The following text was captured using OCR software and may have minor errors which were missed in proofing.
Anthony Harper, Ph.D.
2309 N. Mountain View Drive - Boise, Idaho
E Mail: aharper1952@juno.
com
P.O. Box 1829 - Boise, ID 83701-1829 Phone 377-3568
2/23/98
TO: Senator Grant Ipsen,
Chairman and
other
Senate Health & Welfare Committee Members
RE: SB 1419
I would like to address my experience as a previously licensed professional counselor, how certain individuals irrationally overreacted to strip my license, and how my case was subsequently used as justification for SB 1419. These remarks are particularly significant since my name mid my experience were used in a derogatory fashion in arguments before your committee on February 18th, 1998. Having been compelled to leave for an appointment with a counselee, I had no opportunity to clarify the matter.
My experience with the licensing board of professional counselors in Idaho was directly related to religious discrimination concerning a counselee/friend relationship and donations to our counseling ministry from fills individual. This person has been and continues to be supportive of our counseling ministry (Shiloh Counseling Center).
The Counselor License Board Alleges:
1) That I and Shiloh Counseling Center violated the Ethical Standards of the American Association for Counseling and Development by failing to establish a fee structure and accepting donations in excess of monies due for services rendered to the counselee/friend.
The Facts are:
Section A(5) of the Ethical Standards of the American Association for Counseling and Development does not require the establishment of fees for professional counseling selwices. The standards only require that members must consider the financial status of clients and locality when establishing a fee structure. There is a critical distinction in this matter.
Shiloh Counseling Center is a non-profit corporation, recognized by the Interual Revenue Service. Donations to Shiloh are tax deductible. Shiloh does not charge fees for professional services. There is no fee structure. Shiloh works on a donation basis only, and sends out no bills for services rendered. No services have ever been denied to anybody for lack of ability to make a donation, nor have services ever been discontinued for lack of ability to make a donation.
The American Association for Counseling and Development obviously never contemplated an organization operated like Shiloh Counseling Center. The ethical standards of that association are oriented towards a conventional for-profit business that would have a fee schedule. As such, SectionA(5) of their Ethical Standards is inapplicable to our case.
The Counselor License Board Alleges:
2) That I engaged in a "dual relationship" and that Shiloh accepted donations from the counselee/friend that were not "exclusively" for counseling services rendered.
The facts are:
As previously discussed, the Ethical Standards of the American Association for Counseling and Development do not address the rare kind of operation provided by Shiloh Counseling Center. Shiloh charges no fees and no bills are sent out. All funds are generated by donation only, which are tax deductible contributions to the non-profit corporation.
All donations by the eounselee/friend were given freely and voluntarily, without any' manipulation or coercion whatsoever. This individual believes that I always have protected his/her confidentiality, autonomy, integrity, respect, and considered his/her best interest and welfare.
While it might be argued that I engaged in a dual role relationship with this counselee/friend relative to the financial and professional aspects, that argument could apply to some degree in every relationship between a professional and a friend. By assisting counselees regardless of their ability to pay and accepting only donations, I and our Shiloh Counseling Center ministry try to remove the business role from the professional relationship. Thus, I and Shiloh try to avoid or minimize those dual role issues that affect most all other profit-seeking counselors.
The Counselor License Board Alleges:
3) That I engaged in a dual relationship with the counselee by being his/her "friend." This claim is based upon SectionB (13) of Ethical Standards of the American Association for Counseling and Development which essentially suggests that a counselor should not enter into a professional relationship with a close friend or relative.
The Facts Are:
That the counselee/friend was not a close personal friend of mine during the course of the professional relationship. The mere fact that the counselee invited me and my wife out to dinner one Sunday evening, and had lunch with me on a couple of occasions when we were involved with intensive outpatient therapy, is not sufficient to rise to the level of a violation of the Ethical Standards.
I consider all of the counselees to be friends. I want to be friendly and compassionate to everybody, regardless of their ability to pay. Further, the Ethical Standards do not clearly prohibit going out to dinner or lunch with a client. That would be absurd, an academic exercise in theoretical hyperbole. Thus, this claim is simply without merit.
The Conclusion of the Board
After being asked by the counselor license board prosecutor.. "whether I was going to abide by biblical or state's standards of ethics?", I chose the biblical ethical standards. All biblical scholars would agree that the highest level of standards are biblical. Of course, this would be foreign to a secular board unfamiliar with biblical precepts. Thus, my license as a professional counselor was canceled because I chose biblical ethical standards.
All of this indicates religious discrimination.
Over the past sixteen years my income from counseling as well as lectures on drug abuse and suicide issues, averaged in the poverty range. I have never denied anyone counseling services regardless of their ability to pay. Most professional counselors only accept clients who have the ability to pay for their services.
Over time I have come to recognize the incongruence for me to be associated with a counseling board whose worldview embraces humanistic psychological theories while my worldview focuses on the inspired Word of God. These two worldviews are polar opposites. The former is based upon naturalistic science/evolution and man's ideas, whereas the latter is based upon God as Creator and His statements regarding man's condition, purpose and essential needs. To date, I have learned many valuable lessons and am thankful to be a member of the International Association of Biblical Counselors (IABC).
In conclusion, it is the belief of biblically based Christian counselors, including myself, that the current licensing board of professional counselors is biased in regard to the following issues. The board:
1. Gives preference for a fee structure over a donation structure. (Most licensed professional counselors are money oriented rather than people oriented; this is evidenced by their preference for giving services primarily to those that can afford them).
2. Gives preference for secular psychological theories, diagnosis and treatment over biblical precepts of personality, diagnosis and treatment.
3. Gives preference to an amoral, valueless counseling setting rather than one based upon God's high standards of morality, values and purpose.
I would like to conclude my response with a quote from the Bible in the book of Colossians (Chapter Two and Verses 8-10): "Don't let others spoil your faith and joy with philosophies, their wrong and shallow answers built on men's thoughts and ideas, instead of on what Christ has said. For in Christ there is all of God in a human body; so you have ever3lhing when you have Christ, and you are filled with God through your union with Christ. He is the highest Ruler, with authority over every other power." On these verses, all biblical counseling is built. Contrary to popular belief, true Christianity' is not an exclusive religion but is open to all who will choose to trust in HIM for their salvation and their healing and the sufficiency of all their needs.
It is my belief that SB1419 is a violation of the church and state issue because with SB1419, state control will occur over biblical standards of ethics, and those classified under the term "counselor".
Hopefully you will see that the religious discrimination I have experienced is evidence for the defeat of SB 1419.
Respectfully yours,
Rev. Anthony Harper, Ph.D.
Minister of Counseling and Pastoral Care