Court Says Company Was Right to Fire Anti-Gay Counselor

Great news and excellent analysis, Carrie.  One minor quibble, though.   “Lifestyle” is a word the anti-gays use to demean gay people, implying it’s a choice and that the way we live is somehow vastly different (and less desirable) than that of “normal” society.  

 That’s why I’m extremely uncomfortable with such people as youth or school counselors. With adults you could argue that they have the means to go elsewhere. Sure, that’s not always the case either, but with teenagers it certainly never is.

Good post.
If I were a Catholic minister, but refused to minister because doing so violated my atheism, should I be protected? If I were a police officer, but refused to do anything to help anyone who didn’t share my beliefs because my religion said so, should I be protected? 

She’s a *counselor*, she should be impartial in this sort of matter. If she’s not, she’s not suited for the position. It doesn’t matter if she’s not because of a religious belief or because of any other sort of belief.

I counseled thousands and thousands of people. Male, female, transgender, gay, straight, bisexual, poor, rich, educated, uneducated, intelligent, slow, beautiful, plain, those with criminal records, those with none, addicted, not addicted, atheists, agnostics, theists, deists, every religion, every race, every age, every political view, every occupation, born in the U.S., born elsewhere, citizens, non-citizens, those with disabilities, those without disabilities, those with severe problems, those with mild problems, on, and on, and on, every category that somebody else discriminates or negatively judges others by.

I never had any difficulty holding all of them in high regard, and I gave every single  one of them my absolutely best effort for quality counseling.

You’re a human being, therefore I treat you with the deepest respect.
You’re in difficulty, anguish, or pain, therefore I treat you with the deepest compassion.
My job, my human responsibility, and my personal joy is to help you find your own unique ways to live your life with health, happiness, full self expression, and for you to have the same effect on others.

A person who cannot do all this easily has no business being a counselor. They should get some other job.

“The rulings seem pretty reasonable to me. If the clients aren’t harmed by being referred out to another counselor, then everyone can be happy.”

I’m gay, I make no secret of the fact, and some people find me to be obvious.

If I need to go see a professional about something, whether it’s personal counseling or a dentist or to get help choosing what color to paint my bedroom, I have to take time out of my life to go see them. I have other things I could be doing. I could be getting my housework done. I could be visiting my niece and nephew. I could be visiting my friends. I could be working on my personal programming projects. I could be sewing. I could be at work in my office.

The time I lose by going to consult a professional who then refers me to a colleague, however courteously and without expressing judgment, is time wasted. That time had value, and now it’s gone. 

Further, I will then have to rearrange my schedule again, which might have some social or professional cost aside from the actual time spent. (“Why is he always taking time out of the office for personal appointments? He’s not a reliable employee.” or “He postponed our date AGAIN? I guess he doesn’t really like me. I’ll dump him.”) Also, I might not be able to schedule an appointment with the colleague to whom I was referred soon enough to meet my needs. (It had to wait over 3 months for my appointment to see a specialist at a medical center recently. If I’d had to be referred and rebook to see someone else, that’d have been 6 months, in which time I could have suffered terrible health consequences.)

So yeah, the clients damned well ARE harmed by a professional’s refusal to provide secular services to a client because of the professional’s religious bigotry. If you’re not able to do a job without interference by your religion, don’t take the job, you’re not qualified.

 I honestly don’t see why people like Ms. Waden go into counseling in the first place- you know you will come into contact with all sorts of people yet you already have a wall up about some of them. *shakes head* I can understand going into Christian counseling or advertising yourself as a christian counselor because most rational people will probably avoid you or at least know you have a religious bias.

Even in this incredibly biased video, Walden still managed to shoot herself in the foot.  “It’s always about, how do I share god with them.”  Ummm…. no!  It’s about how do you help someone in need.  She was hired as a counselor, but had other, (and in her mind) more important things to do.  Her motives were to “share god”, not to do her job as a counselor.  I don’t understand why this is so hard for the religious to understand.  I know they are blinded by their belief, but it doesn’t take much to imagine how they would feel if a counselor tried to help them by “sharing” Allah or Ganesha (or any other god).

[quote]“[a] counselor who is a Christian shouldn’t lose her job for upholding the highest professional standards.”[/quote]

Really?  Wow.  In reality, she didn’t want to do her job for *personal* reasons.  Also, when you take a job, unless your employer is a religious institution of some kind, it’s probably not your job to share faith *while on the clock*.  Doubly so when your paycheck is funded with tax dollars.

Flip the situation around and see how the Christians feel when a counselor provides a referral to a vulnerable needy client because they disapprove of the client’s Christianity.

Update: Changed from “lifestyle” to “sexuality.” I’d never want to unintentionally sound a conservative dog whistle. 

Excellent point, Thomas. I was about to say “what’s the harm in referring patients? Even tho homophobia is a shitty reason to do so, as long as she doesn’t bash them openly blah blah blah…” But you’re right.

You’re more than right. That kind of discrimination through buck passing actually sounds eerily familiar. A person can lose months, years, tens of thousands in student loan debt, a passable credit score, rescheduling costs, a job, another job and on and on.

I think it actually happened to me for some unknown reason. People at my university treated me like I smelled bad, and nobody ever did tell me why. Ageism? Snooty Fashionista Style Assessments? A mild walleye that acts up more when I’m sleep deprived? Was I chubbier than I thought? Is being a size 12 at 5’9″ in heels enough to induce Fat Phobia? Or maybe I’m cuter than I thought, and this is mean girl chick pecking?

No, it’s not a therapist’s job to make her patient late and neurotic. They were right to fire her.  

I honestly don’t see why people like Ms. Waden go into counseling in the first place

Bingo.  

Flip the situation around and see how the Christians feel when a counselor provides a referral to a vulnerable needy client because they disapprove of the client’s Christianity.

Exactly.

Unfortunately many RRRW Christians don’t separate their religion from the rest of their lives, including their jobs.  To them, any job they do is nothing more than an extension of their “ministry”. 

Obviously she’s the one that needs some serious counseling. Religion is such a hideous disease. I wish there was a vaccine we could give children so that when they are exposed to it, (read indoctrinated), they would be immune to it.

 If you think they aren’t qualified, can’t you just ask for a referral?

I watched the video too, LOL! the FRC is a trip.
she’s making tea in her microwave, wow, that’s hard! 

What was disturbing is that in her interview, she says that God chose her. That is crazy. I run into many people who believe that. They commit a wrong and get in trouble and then claim that God is on their side and will protect them.

That’s troubling. 

Actually as a Christian I would like to be referred out by a counselor who disagreed with my worldview.    

She told the patient that her “personal values” prevented her from counseling her effectively. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what that means. If Walden had simply agreed to make future referrals without expressing her disapproval, then of course she would still have a job.

If she can be honest – I mean, I should be honest about why I’m transferring her.

Translation: I should be able to tell her that I disapprove of her sexual orientation and I can’t counsel her because I disagree with her “lifestyle choice.” Walden clearly doesn’t care about how such a remark affects the patient. Her desire to express her religious views is more important than anything else.

So she did the professional and ethical move with the referral and yet gets fired for implying her beliefs.  Another example of a Christian being told to stay quiet.

So if an atheist counselor had a client that came to her and said that she was having problems between her christian faith and some of her decisions and the atheist said, I am not the right counselor for you because of my personal beliefs, should that counselor be fired? Or does it only work this way between Christians and the homosexual community?  

That’s a false equivalence. What this person did is more like if an atheist councilor had said “I can’t help you because I’m not comfortable dealing with delusions.” What this person did was not just “implying her beliefs” it was casting judgement on a vulnerable person. If an atheist had done anything similar, they would deserve to be fired.

It was not professional or ethical of her to express disapproval of the patient. If it had merely been a referral, there wouldn’t have been a problem. And she didn’t get fired because of her actions in this case. She was fired because she has said she will continue to express disapproval of patients in the future. She really wants to let those patients know that she disagrees with them, all in the name of “honesty,” of course. 

And, as someone else mentioned, your comparison does not work. If a Christian came to an atheist counselor and the counselor said that she needed to refer the patient because she disapproved of the patient’s religion, that would be just as unprofessional and unethical. It shouldn’t be controversial to expect medical professionals to refrain from making judgmental remarks about patients.

“Another example of a Christian being told to stay quiet. ”

Rwlawoffice, I personally find you to be a fairly reasonable person, so I’ll remind you that not everything is a Christian vs Atheist issue, this case is a prime example.

A person seeking the assistance of a counselor is expecting help and advice, “Jane Doe” got neither because “personal values” resulted in the counselor denying services. This means the counselor failed to perform their duties on behalf of CSC.

As a former employee of CSC I had to sign a diversity contract as a condition of employment. It was basically a reminder that CSC is a global company with employees and contracts all over the world and that I was expected to treat everyone equally. Failure to abide by the contract is grounds for termination, there are no excuses. 

To answer your hypothetical question, the answer is a resounding, “YES”.  The ‘atheist’ counselor should be fired.

I agree. People are people and because of that they each have their own beliefs which could affect their ability to be an objective counselor.  Thus it was right to do the referral and the only reason she was fired was because she expressed those beliefs.  Had it been anything other then her disapproval of homosexuality this would not have been an issue.

Thanks! I’ll keep that in mind. 

She is free to disapprove of homosexuality, she is not free to deny service based on the disapproval. Did you miss the part of my post regarding the diversity contact and having to treat everyone equally? She withheld a service based on the person being homosexual, that is not equal treatment in any context.

Shit. I thought we got rid of that annoying tard. Discussion is all fine and good, but it’s absolutely impossible to reason with him. I still don’t understand why people bother

Licenses for secular (meaning not specifically religious) counselors such as Marriage and Family Therapists, Social Workers, and Clinical Psychologists are granted by each state, and their standards can vary somewhat. In general, MFC’s and SW’s and their equivalents require a Master’s in psychology, social work, or a closely-related major from an accredited college. Psychologists require a PhD from an accredited college. All their licenses require thousands of supervised hours working as intern counselors, and written and oral final examinations.

When I was going through that process in the 1980’s, there was never any formal examination of students’ and interns’ religious views, or how those might impact their ability to deliver competent counseling, but I think that since then, the increased visibility of GLBT struggles for civil rights and acceptance in the public arena has made that a much more important issue, and so I would not be surprised to hear that religious conflicts would be pointedly addressed in counseling classes. I certainly hope so.

Licensees are required to have continuing education to keep renewing their licenses, and those requirements (at least for me in California) reflect ongoing changes in society, such as classes about cultural and national diversity, and sensitivity to cultural, religious and sexual differences. At the very least, counselors are exposed to formal education that can bring their awareness up about these issues, BUT that doesn’t necessarily prevent someone who is harboring religious objections to homosexuality from just pretending to “get it.” Once they pass the course, they might behave as they please until they get in trouble when a client complains to their boss.

“Pastoral counselors” also have licenses granted by states, and their requirements also vary from state to state. They might not have standards for knowledge and skills in counseling psychology that are as rigorous as for the mainstream counselor licenses, and their training in their religion is included in their curriculum. I am not certain, but I expect that any difficulties they have working with GLBT people are much more easily forgiven, perhaps even accepted and expected, and those attitudes are probably not considered to be an obstacle to their becoming qualified for their degrees or licenses.

Caveat emptor! If you’re looking for a counselor, pointedly and frankly question them about their attitudes about any such issues, on the phone before you set up an appointment. Don’t waste your time and subject yourself to frustration and humiliation.

It sounds like the harm that is done  by the referral could be avoided by directing gay clients towards gay friendly counselors when they make the first counseling appointment rather than making a referral at the first counseling appointment?

Fuck this shit. If a firefighter claims that he is a muslim whose beliefs prevent him to put out fires for an infidel’s house, or a jewish EMT refuses to resuscitate a goy, they will be rightfully fired, and possibly tried for a criminal offense. Personal beliefs mean bupkis when they prevent you from doing the damn job you were hired to do. Deal with it.

Exactly.  There is a time and a place that is appropriate for religious discussion, and that situation was not one of  them.  A Christian being asked to be professional on her job, the same expectation made of everyone else BTW, is not the same as “Christians being told to stay quiet.”  If an atheist counselor was uncomfortable with a client’s obsessive faith, it might be appropriate to give a referral to someone who could more easily work within that client’s faith, but it would be wholly inappropriate to say “I’m referring you to someone because I think religion is wrong/crazy/delusional/etc.”  Even to an atheist like me who wants to raise awareness of atheism, there are times when it is incredibly inappropriate, unprofessional, and just plain wrong to be spreading one’s views.  There are lots of situations in our society designed to try and shut atheists up and keep them in the closet, but telling that atheist counselor to make the referral tactfully and without insult or judgment to the client is not one of them.  And that goes for every counselor, regardless of religious or political views.

And where is this magic universe where Christians are told to stay quiet?  All I ever see is Christians smearing their religion on everything, everywhere, no matter how inappropriate or unfair or illegal, and in most cases being celebrated as heroes for it–particularly when it infringes on the rights of non-Christians.  It would be lovely change to spend some time in a place where religious people, especially Christians, don’t feel the need to make everyone in the universe aware at all times, using any means necessary, that they Have Faith and Are Christian.

“No one” told her that she had to counsel people that are LGBT? Really? Did she not have classes on ethics like every one else has to take? It is very clearly stated that to habitually refer patients based on culture, disability, ethnicity, race, religion/spirituality, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, marital status, partnership, language preference, socioeconomic status or any basis proscribed by law is unethical according to the ACA. 

I fail to see how she made it so far through her counseling education and career and never had to learn the basics in ethics? 

In my psych and counseling classes, every single term, sexuality is discussed and it is drilled into our heads the rules and ethics codes according to the APA, NBCC, and ACA. If she can’t put her personal b.s. aside, how is she going to counsel someone who is getting a divorce? Or raising their children in an “ungodly” way? She needs to be a pastor so that she can only counsel those that share in her religious beliefs. Because there are a lot more people out there who don’t follow all the “rules” of religion to the letter. How is she going to counsel those people? I mean, really, is she going to tell a rape victim that she has to marry her rapist because it’s in the bible? 

The converse is that it’s a basic tenet of professional conduct that, excepting certain extreme circumstances, no professional should be required to take on a client that they don’t want to for any reason whatsoever. Sometimes, the client’s problem is outside their speciality. Sometimes, a professional and the potential client just aren’t a good match for any number of reasons.

Should a lawyer be required to take on a client who wants to mount a frivolous lawsuit? Should a doctor be required to perform a medical procedure on someone who, in their opinion, may not understand the full implications of that procedure? Should a counsellor be required to take on a client whose needs are sufficiently outside the counsellor’s area of expertise?

Regardless of how inconvenienced a potential client may be, the default position of the law is that it’s the professional’s job to determine whether they and the client are a good or bad fit, because they are the experts. Except under specifically enumerated circumstances (e.g. a patient whose health would be threatened were treatment to be delayed), a professional may decline taking on a client for any reason at all (some professions are expected to provide a referral and some are not) and the law won’t pry into the reason why.

The problem here is that the counsellor broke professional ethics by giving a bad reason. All she had to do was say “I’m not the best person to help you; I’ll refer you to someone who can help you better than I can”. That’s it. Nothing further required.

I have refused plenty of clients for unspecified reasons in my engineering career. The actual reasons are varied. Sometimes, it’s clear that arranging meetings between the client and myself is going to be highly inconvenient for me. Sometimes, they really need a specialist in an area that I don’t specialise in. Sometimes, it just doesn’t smell right. In each case, my response was “I don’t think I’m right for this job”, sometimes followed by “let me ask around and see if I can find someone”. If I had to justify every such decision to a jury’s satisfaction, I’d be in a different business.

What if there are no other counselors? What if, in a given institution,
an anti-Gay counselor is the only one on staff, or the institution ONLY
has anti-gay counselors?

Then they wouldn’t have won a government contract to provide counselling services. I don’t know if you’ve ever read a government contract or not, but they’re usually pretty strict about such things. If the organisation thought that it couldn’t provide the service, it wouldn’t have applied for the job. If it helps, remember that it’s the organisation who fired her.

 Contrary to what fantasy Hollywood movies tell you, “telling the truth” is not the same as “blurting out every little thing that comes into your head”.

She was not required to lie at all. It is not a lie to say “I don’t think I’m the best person to help you; here’s someone who can do it better”.

Please see my lengthy answer to this above.

 Ah, yes, I can picture it now…

Receptionist: All right, we can book you in on either Monday or Wednesday.
Client: How about Thursday?
Receptionist: That depends. Are you gay? Because that’s a no-go if you are.

She shouldn’t become a minister. She should work for a religious counseling service.

What really put me off was he quotes in the interview, paraphrasing the “I never said that I was giving the word of god, but that’s what I tried to give my clients”

That is enough to disqualify her in my eyes: Counselling shouldn’t be a way to smuggle in the world of god, because that sounds mighty like brainwashing.

If that’s meant to be a criticism GentleGiant, you’re going to have to explain it a little more.

If you’d paid a little more attention to those words, you might have realized that that wasn’t an argument that counselors should be allowed to refer clients for discriminatory reasons, it was an argument that if we are going to allow that (as the court does), then we should allow them to stat their discriminatory reasons. I have argued in other comments on this post why I think that allowing counselors to refer clients for discriminatory reasons is a good idea, why don’t you go respond to that?

I’m not oversimplifying it at all. As a matter of principle, we give professionals considerable latitude in deciding whether or not
they will take on a client, and with good reason. The professional is
the expert. It’s part of their job to know whether or not the client is a
good fit, and to provide a referral if it isn’t. The law does not pry into the question of why the referral happens unless there’s evidence that the reason might be unlawful.

Unless there an emergency of some kind, clients are not harmed by a professional referring them to someone who, in their professional opinion, would better serve the client’s need.

If Ms. Walden hadn’t created a hostile environment for the client by her demeanour (which was a serious breach of ethics), you’d never have heard about this case. You would not have been able to tell if the reason was because she hatez teh gay, or because she honestly felt that someone with more expertise in the issues facing homosexual people would be a better fit. In this case, both of these are probably accurate.