First Amendment Rights and the Counselor

I'm learning quite a bit about the origins of the ACA and the philosophical leanings towards Humanism that drives its concept of ethics. This explains why they threw a temper tantrum concerning Tennessee House Bill 1840, a bill that is in full compliance with their ethics code yet protects counselors of faith from law-suits from the LGBT community for referring them to another counselor.

The ACA threw a fit, said the law violated its ethics (not true) and pulled their annual conference from Nashville and moved it to San Franciso. What the ACA has effectively done with its values-based behavior is to create a religious litmus test for all counselors of faith; whether they be Christian, Islam, or Judaic counselors.

The ACA code of ethics states that counselors act to avoid imposing their values towards a client.

A.4. Avoiding Harm and
Imposing Values
A.4.a. Avoiding Harm
Counselors act to avoid harming their
clients, trainees, and research participants
and to minimize or to remedy
unavoidable or unanticipated harm.
imposing—their own values, attitudes,
beliefs, and behaviors. Counselors
respect the diversity of clients, trainees,
and research participants and
seek training in areas in which they
are at risk of imposing their values
onto clients, especially when the
counselor’s values are inconsistent
with the client’s goals or are discriminatory
in nature.

A.11.b. Values Within
Termination and Referral

Counselors refrain from referring prospective
and current clients based solely
on the counselor’s personally held values,
attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.
Counselors respect the diversity of
clients and seek training in areas in
which they are at risk of imposing their
values onto clients, especially when the
counselor’s values are inconsistent with
the client’s goals or are discriminatory
in nature.

The key word here is refrain . A counselor will not ask about clients sexual preference during intake because that is definitely discriminatory. However, the moment a client begins delving into areas outside the counselor's competence then the counselor is required to refer that client to someone more competent or trained. Most faith-based counselors do not have the competence to help a client in certain areas of behavior. In fact, trying to help a client outside of a counselors competency is unethical and can lead to loss of licensure. I see the Tennessee HB 1840 as solving this ethical dilemma that every counselor, regardless of faith, will face at one time or another. How can a Humanistic Atheist Counselor possibly and unethically provide competent services to a Christan, Muslim, or Jew, when they begin talking about their relationship with God and how to resolve toxic anxiety, guilt, or depression and still maintain their faith in God?

It just ain't gonna happen!

I have personally been to Humanistic counselors in the past and they suggested that I do things that were so contrary to my worldview and values that it would have created Cognitive Dissonance in my life. This whole notion of neutrality is nonsense because no one is 100% neutral and is precisely why the ACA code of ethics makes provision for the counselors own humanness in the counseling relationship and suggests a referral for everything except a values conflict. Why would the ACA exclude a values conflict as a reason for referring a client? While I cannot state conclusively, the logical outcome is that they wish everyone to be neutral so as not to offend anyone. In my 35 years of ministry and 5-10 years of private pastoral counseling, I have never seen a situation in which someone was not offended at some point itn time. The ACA seems to be out of touch with reality and wishes to impose an unrelaistic and outdated worldview and values system of humanistic atheism upon the world of counseling.

The logical solution would be to refer that client to another counselor trained in LGBT related matters. House Bill 1840 includes the ACA's own guidelines to refer to another counselor who is qualified. But that was not good enough for the ACA, they insist that the law is discriminatory and they specifically mentioned the LGBT community as the potential victim of the Bill. However, one of the ACA's original division was for Humanistic Counseling which is unquestionably tied to Humanist Philosophy that rejects the existence of the supernatural and promotes that salvation or help in this life cannot come from any source other than the man himself.

You can see where this is heading. By insisting that all counselors follow the ACA philosophy of ethics which is motivated by humanist philosophy, they are effectively discriminating against the First Amendment Rights of counselors of faith. The ACA is telling anyone of any faith to park their moral and ethical values at the door of THEIR PRIVATE business.

Why is this so important to a Christian Counselor who is a licensed professional counselor? Because the ACA has lobbied successfully for years to persuade all 50 states that their "code of ethics" is the standard for all counselors to practice by and to receive licensure by the States. As of this day, and to the best of my current knowledge, all 50 states LPC Examination is in compliance with the ACA standards. That is far too much power for on organization to have and to impose their values upon all counselors who come for an enormous diversity of cultural, religious, and philosophical backgrounds. This influence can directly affect the career and economic well being of competent and caring counselors who are truly called to help society.

I'm sure this discussion is far from over because this will be a fight much like the fight private businesses, with christian owners, had with the government about whether they should be foced to give up their First Amendment Rights and be forced to provide birth control, and/or abortion as part of Obamacares mandates. I predict that this will eventually end up in the Supreme Court and the ACA will eat crow.
For one, by their own admission, the ACA code of ethics cannot be forced upon anyone but are only guidelines to follow. Yet their behavior over the Tennessee HB 1840 exposed their own philosophical intention to force all counselors and states to abide by their values system, even when laws are created that abide by the ACA's own code of ethics. Consequently, the ACA made this an issue of values and First Amendment Rights in the workplace instead of the code of ethics.

Watch for a Supreme Court decision within the next 5 to 10 years on this subject, at least that's my prediction.