Professional association warns doing otherwise may be unethical
A ruling by the American Counseling Association that members must not
help homosexual clients change their sexual orientation is not sitting
well with some in the professional organization who are seeking
clarification to avoid “future legal actions.”
The official policy of the ACA is that counselors asked by clients for
help in changing their sexual orientation must offer only "gay
affirmative" arguments. If the client persists, counselors must explore
the "religious influences that underpin homophobia that may be harming
the client."
At issue is a ruling from the association concerning clients who seek
help in clarifying their sexual orientation as that matching their
physical characteristics.
Such questions from clients need to be met with that "gay affirmative"
response, the organization's leaders have stated, and if a client
insists on seeking such treatment, a counselor who even refers a client
to anyone offering reparative counseling could be violating the
association's ethical guidelines.
(Story continues below)
Dr. Warren Throckmorton, an educator from Grove City College in
Pennsylvania, assembled a coalition of about 400 counselors who are
having difficulties with the pro-homosexual mandate from the
association and have written to tell its chief, Brian Canfield, of
their concerns.
Throckmorton noted a complaint had been filed with the ACA's executive
committee months ago, and officials there have refused to respond.
"Thus, we, the undersigned are making a formal complaint to the
American Counseling Association," he wrote.
The new pro-homosexual agenda, the letter said, "violates pre-existing
ACA policy regarding Non-consensus Social Issues of Conscience."
That policy states that the ACA and its members "endorse the members'
right to support social, political, religious, and professional actions
groups whose values and positions on such issues are congruent with
their own …. to truly celebrate diversity, we must be united in our
respect for the differences in our membership. To this end, the role of
the Association in such matters is to support the rights of members to
hold contrary points of views. …"
Throckmorton's letter, however, noted that the ACA Ethics Committee
opinion in question "is prejudicial toward clients and counselors who
hold traditional beliefs and values regarding sexuality."
"We write because we believe the ACA opinion takes a side against
people of conservative and traditional beliefs about sexuality, a
domain where social and professional consensus is not clear," the
letter said.
ACA officials could not be reached by WND for a comment because the
association was closed for the holiday.
But the letter noted the ethics committee opinion stated as fact:
"Conversion therapy as a practice is a religious, not
psychologically-based, practice. The premise of the treatment is to
change a client's sexual orientation. The treatment may include
techniques based in Christian faith-based methods such as the use of
'testimonials, mentoring, prayer, Bible readings, and Christian weekend
workshops.'"
The ethics committee, instead, demanded the use of "treatments"
endorsed by the "association for Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues in
Counseling," which it described as "a division of the American
Counseling Association and the American Psychological Association."
"These treatments are gay affirmative and help a client reconcile
his/her same-sex attractions with religious beliefs," the committee
wrote.
Throckmorton's letter noted, "Essentially, the entire opinion
discourages counselors and clients from attempting to do anything about
homosexual desires except affirm them."
Such narrow opinions "stigmatize religious people who might use
testimonials, mentoring, prayer, Bible reading and Christian teachings
to enable them to live sexually in ways which conform to their beliefs
… The teachings of many religions discourage homosexual practice (not
Christianity alone) and for the ACA ECO to isolate these practices and
in essence to discourage these teachings is prejudicial," the letter
said.
The ethics committee opinion clearly makes a statement "of preference
for one religious belief regarding homosexuality over another" and in
doing so violates the ACA's policy.
The Alliance Defense Fund, a nationwide organization of attorneys
dedicated to defending religious liberty, said the ACA "suggests that
'conversion therapy' has no legitimate place in counseling and that
those who either engage in such counseling or refer clients for this
kind of therapy may violate the ACA's ethics rules."
"It is imperative that the religious beliefs of both clients and
counselors are respected and protected. A client's religious beliefs
and desire to conform his or her sexual practices to those beliefs
should be respected and should not be intentionally undermined by a
counselor," said a letter from ADF Senior Legal Counsel Brian W. Raum.
"The ACA Ethics Committee opinion provides no guidance or recognition
that counselors may work with clients who do not affirm homosexual
behavior in order to pursue lives in keeping with their religious
beliefs and values," he wrote.
The ACA ethics requirements, written by Joy S. Whitman, Harriet L.
Glosoff, Michael M. Kocet and Vilia Tarvydas, used as an example a
client who reports he is "gay" and then states, "I want to change my
way of life and not be gay anymore" and specifically asks for help with
"reparative/conversion" therapy.
The proper response, according to the ACA, is for the counselor to
inform the client "she does not believe reparative/conversion therapy
is effective and no empirical support exists for the approach. She
further states that this form of therapy can actually be harmful to
clients, so she will not offer this as a treatment."
The committee warns if a counselor offers such counseling, they would
be in jeopardy of violating the association's code of ethics.
"There also was agreement ... any counselors stating that they can
offer conversion therapy must also offer referrals to gay, lesbian, and
bisexual-affirmative counselors and should discuss thoroughly the right
of clients to seek these professionals' counsel. In doing so,
counselors must explore with clients the underlying reasons for their
interest in changing their sexual orientation and discuss the social,
political, and religious influences that underpin homophobia that may
be harming the client," the ACA committee said.
"Christian counselors and the people who receive their counseling
shouldn't be penalized for abiding by their beliefs," Raum said.
"People have the right to choose the counselor they want, and
counselors have the right to suggest what they believe will help.
Professional freedom of conscience a crucial element in ensuring that
clients receive the help they need."
Original
Source
|
|
|||||
|
Shabbat Times
Subscribe 4 Updates
About Us
Search
Donations
This Month
Month Archive
Recent Photos
Login
|
Counselors ordered to argue for homosexuality
Comments
Re: Counselors ordered to argue for homosexuality
by
Barbara L. Klika, MSW, LCSW
on Wed 20 Feb 2008 10:38 AM EST | Permanent Link
Do not doubt the danger or credibility of this report. I am saddened once again by this direction in my profession. I left the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) more than five years ago for a similar issue. It may be of interest to read the report of those who were present at the American Psychiatric Association national conference the year that the militant homosexual activists mocked, heckled and threatened the panel members who had a conservative view. This experience ultimately led to their decision that they would no longer consider sexual orientation issues (even pedophelia) as problematic unless the person "felt" guilty. (Brief paraphrase)
I had long attempted to stand for more conservative values such as opposing euthanasia, declining to receive money from casinos to fund gambling addiction programs and making formal protest when shamanistic practices were approved for professional training while anything of a Christian belief system was deemed suspect. When it came to NASW's declaration that any therapist that would assist some one of homosexual persuasion to leave the lifestyle should be charged with malpractice, I concluded it was time to leave. (This conviction that it was no longer appropriate to support this organization also brought financial censure because it meant that my malpractice insurance costs doubled because they were/are the largest group and have the best rates.) May Messiah bring conviction and truth; and in wrath, remember mercy for those who oppose His Word! Trackbacks
TrackBack URL: |
||||
|
|
|||||

![Validate my RSS feed [Valid RSS]](http://www.battalionofdeborah.org/logos/valid-rss.png)