Conscience Protection Sought for Nebraska Psychologists over Homosexuality

June 19th, 2009 by Kathleen Gilbert Print This Article Print This Article ·

The Nebraska Catholic Conference has asked that licensed psychologists be allowed to refuse services to homosexual couples seeking relationship help, reports the Lincoln Journal Star.

Jim Cunningham, the executive director of the Nebraska Catholic Conference, told regulators at a licensing rules hearing last Thursday that psychologists should not risk losing their job if they refuse to counsel such couples based on their religious belief that homosexual relationships are immoral.

The Nebraska Catholic Conference has also asked for conscience protection for licensed counselors, social workers and marriage and family therapists.

Advocates cited earlier examples of discrimination against conscientious psychologists as evidence that licensing rules ought to contain a specific conscience clause.

Lincoln psychologist Edward Stringham pointed out a 2001 case where an appeals court ruled in favor of an employer who had fired a counselor for refusing to offer relationship enhancement counseling to a lesbian, citing moral objections.

That decision shows that professionals who could not counsel such couples in good conscience have legitimate concern of legal repercussions, Stringham said.

However, a psychologist representing the Nebraska Psychology Association argued that conscience language would allow too much latitude for practitioners to deny services as long as they claim their religious beliefs are compromised.

“I have provided psychological services to individuals convicted of murder, and I have never had to compromise my moral belief that killing is wrong,” said representative James K. Cole.

A conscience clause has reportedly already been incorporated in proposed rule changes for counselors, with language agreed upon by the Nebraska Catholic Conference and the Board of Mental Health Practice last winter.

This article is courtesy of LifeSiteNews.com.




  • arrowe

    “I have provided psychological services to individuals convicted of murder, and I have never had to compromise my moral belief that killing is wrong,” said representative James K. Cole.

    But this doesn’t mean that he will encourage the person to continue doing it.

  • http://catholichawk.com PrairieHawk

    The counselors could take the cases on as an opportunity to point out the truth about the relationships to the homosexual couples. It is my prediction that the couples wouldn’t remain clients for very long.

  • Mary Kochan

    Anthony and all: Let’s not allow these people to control the language. There are no homosexual “couples.” To couple is a verb meaning to link or join. Coupling is done by putting together complimentary parts that are made to fit together. Two homosexuals do not make a couple — they are a pair, a matched set.

  • http://catholichawk.com PrairieHawk

    Mary, that is a very good point. It is amazing how subtly and insidiously the redefinition of words can creep into one’s mind. Our use of language is conditioned by our culture, but the problem is the culture very often uses words wrongly in an effort to legitimize immoral behavior. So we have words in Newspeak such as “gay,” “choice,” “reproductive freedom,” “domestic partner” for cohabiting-not-as-brother-and-sister friend, and on and on.

    I read once that one of the “issues,” if you can call it that, for Jesus was that his own language was conditioned by his culture, a culture that was fallen too. I found that to be a very interesting point and I’ve never heard anybody since talk about it. Any takers for an analysis?

  • Terri Kimmel