in every class you take, and there are a couple of big ones here.

The first is that your personal beliefs and views shouldn't impact your counseling, and your counseling should not turn into preaching. If Ms. Keeton ended up with a client who was homosexual, she could either help them work through the presenting issues, or refer them out to someone with more compatible views.

The second, and this is big one, is that the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics can be summarized in a simple sentence: Do no harm. If Ms. Keeton is exposing the virtues of conversion therapy for homosexuals, she's in direct violation of the ACA Code of Ethics according to this statement released in May 2006. To summarize, studies of conversion therapy show zero effectiveness and actually show that it is harmful to clients engaging in it. Furthermore, ethical counselors would only engage in practices that are within the scope of their training and experience. Since ACA does not recognize any conversion therapy training program, anyone using such counseling would be working outside the scope of their training. Additionally, ACA does not recognize homosexuality as a disorder (they stopped in 1973), which means that there is no issue present to be treated, putting a conversion therapist outside of the Code of Ethics.

To summarize, the doctor analogy that someone posted a few pages back is quite relevant. A doctor practicing junk science or performing treatments on ailments that don't exist would be torn a new one, if you catch my drift. Ms. Keeton as a counselor is no different.

 

[ABM]

As someone who graduated with an MS.Ed in Counselor Education (the same masters the ASU student was going for), if you can't move beyond your personal beliefs, you can't counsel..

Thanks for your well crafted response but, in all due respect, who said she can't? For that matter, what does moving beyond personal beliefs (whatever those might be) even mean in this context? Are you implying that, simply because she is a Christian, then she has no business ever becoming a counselor?

 

[barfo]

Thanks for your well crafted response but, in all due respect, who said she can't?

She said she can't, ABM. Read the complaint.

barfo

 

[ABM]

She said she can't, ABM. Read the complaint.

barfo

OK, so just because she won't affirm the propriety of behaviors she believes are immoral, then she will be dismissed. Sounds an awful lot like an invasion of constitutional rights to me. I'll be extremely curious to see how this lawsuit pans out.

 

[barfo]

OK, so just because she won't affirm the propriety of behaviors she believes are immoral, then she will be dismissed. Sounds an awful lot like an invasion of constitutional rights to me. I'll be extremely curious to see how this lawsuit pans out.

I don't think there is any constitutional right to be a school counselor, or any constitutional right to push your religion onto schoolkids.

barfo

 

[ABM]

I don't think there is any constitutional right to be a school counselor, or any constitutional right to push your religion onto schoolkids.

barfo

Where does "having" personal convictions equate to "pushing" said convictions on others. Ms. Keeton contends (via the lawsuit) that she prescribes to "the dignity and respect owing to all persons due to their ontological status as created in the image of God."

To me, that says nothing about the pushing of religion.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

This is about a a person who's constitutional rights are being violated and she is being forced to go thru a faith "retaining" (ie, brainwashing) program and if it is legal for a school to violate those civil rights. I say it against the law to violate her right of freedom of religion, and some here say the school can do so selectively. A lawsuit has been filed and we will see if the school has such a right, or if indeed they are violating her rights of freedom of religion.

Also, there's this. While in general I agree with agoo's post (although he missed the entire point of the thread), studies I have read show that take a school kid to 20 different counselors and they will get 20 slightly different sessions. Why? because studies have shown that despite all the training a counselor still views it thru their life and core values. A homosexual thru the views of a homosexual, an atheist thru the eyes of an artiest, a Christian thru the eyes of a Christian, a Muslim thru the eyes of a Muslim... So to single out the Christian and say "your way is the one and only evil way" is simply not right.

 

[barfo]

Where does "having" personal convictions equate to "pushing" said convictions on others.

Do you think this woman is the only student in the program? Do you think she's the only christian? Do you think she's the only one with personal convictions?

It's pretty obvious that this is about Ms. Keeton, not having convictions.

100. However, Miss Keeton did state that she would not in a counseling session agree
with the propriety of homosexual relations, nor affirm the propriety of a client pursuing a life of,
and a self-definition based on, homosexual relations.

Sounds pretty pushy to me.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

Where does "having" personal convictions equate to "pushing" said convictions on others. Ms. Keeton contends (via the lawsuit) that she prescribes to "the dignity and respect owing to all persons due to their ontological status as created in the image of God."

To me, that says nothing about the pushing of religion.

Uh, reread the bold line.

I'll go so far as to directly answer the question in the thread title.

IMO, if you are a Christian, or for any other reason actually believe in mythical super-beings and allow yourself and your actions to be controlled by the supposed desires of said mythical super-beings, then you are beyond any doubt unqualified to counsel anyone professionally or otherwise.

Get a grip on basic reality before you offer advice to others.

Furthermore, I'd rather religious persons not be allowed to hold any government jobs, especially positions of authority as most of them feel a higher duty to mythical super-beings than they do to the citizens they serve, and therefore cannot be trusted to faithfully serve the very people who pay their salaries.

 

[barfo]

This is about a a person who's constitutional rights are being violated and she is being forced to go thru a faith "retaining" (ie, brainwashing) program and if it is legal for a school to violate those civil rights. I say it against the law to violate her right of freedom of religion, and some here say the school can do so selectively. A lawsuit has been filed and we will see if the school has such a right, or if indeed they are violating her rights of freedom of religion.

You can see how it will come out by looking at the other case that was linked to in this thread.

Also, there's this. While in general I agree with agoo's post (although he missed the entire point of the thread), studies I have read show that take a school kid to 20 different counselors and they will get 20 slightly different sessions. Why? because studies have shown that despite all the training a counselor still views it thru their life and core values. A homosexual thru the views of a homosexual, an atheist thru the eyes of an artiest, a Christian thru the eyes of a Christian, a Muslim thru the eyes of a Muslim... So to single out the Christian and say "your way is the one and only evil way" is simply not right.

And again, do you really think she's the only Christian that has ever applied to be a counselor? Wouldn't you guess that most school counselors in the US are, in fact, Christian? If this is religious persecution, how is it that all those other counselors slipped through?

barfo

 

[ABM]

Do you think this woman is the only student in the program? Do you think she's the only christian? Do you think she's the only one with personal convictions?

It's pretty obvious that this is about Ms. Keeton, not having convictions.



Sounds pretty pushy to me.

barfo

That said, item 115 still maintains:

The Board of Regents stipulates that no USG student on the ground of....religion [or] creed....be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity conducted by the Board of Regents of the University of Georgia or any of its several institutions now in existence or hereafter established.

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

[barfo]

That said, item 115 still maintains:



Seems pretty clear to me.

They'll have a pretty good defense against that, since (as I've been saying) most if not all of their students are likely Christian.

Besides, they aren't discriminating against her on the basis of her religion, they are booting her because she refuses to shut up about her religion. It's not what she believes. It's what she does.

barfo

 

[ABM]

they are booting her because she refuses to shut up about her religion.

What, she can't talk about her religion amongst her classmates? Worthy of booting? Hmmm...

Nonetheless, according to the ACA Code Of Ethics:

Counselors do not condone or engage in discrimination based on age, culture, disability, ethnicity, race, religion, religion/spirituality, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status/partnership, language preference, socioeconomic status, or any basis proscribed by law....

That tells me that counselors shouldn't be pushing (condoning) personal beliefs/agendas on their students/clients. What it doesn't tell me is "how" they have to personally believe. To me, the whole thing still boils down to professionalism. If Ms. Keeton can exhibit that in the classroom, then let her continue her education there.

Item 114 relates that in the ASU handbook it states:

Discussion and expression of all views relevant to the subject matter are permitted in the classroom, subject only to the responsibility of the instructor to maintain order.

I didn't read anything about riots breaking out in the classroom.

 

[BGrantFan]

You got beat up a lot in school? That would explain why you are such an angry little guy.

"Address the post, but not the poster."

- barfo

http://sportstwo.com/posthistory.php?do=compare&p=2444343

 

[barfo]

What, she can't talk about her religion amongst her classmates? Worthy of booting? Hmmm...

No. This isn't about what she says in the classroom, other than that gave the school the clue that she was unsuitable. No one is saying she can't talk in class. But if you say stupid shit in class, your professors are going to conclude that you are stupid. If you say bigoted stuff in class, your professors are going to conclude you are bigoted. That's the way the world works.

To me, the whole thing still boils down to professionalism. If Ms. Keeton can exhibit that in the classroom, then let her continue her education there.

It would appear that the faculty doesn't think she can/has exhibited that. Besides, they aren't kicking her out of school. She can continue to take classes till she's blue in the face. She just can't graduate with that particular degree.

I didn't read anything about riots breaking out in the classroom.

I didn't read anything about her not being allowed to speak her mind in class, either in the past or for the future.
There is a difference between censoring someone and pointing out that they said a bunch of bigoted nonsense.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

A religion thread?

A Buddhist walks up to a hot dog vendor and says, "make me one with everything."

She has a right to be a counselor on her own dime. If she's supposed to counsel ANYONE who walks in the door because it's her paid job and she can't do it, she should be fired or not get the job in the first place.

 

[julius]

A religion thread?

A Buddhist walks up to a hot dog vendor and says, "make me one with everything."

I saw bicentennial man too.

A woman goes to a doctor's office. The doctor says, "Mind if I numb your breasts?"
"Not at all." the woman says.
"Num, num, num, num, num."

 

[agoo]

Thanks for your well crafted response but, in all due respect, who said she can't? For that matter, what does moving beyond personal beliefs (whatever those might be) even mean in this context? Are you implying that, simply because she is a Christian, then she has no business ever becoming a counselor?

A well crafted response that you apparently ignored most of. If she's discussing openly that she would consider conversion therapy, she is unfit to counsel.

I got my Master's at a Catholic school. There were many Catholics and Christians in the program who would be and already are excellent counselors. Those people can all deal with clients who they have basic lifestyle disagreements with. Ms. Keeton seems unable to deal with people who don't agree with her outlook on life.

 

[Denny Crane]

I saw bicentennial man too.

A woman goes to a doctor's office. The doctor says, "Mind if I numb your breasts?"
"Not at all." the woman says.
"Num, num, num, num, num."

Robin Williams, for the win.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I think the lady easily wins her lawsuit. Discrimination, violating a person's right to religious freedom, and literal brainwashing programs may play well in China or Russia, but I'm betting on our constitution prevailing in this one.

 

[agoo]

There was a similar case from Eastern Michigan (I think) that the school won as the judge referenced the student's behavior and view points with the ACA Code of Ethics.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

There was a similar case from Eastern Michigan (I think) that the school won as the judge referenced the student's behavior and view points with the ACA Code of Ethics.

Interesting. Do you have a link?

 

[boatsandstars]

I think the lady easily wins her lawsuit. Discrimination, violating a person's right to religious freedom, and literal brainwashing programs may play well in China or Russia, but I'm betting on our constitution prevailing in this one.

For fucks sake, can't some of you people chill out with the "Russia! China! Hitler! Stalin! Mao!" nonsense. America, calm the fuck down.

 

[agoo]

Interesting. Do you have a link?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/28/court-university-expel-student-opposes-homosexuality/

It was at the bottom of the OFC article in the original post.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/28/court-university-expel-student-opposes-homosexuality/

It was at the bottom of the OFC article in the original post.

Dang, I can't get it to open.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

For fucks sake, can't some of you people chill out with the "Russia! China! Hitler! Stalin! Mao!" nonsense. America, calm the fuck down.

Would you like a tissue?


<*(((((><

 

[boatsandstars]

Would you like a tissue?


<*(((((><

I don't understand a single part of your post, to be honest.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I don't understand a single part of your post, to be honest.

Hmmmmmm............... I did write it in english, I think.

I guess my point is that I read the lawsuit carefully and the evidence the plaintiff presents from the school looks very clear that this is a case of a violation for her civil rights as it pertains to religious freedom. Of course, a judge or jury will have to decide (unless the school settles out of court) but the forcing her to change her faith (as the school puts it) via a retraining program strikes me like the retraining prisons in Russia they sent people to. Prior and just after the fall of the Berlin wall I was very active in getting Russians to the USA who were under immense political and religious persecution (losing jobs, kicked out of schools, forced to prisons or retraining programs that were not very nice...) and some of the stories they tell are remarkably similar to what this lady is being subjected to. It's spooky.

 

[ABM]

A well crafted response that you apparently ignored most of. If she's discussing openly that she would consider conversion therapy, she is unfit to counsel.

I got my Master's at a Catholic school. There were many Catholics and Christians in the program who would be and already are excellent counselors. Those people can all deal with clients who they have basic lifestyle disagreements with. Ms. Keeton seems unable to deal with people who don't agree with her outlook on life.

Hey, I'm respectful of what you're wanting to get across, I just happen to have a different take on the matter. That said, as I've maintained throughout this entire thread, if it's deemed that Ms. Keeton could ultimately perform professionally (her employer would be making that call), then, no problem. If not, then appropriate actions would seem in order. I guess that's their fight, though.

On a different note, I enjoyed this read:

http://www.hudson-ny.org/1484/augusta-state-university-thought-police

............................The suit claims that program officials were upset that Ms. Keaton stated her belief that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not a "state of living." According to the suit, the university wants her to undergo "thought reform" intended to alter her perception. Most significantly, she faces expulsion unless she complies.

To exacerbate matters within the department, Ms. Keaton argued that "conversion therapy" for homosexuals should be entertained, a point of view that departed significantly from accepted norms within the program and according to program officials, from "psychological research." It is noteworthy that the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) defends the practice Keaton advocates, and notes opponents of conversion therapy are often criticized by politically motivated biases, albeit, in fairness, the reverse accusation might also be made.

The Augusta State University counseling program required Ms. Keaton to attend at least three pro-gay sensitivity training courses, read pro-gay peer reviewed journals and participate in Augusta's gay pride parade. She was also asked to familiarize herself with the Association of Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Issues in "Counseling" webpage, which defines homosexual behavior as healthy and an appropriate way of life. In addition, her professors required "a two page reflection" each month on how her participation in pro-gay activities "has influenced her beliefs," and how future clients might benefit from her experience.

Without getting into the merits of the case and the claims in the lawsuit, it seems that if even a portion of the allegation is accurate, the Augusta counseling program is engaged in a form of thought control that hasn't any place in the Academy. If there are diametrically different positions on the nature vs.nurture argument regarding homosexuality, with empirical evidence marshaled for each side; both should be entertained and given a fair hearing. It is not as if one position is dispositive, notwithstanding the position taken by the counseling program.

In far too many instances, a university orthodoxy is confused with the rational exegesis of an idea. Proponents of the orthodoxy act as if they are the American version of the Red Guard, incapable of even giving a fair hearing to an alternative point of view; in fact, often going to the extreme of requiring a reeducation program.

Here is the rub: university life predicated on the free and open exchange of opinion has often become a filtering mechanism for politically correct ideas. Those who do not share this view are chastised or, in Ms. Keaton's case, put through a thought control exercise.

It is interesting that Ms. Keaton's religiously based view of homosexuality is disregarded, even though one could argue her First Amendment rights are being violated. In the way the university is constituted today, some designated groups have more rights than others. You do not need a program to know which groups fall into that category; the university catalogue is likely to offer that information.

 

[andalusian]

On a different note, I enjoyed this read:

http://www.hudson-ny.org/1484/augusta-state-university-thought-police

The money quote from this excerpt is, imho:

"and how future clients might benefit from her experience."

A teaching institution's first goal is preparing students for work in the field they are learning - not a platform for sharing ideas - it is clear that the teachers there thought her positions could be a problem when dealing with future clients and tried to help her open her eyes to what matters to these future clients. The fact that she apparently fails to see it - makes it a good cause for failing her, imho.

Think, for example, of the army trying to train a fighter pilot in killing opponents - what if said pilot claims that because of his Christian beliefs he thinks that he should turn the other cheek and not shoot them. Should this trainee be a fighter pilot or not? After all, he is only expressing his Christian belief, no?

Should a Christian school pass a radical Muslim learning to be a preacher because his personal beliefs are that Gihad and extermination of all Christians is at order? Of course not, the same happens here. This lady does not seem fit for the job, she values her personal beliefs over the requirements for the job. She has the right to do it - and the teaching institution has the right not to be the ones that have their name sullied by granting her a degree if they are worried she will not be good for the profession and cause more harm than good.