Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
Augusta State University (ASU) of Georgia was taken to court by a clinical psychology student, Jennifer Keeton, who refused to do coursework necessary for completing her degree. The coursework in question dealt with LGBTQ population. “In her brief, Keeton describes herself as a Christian who is committed to the truth of the Bible, including what she believes are its teachings on human nature, the purpose and meaning of life, and the ethical standards that govern human conduct. She holds several beliefs about homosexuality that she views as arising from her Christian faith. She believes that ‘sexual behavior is the result of personal choice for which individuals are accountable, not inevitable deterministic forces; that gender is fixed and binary (i.e., male or female), not a social construct or personal choice subject to individual change; and that homosexuality is a ‘lifestyle,’ not a ‘state of being.’” ASU’s officials became aware that Keeton held these beliefs when she expressed to professors in class and fellow classmates in and out of class that she believed that the GLBTQ population suffers from identity confusion, and that she intended to attempt to convert students from being homosexual to heterosexual. Keeton also said that it would be difficult for her to work with GLBTQ clients and to separate her views about homosexuality from her clients’ views. Further, in answering a hypothetical posed by a faculty member, Keeton responded that as a high school counselor confronted by a sophomore student in crisis, questioning his sexual orientation, she would tell the student that it was not okay to be gay. Similarly, Keeton told a fellow classmate that, if a client discloses that he is gay, it was her intention to tell the client that his behavior is morally wrong and then try to change the client’s behavior, and if she were unable to help the client change his behavior, she would refer him to someone practicing conversion therapy.” Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 10-13925, D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-00099-JRH-WLB (Dec. 16, 2011)
This raises some interesting questions concerning free speech, free exercise and educational and professional accreditation.
Keeton’s stance is not only out of line with the prevailing views of homosexuality as expressed by the American Psychological Association (APA), but it runs afoul of the guidelines set forth in the American Counseling Association’s (ACA) Code of Ethics, which ASU was required to adopt and teach in order to offer a counseling program accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP). To resolve this problem, ASU put Keeton into a remediation program before she could participate in the program’s clinical practicum, in which she would have engaged in one-on-one counseling with a student. The remediation plan was to help Keeton learn how to comply with the ACA Code of Ethics and improve her “ability to be a multiculturally competent counselor, particularly with regard to working with [GLBTQ] populations.” Remediation is not a disciplinary action. As one ASU official described it, a remediation plan is “a plan to deal with the professional part of the curriculum that goes across the program, goes across classes. It’s a plan that is devised with students in order to help students to grow professionally in areas of weakness.”
The ASU student handbook states that students can be placed on “remediation status” when a “student’s progress is not satisfactory on interpersonal or professional criteria unrelated to academic performance.” As in Keeton’s case, the student then receives a remediation plan “outlining the faculty’s concerns” and “delineat[ing] what conditions the student must meet to be removed from remediation status.” Keeton was warned that failure to complete the remediation would result in her being dismissed from the program. After agreeing to the remediation, Keeton was allowed to participate in the program’s clinical practicum. Soon thereafter, Keeton withdrew from the clinical practicum, stating, “I am not going to agree to a remediation plan that I already know I won’t be able to successfully complete.”
Rather than complete the remediation so she could complete the required clinical practicum for her degree, Jennifer Keeton filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that requiring her to complete the remediation plan violated her First Amendment free speech and free exercise rights. Keeton also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent ASU’s officials from dismissing her from the program if she did not complete the remediation plan.
The Georgia courts denied her request for preliminary injunction, stating that Keeton had not met the first requirement for granting such an injunction – establishing a substantial likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her free speech and free exercise claims. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed to lower court’s ruling.
The school did not say Keeton could not practice her religion or say what she likes, but rather said that by refusing to treat LGBTQ patients under accepted professional guidelines that she was not fulfilling the educational requirements for the degree she sought. Consider an alternative situation: a geography student who believes in the Flat Earth Theory and refuses to teach anything else as part of their teaching practicum in pursuit of their Ph.D. Surely the school is reasonable in withholding a degree from said person when they allow their personal beliefs to interfere with their course work required for completion of the degree, but especially when said belief contradicts the scientific consensus within the field? Not challenge mind you. Contradict. To challenge a fact is to dispute it as being unjust, invalid, or outmoded. Dispute means to argue to the contrary or alternative. Contradict means to imply the opposite or a denial of fact. When dealing with scientific facts, like any finding of fact, disputing them is part of the fact finding process but it must be based on evidence, not belief. Keeton presented no evidence for her beliefs, only the assertion that because that’s what she believes, it must be true.
Do you think Keeton would have been sanctioned so if she had merely presented her beliefs as an alternative instead of an absolute? Do you think Keeton’s treatment by ASU was fair, both in their administration of policy and adherence to educational standards of the field? Do you think that the court was correct in their finding that Keeton had failed to establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits with respect to her free speech and free exercise claims?
What do you think?
Source(s): Daily Kos, UC-Davis, Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley (.pdf)
Kudo to Otteray Scribe for pointing out this story.
~Submitted by Gene Howington, Guest Blogger
Is her argument that her sincere actions should not disqualify her, given that she has a right to her beliefs?
Carol, Georgia has a Licensed Professional Counselor law as well as a Psychology license law. Those laws are not “title” licenses, but actual practice licenses. That is true of almost all the states and provinces of Canada. I suppose she could go somewhere with lax laws protecting the public, but she would not be able to receive insurance reimbursement anywhere.
Her only “out” would be to call herself a pastoral counselor, but even then, there are certain restrictions.
OS I understand that.
My point was go to a school that has her “values”. Then she could get whatever “degree’ that school would allow her,. I would not go to, say, a drama school, to get my degree in psychology just as she should not go to a non religion based school to get a degree that is not in keeping with what she intends to do, and what she intends to do is not in keeping with the requirements of either her school or counseling guidelines.
Anyone, (in Pa) can put up a sign calling themselves a therapist (in NJ ‘counselor” but not therapist.) so she really does not need the degree as long as she is compliant with state laws as to what she chooses to call herself .
OS,
Exactly … very skinny, long, limp hair (usually bleached), heavy eye make-up, wide mouth, squared jaw … it’d be hard to pick an individual out of a line-up.
Carol, this is not a Christian issue. It is a professional requirement. Read the excerpt from the ethical standards of the American Psychological Association I posted above. Those are not negotiable.
Any university offering a degree leading to a professional license would have the same requirements. Failure to abide by the ethical standards of one’s profession is automatic disqualification. If she did not take that course, she would never be allowed to sit for the licensing exam by the State Board of Psychological Examiners.
I will make it easy for you to find. Here is the link to my comment.
http://jonathanturley.org/2012/01/01/science-and-education-win-in-georgia/#comment-308919
Why didn’t she just go to a Christian university? This was a choice to go to ASU… as such she needs to follow their educational guidelines. Not an attorney but seems like a frivolous suit to me.
Blouise, her resemblance to Ann Coulter is scary. I have to wonder if anorexia is one of their problems. If you look for her in Google Images, you will find additional photos of her. We know from research that malnutrition can affect brain function, including judgement.
But, nevertheless, she has friends who support her enough to have a rally for her.
http://www.blogfordemocracy.org/2010/10/heard-2.html
I use single and double intermittently … it’s a “free choice” thing
“I am not going to agree to a remediation plan that I already know I won’t be able to successfully complete.”
Honey, you have your own “free choice” decision to be a Christian who is committed to the truth (so called) of the Bible confused with the fact that GLBTQ’s did not have a choice regarding sexuality. This single minded obsession with what organized religion has conned you into believing is one of the many reasons people are turning away from religion in general.
Snark moment … after viewing her picture I ask myself … why do all of them look so much alike?
Back when I was in college, using my creaky little Royal typewriter, my professor for English 101 & 102 (now called either Language Arts or Communications) was an English Lit major from Harvard. He required at least one short essay for every class meeting, which meant three a week. The quickest way to get points taken off was to fail to put two spaces between sentences. It is a habit that dies hard. I like it because it makes a piece less dense and more readable–something that has become increasingly important the older I get.
Gene,
I agree with you. I love spaces……….after a period! 🙂
Gene,
“the little lame baloonman whistles far and wee”.
Great post on so many levels, referencing the dangers of fundamentalism running rampant.
People have every right not to treat Christians, Jews, blacks and all people of color if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.
Ooh, I’m being sarcastic, but I have to explain it because all of you are conservative neanderthals,
while I’m so politically pure. That’s why I don’t bother to read what you write, but interpret it based on my own pre-judgment.
1zb1
You’ve pretty much outlined the 2012 GOP Presidential platform.
Yeah, Nal. I know all of that and have for many years, but I just don’t care. And I’ll tell you why . . . my ease of reading while editing. Call it a personal preference. Unless the Prof imposes the Chicago Manual of Style on us, I’m not likely to change it either. The information is key, pleasing typographers is a secondary consideration at best. Besides, this CSS uses justification. I know you’re a Nal, but the format itself is going to trash spacing from the get go. I just can’t get too upset about it. Be glad I don’t use double spacing (which I still do when proofing off of printed material). Now if you want to complain about something that’s really whacked? There’s a fellow by the name of Edward Estlin Cummings who really needs to do something about his capitalization. 😉
Why you should never, ever use two spaces after a period.
Can I let you in on a secret? Typing two spaces after a period is totally, completely, utterly, and inarguably wrong.
Regarding questions-
1. Would she be getting into trouble like this if instead of telling kids that it isn’t OK to be gay, she merely told kids *they might want to agree with her* that it isn’t OK to be gay? Yes; provided ASU guidelines can’t be fooled that easily.
2. Was her treatment fair? Yes; she presented herself as a sexual predator.
3. Was the court correct in its finding on the merits in this case? Yes; I’m not from GA but this what courts are supposed to be for.
The school and its professional faculty are bound by the Ethical Principles for Psychologists, and likewise, students who aspire to become psychologists are also bound by the Ethical Principles for Psychologists.
The controlling part of the Ethical Principles for Psychologists is published by the American Psychological Association. Membership in the APA is voluntary; however, state psychology licensing boards have incorporated those principles into their rules and regulations, either by reference or by copying them verbatim into the enabling statute. The operant rule here is comes from the General Principles section.
Had the school not acted as it did, their program and the faculty’s own professional status would have been subject to sanctions, something the Court understood clearly.
The simple fact is, that any student who places their own personal prejudices and bigotry ahead of their professional ethical obligations has no business practicing a profession.
i reserve the right not to treat christians; not to prescribe drugs to the sick; not to let white people in my hotel; not to sell food to an hispanic; not to pump gas to a jew; not to hire a woman; not to admit asian students into my school; not to put out fires in a building owned by muslims; not to provide phone service to gays; and not to provide energy to old people. i do this because according to my religion all these people are sinners, and because the constitution gives me the right to be a bigot as long as i do it in the name of my religion.*
if a medical doctor believed you treat infection with prayer instead of anti-biotic would they keep their license?
*for those people here who take themselves way to seriously and don’t think sarcasm is a worth form of communications based on their “analytical gifts” please be aware that was all said with sarcasm.
Great article Gene. I do think Ms. Keeton was treated fairly and properly. For her to assert that her religious beliefs prevent her from completing her coursework is preposterous. An attorney has to follow and argue the law even if that law conflicts with the biblical law. My law school requiring me to read and learn the law did not prevent me from practising my religion. What makes her different?