http://www.easternecho.com A federal judge denied Eastern Michigan University’s move for dismissal or summary judgment of former EMU counseling graduate student Julea Ward’s case March 24. en-us Gryphon 2.3.1-dsw (pewabic)/Foundry5 Wed, 12 May 2010 13:16:54 -0400 webmaster@easternecho.com http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/804 It makes me wonder what was wrong with Ms.Ward. You cannot call yourself a Christian, Muslim, Jew, or any other mainstream religion, if you don’t want to help people, even if they are gay. You should not be a counselor if you don’t want to counsel. Its not your place to judge people, its your place to listen. All that aside, she should have refereed the person out if she could not handle the case. So, for a bigot, she did the right thing. EMU was wrong for dismissing her. They should have had a more stringent admissions process instead. Mon, 12 Apr 2010 03:37:28 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/804 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/805 I think this is a very complicated situation. Obviously there’s nothing wrong with being homosexual; that’s not the issue. I think the big issue is the patient-therapist relationship. It is sacred. If you force a therapist into a position that they find untenable, that means the the patient-therapist relationship is fundamentally weak. The patient can’t trust the therapist, and the therapist can’t do his or her job to the best of their ability. The EMU program is large enough that the patient could have been reassigned to another counselor. In most therapy clinics, the patient would have been assigned to someone who best fit his/her needs anyway. When Ms. Ward graduates, she will be able to choose the jobs she applies to, so that if it continues to be difficult for her to counsel certain people, she can choose not to apply to jobs where she would have to. Or conversely, she may eventually be able to reconcile her religious beliefs with the good she does helping others, regardless of their circumstances. Whatever the future may hold, there was a way to protect the patient’s needs while also respecting the counselor’s core beliefs, but EMU did not do what they should have to find that way. She should be readmitted and somehow compensated for the damage to her educational progress and the potential fallout to her career. Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:42:56 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/805 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/808 Two items left out of the summary of the case in article are important to understand Ms. Ward’s actions. Ms. Ward was willing to meet with the client, but Ms. Ward was unwilling to affirm the relationship of the referred client. The school required her to affirm the relationship. This forced “affirmation” is at best silly and at worst an attempt at thought control. Without any knowledge of the relationship, the referred client’s feelings about the relationship, or their feelings about their sexual orientation to make such a one size fits all statement is simply political and not based upon the best interests of the client. I understand that even with more information Ms. Ward would have been unwilling to provide such an affirmation of the relationship. BUT, these decisions are made every day in counseling organizations in order to best serve the client, which I assumed was the important element of the therapist client relationship. Counselors are expected to know their limits (knowledge, experience, feelings) and to make appropriate referrals when necessary. Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:40:47 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/808 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/809 I am an EMU grad. I wonder if I could be today, since my Christian tenets would not allow me to “counsel” someone to go on practicing a lifestyle that is wrong. The answer was exactly what was done initially: to accommodate her religious principles and assign someone else to deal with the student. Then, however, EMU became retaliative and punitive against someone who stood by her principles, but had the integrity and candor to tell her academic superiors and allow some other counselor to provide counseling for that student. That appears to be the honest and fair thing to do — except to those whose intolerance insists on coercing dissenters into accepting their viewpoints. Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:34:29 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/809 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/813 It’s sad what political correctness has wrought. A small minority can, apparently, use public shamming to keep silent those of the majority that should be opposing immoral conduct. Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:59:43 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/813 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/815 While some may disagree with the students beliefs being able to reject something as part of your job based on moral or religious beliefs is common in many fields. Such as pharmacy. Many states have conscience clauses the clause can allow pharmacist to deny patients certain medicines i.e., birth control, abortion pills etc. because they morally object to handing out otherwise safe and legal medicines. So I do not see why this is a problem for the student as the student could have been given a new client to finish her training and receive her degree. Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:15:59 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/815 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/817 EMU is in trouble for this. It would be nice, for once, if EMU just would come out and say, “we were wrong”. Instead, this case will be tied up in court for a long time….It’s clear that EMU will be in trouble for this one. For once, just once, I wish our state institutions would be honest with the public when they are wrong. Better now then later… Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:31:32 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/817 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/820 I felt I had to respond mostly on the first comment. According to that poster if you disagree or have other views you are a bigot. This student did the right thing by asking for the case to be reassigned as there religious views do not match. This student could have taken the case faked it and been fine, but because they stood up for what they believed they are a bigot and a bad person. EMU was clearly wrong in this case they need to admit it instead of dragging this through the courts and costing all of us in higher tuition and fees. Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:49:49 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/820 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/841 I am a student in the same program Julea was in and I wholeheartedly agree with EMU’s decision to dismiss her. It’s unethical to refer someone based on their sexual orientation, which is exactly what Julea did. What if she hadn’t known until the 3rd session that the client was homosexual? It can be very damaging to someone (the client) to be referred after establishing a relationship with a therapist, on the grounds that the therapist doesn’t agree with your lifestyle, and won’t even respect it at that. EMU didn’t and doesn’t make counselors-in-training drop their belief systems and doesn’t force students to “affirm” how people live their lives; we’re taught to set aside our beliefs in the best interest of the client. Julea blatantly said that she would refuse to counsel people struggling with their sexual identity (including young people in schools), people having extramarital affairs, and basically anything she thought went against her beliefs. That’s not what counseling is about, and if she thinks she can treat people in such a way, refusing to counsel them simply because she doesn’t agree or believe in it, I think she’s in the wrong profession. Sat, 24 Apr 2010 13:52:49 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/841 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/842 I, too, am a student in the counseling program. I am also a Christian. There are various spiritual beliefs held by various students in the program. At no time are we asked to change or compromise our own beliefs. What we are supposed to do is to hold onto our own beliefs and realize that we are not “converting” clients to any given way of life. We are there for the sole reason to help them work through their problems or do explore their beliefs. Our counseling code of ethics requires us to seek supervision or to refer in cases that we are not qualified to help with. We are NOT to refer just because we don’t agree with our clients. Based on Julea’s Christian beliefs, I am guessing that she would not have been able to “affirm” teens who had premarital sex, homosexual clients, drug addicts, or any number of other clients with whom she did not agree. She should have applied to a seminary position or tried to receive a degree in Christian counseling. Throughout the program at EMU we are told that we need to seek counseling for ourselves so that we can be better aware of our own “things” that can get in the way of focusing on what is best for our clients. I am glad that our program is not backing down. It is nice to know that we have a minimum standard of care to uphold and that we are not allowing people who will go out and damage clients to graduate. Afterall, if the program is forced to let Julea graduate, then who will be out there defend Julea when she gets sued by a client for the damage she does when she discriminates against him/her on the basis of sexuality? Sat, 24 Apr 2010 20:46:21 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/842 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/846 I think the controversy over not conseling a gay client is not the important point. While certainly it may be frowned upon by many to refuse a service to someone who lives a different lifestyle, I think the legal precedence that could be set by this case is much more important: a citizen’s right to express their freedom to religion or political beliefs being subject to the policies of an institution. Frankly, from a systematic approach, I don’t really care for (or about) Ward’s apparent distaste for homosexuality. But giving institutions the power to trample a citizen’s right to upholding their beliefs is much scarier than one conselor keeping her idelogies to herself. Imagine the shoe is on the other foot; if the precedence is set against Ward and institutions are granted this power. If a gay man/woman enrolls in a degree program which pits them into a position where their ability to express their freedoms is surpressed (think military Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell), the individual loses everytime. Now that’d be an awful thing, for all persons of any sexuality or preference. Mon, 03 May 2010 19:13:05 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/846 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/845 I agree whole heartedly with MP. I am a masters student in a counseling and psychology program and also a Christian. I dont know why she chooses (and like many Christians) to take a stand on homosexuality. I mean why counsel at all then, because if she is basically taking a stand against one thing then as you said she will have to take a stand against everything infidelity, premarital sex, drugs, what about lying, stealing, what happens when her client confessed he did time for murder after week 6. No matter where we get our degree we are not permitted to impart our values onto the client. I know at times it will be difficult to counsel certain situations but we just have to sit there and listen, however, you are right they may not introduce the idea till the 4 th or 5th session then what? We must continue. Either way she is causing damage to Gods loved ones, and HE may orchestrate that you are the very person to be there for that client. This kind of behavior is not only unethical it is hurtful to the very people we are being offered a privilege to help.Even Jesus took the time to talk to the woman at the well and stand up for the prostitute. It was the religious that judged Him for that. Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:45:13 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/845 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/851 The greater wrong is that a Public University is denying a devout Christian the right to obtain a counseling degree because that person’s strongly held religious beliefs are in conflict with the agenda of the politically correct liberal professors who have a stronghold in the field of higher education. Ms. Ward did not refuse to counsel a gay client, she refused to counsel that person in a way that would encourage the client to engage in harmful behaviors. Caroline, the difference when counseling a person who had previously committed a murder is that the educational institution does not require the counselor to affirm and support the act of murder. I predict Ms. Ward will prevail in the higher courts and Universities will be forced to allow religious freedom in all their programs. Wed, 05 May 2010 08:09:09 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/851 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/852 I agree with MP’s comment. It sounds ilke Julea would have done better to attend the Focus on the Family school in Colorado, or another Christian Counseling Program. Why on earth did she choose to go to a public university if she had such strong religious beliefs? Wed, 05 May 2010 09:30:39 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/852 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/860 I find this story to be absolutely outrageous! Two things come to mind: First of all, Julea was completely respectful when refusing to counsel the student. She did not picket EMU, holding up signs saying such ridiculous things such as “God Hates Fags”. There was nothing radical or wrong for being passive and respectfully saying “no”. When courts pick a jury, they go through a similar process. If somebody is deemed to be partial to one belief or another, they dismiss the person. No hard feelings. However, to take away somebody’s right to stand up for their own religious beliefs is wrong! If they school had given her a student who was not gay, then this would not have happened and she would have been graduated by now. Secondly, you cannot force somebody to counsel of affirm somebody living a lifestyle of which you disapprove. Do you want a good comparison? How about Communism? If you do not affirm the beliefs of the country, you are struck down for it. I am ashamed of EMU for doing this. This student didn’t cheat. She didn’t get caught smoking weed or breaking into a dorm. She was singled out because of her beliefs. Shame on you, EMU! Wed, 12 May 2010 13:16:54 -0400 http://www.easternecho.com/index.php/comment/view/860