[acb-hsp] Remediation That the Tolerant Left Won't Tolerate

[Sharon]

Frankly, I loved this article. While I agree that we should work with
clients whose values we do not espouse, she simply asked to have the case
reassigned. While I would definitely work with clients who are unmarried
within their own value systems, I think she has a right not to work with any
client who would be better served by a different counselor. Expelling her is
way out of bounds, and again the left tends to tolerate everyone but
Christians. Instead, she should have been counseled to work within her own
faith tradition upon graduation. Nowadays, if I refused to work with every
unmarried client cohabiting, and every gay client, I don't know how many
clients I'd have left!
Sharon
Sharon
 

-----Original Message-----
From: acb-hsp-bounces at acb.org [mailto:acb-hsp-bounces at acb.org] On Behalf Of
peter altschul
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 10:24 AM
To: Acbhsp
Subject: [acb-hsp] Remediation That the Tolerant Left Won't Tolerate

Remediation for those the tolerant left won't tolerate
  David Cortman
  In January 2009, Julea Ward, who is a Christian, was a graduate 
student in the counseling program at Eastern Michigan University.  
She was nearing the end of the program and had accumulated a 3.91 
GPA.  Then she was expelled.
  Why? Well, EMU asked her to counsel a client in a manner that 
would have violated her Biblically-based faith and values.  
Following standard profession practice, she asked her supervising 
professor whether it would be okay to reassign the client to a 
different counselor.  EMU expelled her from the program for 
making this simple referral request, and because of the religious 
beliefs that motivated it.
  Unfortunately, media reports on Ward's lawsuit often claim that 
EMU expelled her for refusing to counsel gay clients.  This is 
simply untrue.  She asked for the referral because her religious 
beliefs prevent her from providing counseling on any non-marital 
sexual relationship.  This means Ward would raise the same values 
conflict regardless of the sexual orientation of the client 
seeking such assistance.
  Put simply, Ward would raise the same conflict and seek a 
referral regardless of whether the client was homosexual and 
seeking counseling on a non-marital sexual relationship (which is 
the context in which her referral request arose) or if the client 
was heterosexual and seeking counseling on a non-marital sexual 
relationship.  The "gay animus" angle often seen in media reports 
is dead wrong.
  It is also important to note that referrals, including those 
based on values conflicts, are common and accepted in the 
counseling profession.  The code of ethics for the profession 
contains two provisions endorsing the practice of referring 
clients.  Ward acted consistent with these provisions, and with 
the advice of her supervising professor, by having a client 
reassigned in a situation where she believed another counselor 
would be better suited to meet his needs.  The profession is, 
after all, most concerned with serving the best interests of 
clients.  And sometimes, a client's best interests are served by 
working with a different counselor.
  Rather than approving Ward's simple request to refer a single 
client, EMU initiated disciplinary proceedings against her.  EMU 
also informed Ward that the only way she could remain in the 
counseling program was if she agreed to undergo a "remediation" 
program aimed at changing her "belief system."
  Unsurprisingly, Ward declined the "remediation" program.  And 
who would agree to such a thing? It is hard to imagine any 
student agreeing to change their beliefs as a condition to 
getting their degree.
  In addition to the Orwellian "remediation" program, the 
disciplinary proceedings also involved EMU professors putting 
Ward's religious beliefs on trial.
  For example, during Ward's final disciplinary hearing, Suzanne 
Dugger, one of EMU's counseling faculty, asked Ms.  Ward whether 
she viewed her "brand of Christianity as superior" to other 
Christians who may disagree with her.  And Perry Francis, another 
EMU faculty member, told Ward he was going to take her on a 
btheological boutb and then directly attacked her understanding 
and interpretation of scripture.
  Throughout these things, Ward remained steadfast, refusing to 
abandon her religious convictions or violate them as a condition 
to getting her degree.
  What is amazing about Ward's situation is EMU's harsh and 
drastic reaction to her request to refer a single client.  Rather 
than honoring Ward's simple request (which, again, was consistent 
with the professional standards regarding referral), EMU expelled 
an academically stellar student and, in the process of doing so, 
targeted and attacked the religious beliefs that motivated her 
referral request and told her she had to change them to get her 
degree.
  Now, instead of being a Christian and a graduate student at 
EMU, Ward is but another Christian whom the tolerant left will 
not tolerate.
  David Cortman serves as senior legal counsel with the Alliance 
Defense Fund at its Atlanta Regional Service Center in Georgia, 
where he heads litigation efforts to defend and reclaim the First 
Amendment rights of public school students across the nation.  
Cortman joined ADF in 2005, and is admitted to the bar in 
Georgia, Florida, and the District of Columbia.  He has practiced 
law since 1996 and graduated magna cum laude from the Regent 
University School of Law, where he earned his J.D.
_______________________________________________
acb-hsp mailing list
acb-hsp at acb.org
http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/acb-hsp