FWIS 2.0

Yosh · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:52 pm Post subject: Good or bad ruling?

I'm more interested in the dynamic than the specific topics at hand:

Court Upholds Expulsion of Counseling Student Who Opposes Homosexuality

I had read an article about the Augusta State student a week or two back, so this caught my eye.

To assert that an institution won't discriminate against you, unless you discriminate first, seems a bit odd. So, "retaliatory" discrimination is morally acceptable?

(As I noted, I don't care about the adjectives involved, you could substitute other ones; the same dichotomy would exist.)
_________________
"I drank what?!?"

Socrates' last words.....

FZR1KG · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:06 pm Post subject:

Tough call here.
I'd put it in the same category as expelling a sadistic medical student for being in principle in breech of the hypocritical oath.

As a councilor she shouldn't be making moral judgments on people based on her own religion. The possible damage could be great.

I guess every case should stand on its own merits.
What I'd like to know is just how she was "outed" regarding her beliefs. If she was making herself and her beliefs regarding homosexuality vocal then I'd have to agree that she is not fit for the position simply because her belief is overriding her commitment to her profession. In many cases this just means a bad product. When your product is fixing vulnerable peoples minds and lives I have to raise doubts as to eligibility to pursue a career in it.
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

SciFi Chick · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:17 pm Post subject:

According to her testimony, she hadn't started counseling the student yet. The student came in strictly for counseling about a homosexual relationship. Since she is against homosexuality, she wanted to refer the student to another counselor. It's not like she actually counseled a student to change his or her lifestyle.

So unless I can find some information to the contrary, I think she's being discriminated against.
_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." James Bovard

FZR1KG · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:21 pm Post subject:

What would happen to a medical student for refusing to see HIV patients because God condemned them?
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

SciFi Chick · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:29 pm Post subject:

I have to take back what I said based on this blog.

In reality, there are Christian schools with their own accreditation for counseling, and if she is this religious, she would be better off in that environment. It makes no sense to try and join an organization that opposes your belief system.

Therefore, I'd have to say she wasn't discriminated against. She was disciplined for not following the ethics of the organization she joined, and since those ethics are clearly outlined before joining, there was no discrimination.
_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick

"Democracy must be something more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner." James Bovard

Yosh · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 10:27 pm Post subject:

I reviewed the ACA Code of Ethics. No where in there does it say a counselor must accept any person who walks through the door.

So, if I had PTSD from a two tours in Afghanistan, and a counselor believed war was "a priori" evil, that counselor would still be competent to "treat" me? Or would that counselor refer me to another individual better able to assist me?

I'd like to see *that* scenario played out at the grad school. For that matter, would the school make the same decision concerning a Consiencious Objector who was student in the program? That individual couldn't adequately serve a segment of the population.

My opinion is that it is discrimination. The school's justification is she did it first.
_________________
"I drank what?!?"

Socrates' last words.....

FZR1KG · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:27 pm Post subject:

Secation A.4.b
Section C.5

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/07/28/counseling

As explained there, the course is accredited by the ACA.
The ACA required non judgmental approaches to clients.
The school provides graduates that work in high schools.
If she graduated she would be accredited as abiding by the ACA code of ethics but would not be doing so. She could not council students of a high school who were gay or as she says could not be neutral on their sexual orientation because its against what the lord says.
Basically it would be a situation where she is in a position in a government institution who cannot fulfill her obligations as required.

Would it be OK for a Muslim to councilor to not treat women because he believes that women are not as worthy as men?

The we have other issues, what if the gay client/student asked her why she is disapproving of their sexual orientation?
Her choices are to tell them the truth or not say anything at all.
The first has obvious problems and would go directly against the ACA code of ethics regarding neutrality. The second creates a situation where the client who is obviously disturbed to begin with is now even more so because they are being judged, again, against the ACA code of ethics.

Also as pointed out in many articles and the judge that heard the case, people come to counselling not knowing their problems. A trust relationship is built. With her stance there is no way that a client can realise that they are gay without being judged or rejected due to her views. This can be enough to cause considerable harm to a client either way. The exact opposite of her job requirement.

The biggest issue I have however is that the ACA code of ethics has a pre-requisite that their accredited councilors are not biased or judgmental. Giving her accreditation goes against their own codes. The school is ACA accredited so if they allow her to pass then they can no longer be so. Basically they have a reputation or standard to keep of being unbiased. They will lose that if they lower their standards to allow her to pass.
I'm an advocate of not lowering standards in education and accreditation.
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

FZR1KG · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject:

geonuc · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:35 pm Post subject:

I'm on my iPhone so searching for something other than the OPs Fox News link is a pain. I think FZ is on the right track.

brite · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:48 pm Post subject:

[whine]But I want them to stop BEING homos!!!!!!!!!! It's against God's WIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!! They'll go to HEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/whine]
_________________
When life throws you lemons... WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE LEMONS!? Why can't it be chocolate or something...

This is my pistol
This is my gun
This is for shooting
This is for fun
(the bayonette is for the kinky stuff)

Didn't you hear? There are no fairy tales in the military. It violates Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Yosh · Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:53 pm Post subject:

My concern is that no one walking this planet is completely "non-judgemental."

So, using that criteria, only saints need apply (but they fail on the religious test).

Brite, it isn't about the adjectives for me, it's the above...as well as schools claiming they don't discriminate...until they do. Because discrimination is wrong...unless they're doing because someone else discriminated first.
_________________
"I drank what?!?"

Socrates' last words.....

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:04 am Post subject:

There is a difference between being biased and being willingly or proudly biased. She was offered to be taught how to correct her bias. She chose not to because she wanted to keep it.
I find that ironic, she was offered counseling and rejected it because they were biased to her bias.
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:06 am Post subject:

SciFiFisher · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:36 am Post subject:

it actually becomes an ethics issue in addition to a discrimination (potentially) issue.

In nursing we run into this all the time. Nurses often work for hospitals that are run by religious organizations. Those hospitals will not do abortions or in some cases blood transfusions (look up 7th Day Adventist). Or just the opposite. A nurse works in a non-religious hospital and has personal or religious objections to abortions or blood transfusions.

These health care providers have the right to refuse to participate in medical treatment's that violate thier personal beliefs. As long as they do not jepardize the patient when they refuse to provide care. In those instances it's simply a matter of re-arranging the assignment and letting another nurse do the care.

Counseling is similar. Counselors should have the right to refuse to treat patients based on thier personal beliefs and convictions. and as the article noted the student was seeking a different counselor for the patient. she was not refusing to have the patient counseled. A hair splitting distinction but one that is critical.

SFC may be correct. A religious based counseling program may have been a better choice for this student. But, I bet you she didn't know this would be considered a violation of the code of conduct until the university made the issue out of it.

Unfortunately, courts have also ruled that, while employee's have the right to object to providing care they beleive to be unethical, employers have the right to broaden those employee's employment horizons for refusing to provide that care. The court maybe applying a similar arguement in the case of this student.
_________________
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wits and add drama to an otherwise dull day! -Calvin and Hobbes.

“You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.” Winston Churchill

brite · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 12:55 am Post subject:

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 1:15 am Post subject:

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 1:22 am Post subject:

Actually I simplified too much.
The other way she was willing to see the student is if she could try to convince him to not be gay. Since the ACA and the school do not condone this (based on years of history of failures) this was not allowed according to their code of ethics.
She however has stated many times that she feels it is possible for them not to be gay. This IMHO is also arrogance and backwards thinking. A student telling the teachers and institutions that they are wrong to abandon an already tried and failed technique.
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 1:23 am Post subject:

SciFi Chick · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:21 am Post subject:

FZR1KG · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 4:40 am Post subject:

If anyone reads the transcript I linked to in response to fisher they can see where the problems are. Look near the end where she has the interview with the board. Its not just this issue that she has problems with.

1) She thinks homosexuality is a choice.
2) She would refer homosexual students to be "rehabilitated" till it was pointed out that is wrong.
3) She also has issues with anything that conflicts with her religious beliefs and would not explore anything in a session that would conflict with them even though she claimed it was the only thing that she had issues with.
4) She read the ACA code of ethics as required prior to enrolling and was told her choice of career conflicted with them but felt that it was a matter of opinion rather than a strict set of rules to abide by.
5) She defines affirming a persons sexual orientation anything that includes discussing it. The only solution is not to have homosexual affairs. Even though the school says all possibilities need to be explored she feels that means its affirming homosexuality so will not cover the possibility of them actually being homosexual.

Point 5 is interesting because she will also not cover abortion as a solution under any circumstances etc. This creates problems if she was confronted with a life or death situation for the expectant mother.
Basically she is misrepresenting herself. She would consult with patients but exclude certain actions from being on the discussion due to her beliefs.

That considering she was studying to be a high school counselor this represents major problems in the separation of church and state.
Her argument that she can always refer the student to someone else is not practical. Schools would have to accommodate multiple counselors just to give people that refuse to see all students a job.
Considering the amount of kids discovering who they really are this is going to be a regular occurrence for her.

Should schools be allowed to employ people who won't work with say black people on the basis that they can refer them to someone else?
_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

Yosh · Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:49 am Post subject:

Ikyoto · Has A Perminant Rash Joined: 06 Jun 2007 Posts: 4882

SciFiFisher · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:07 am Post subject:

FZR1KG · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 1:23 am Post subject:

Ikyoto · Has A Perminant Rash Joined: 06 Jun 2007 Posts: 4882

I was poking at Yosh.

And I stand by what I said, but for a more in depth reason. I want her to continue to turn away people who come to her for counseling because of her choice to use a religious standard over humanitarian. She will never get a job in the field outside of her religion and that's fine with me.
_________________
異教徒
My ignorance is exceeded only by my lack of knowledge.

FZR1KG · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:16 am Post subject:

To further highlight this case, take the following passage from the Bible:

SciFi Chick · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:25 am Post subject:

FZR1KG · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:45 am Post subject:

Nah, thats OK, because the bib'lay says so and its a crazy for a gay person to want to enter an institution that disagrees with them being gay.

This is clearly different, she doesn't disagree with the ACA, she just thinks they are wrong. Two totally different things. Razz

_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

Yosh · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 10:16 am Post subject:

geonuc · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:37 pm Post subject:

SciFi Chick · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 9:38 pm Post subject:

Yosh · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:26 pm Post subject:

SciFi Chick · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:31 pm Post subject:

Yosh · Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:32 pm Post subject:

Ikyoto · Has A Perminant Rash Joined: 06 Jun 2007 Posts: 4882

FZR1KG · Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:43 am Post subject:

I like Yosh, he's nutty.
Like the whole "card carrying democrat" thing. I mean you just can't make that shit up. Its like striking comedy gold. We hit the jackpot! Very Happy

_________________
It's not the speed that kills, its the sudden stop

SciFi Chick · Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 8:45 am Post subject:

Yosh · Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 10:39 am Post subject:

Ikyoto · Has A Perminant Rash Joined: 06 Jun 2007 Posts: 4882

"polish my katana..."
So THAT'S what they call it now.
_________________
異教徒
My ignorance is exceeded only by my lack of knowledge.

Yosh · Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:56 pm Post subject:

brite · Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:22 am Post subject:

Just like a guy... claiming that it's a katana... when it's probably more like a wakazashi....
_________________
When life throws you lemons... WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE LEMONS!? Why can't it be chocolate or something...

This is my pistol
This is my gun
This is for shooting
This is for fun
(the bayonette is for the kinky stuff)

Didn't you hear? There are no fairy tales in the military. It violates Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

FZR1KG · Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:23 am Post subject:

Yosh · Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 2:13 pm Post subject: