Tennessee shows it's hate

[Charlize]

Their governor has signed a bill allowing therapist to discriminate on the basis of religion.

Another shot at the LGBT community.

http://www.advocate.com/health/2016/4/27/tenn-gov-signs-bill-allowing-psychologists-turn-away-lgbt-patients

I doubt i would ever go to a therapist who hated me anyway.

Hugs,

Charlize

[Guest LesleyAnne]

And it continues .

[Carolyn Marie]

Geez, this is especially draconian. I know that the American Counseling Association has come out strongly against this bill, and probably other professional groups as well. It is so broadly written that a therapist who is against war could refuse to treat or counsel a veteran suffering from PTSD.

It is hard to fathom a professional counselor or therapist refusing "on principles" to treat someone in need, but I'm sure they are out there. Lots of bills like this are stupid and mean; this one is heartless, too. The legislature and governor should be ashamed.

Carolyn Marie

[Timber Wolf]

How unconscionable!? I couldn't sleep at night if I had done that. I hope I'm right in assuming that most providers wouldn't turn them away.

Lots of love,

Timber Wolf?

[Mayo]

Nice to see that the ACA has pulled their 2017 conference from TN in response. I haven't seen any statements from the American Psychological Association.

[Cyndee]

This is useless legislation, and could actually "save" somebody the trouble.

Like the song says "hate will come back to you"

[Guest Mickey]

And this news is months old now. We're doing everything that we can to fix things here. It can be hard at times though. Especially when people say that we should just move away. That infuriates me to no freaking end. As if everybody is rich or something. There will be several days, at the end of this month, that I have no food, no money, and no way to get either. If I could move out of state, do you actually think that I would be going hungry several day EVERY SINGLE MONTH?!?!?

[Carolyn Marie]

You're right, Mickey, in that this happened last April. I'm not sure why the story is making the rounds again. I would love to see the various country music associations and stars make this a cause, but that might upset their fan base. If they haven't said anything by now, I doubt that they will.

Carolyn Marie

[Guest Mickey]

You're right, Mickey, in that this happened last April. I'm not sure why the story is making the rounds again. I would love to see the various country music associations and stars make this a cause, but that might upset their fan base. If they haven't said anything by now, I doubt that they will.

Carolyn Marie

Dolly Parton has. And she has been a LONG time supporter.

[Guest]

I was shocked that Dolly got death threats from the Klan for the song she did for the movie Transamerica. She has been a beloved American icon for most of her life. Hate knows no boundaries. Very sad.

[Briana]

Honestly, I don't know how this could stand up if challenged in court; esp. state supreme court. Seems like a constitutional violation right out of the gate. And yes - very hateful and dumb too.

[Guest]

I remember how there was supposed to be a separation between church and state. Now they want to use their state as a tool of state of the church? Or was it hate? Or both. Designer politics, have your cake and smear it in other people's faces too. Hail the new America... shaking head. I'm still a Christian from the era of the New Testament, I have little faith they can win their self serving holy war.

[Guest Mickey]

I've been a Bible student for 15 years now. Now that I know how to study it for myself, I've learned a whole lot. I learned that ancient Israel not only recognized SIX different genders, they accepted and affirmed them as well. In the story of Joseph and his "coat of many colors", the word that the translators got that "coat of many colors" from, was a Hebrew word. This word was only used in TWO places in scripture. This one, of Joseph, and in the story of King David's daughter Tamar's rape. There it was properly translated as princess dress. That is what the Hebrew word meant, princess dress. And with the Catholic church pushing hetero normativity, even though they didn't have that specific wording for it, the translators wouldn't very well have Joseph running around in a princess dress, now could they. So they said, "We can't find a good translation for this word here, so we're going to call it a coat of many colors." Also, in the story about Joseph, he was hanging out around the camp. His family were nomads. They went where the pastures were, for the sheep. They would find a good place to pasture the sheep, and a good campsite nearby. They'd pitch all the tents and live in one spot for a little while, until they needed fresh pasture for the sheep. During this time, the men of the camp would go out in the pasture with the sheep, to guard the flocks from wild animals and thieves. The women folk would hang out around the camp site, taking care of the home life. Joseph was hanging out, with the women folk, in the camp. And when his father asked him what good gift he could get for his favorite child, Joseph asked for a princess dress. And his father got a princess dress for his child.

I could go on about this and other stories from the Bible that clearly shows God loves all of His LGBTQIA+ children. Just. As. He. Made. Us.

[Ravin]

This, especially coupled with the growing trend of MH professionals working on a strictly cash basis (no billing health insurance) is a bad situation for a lot of people in TN.

Anyone who does take medicare or medicaid will risk losing the ability to do so as a penalty under the ACA antidiscrimination law.

[Sakura]

I think the bigger question should be ." would you really want a Doctor Therapist or surgeon monkeying a around with your mind or body that was not fully dedicated to helping you but is being forced to legally oblige ? " I came to this conclusion about 7 years ago when I had my breast augmentation done. My mother and sister had BA while I was shopping around for Dr to do the op I had my mom ask their surgeon what he thought about doing mine. His response was " While he personally had no problem against transgendred peoples he was not comfortable preforming the surgery on the "male" chest. He also went on to say that his staff consisted of many nurses that where Pentecostal  and he would worry that due to their religious beliefs may not give me the proper care " I could respect that answer  as it also made sense. Would I( or you) really want some one in charge of any aspect of my personal health and well being that was not 100% on board with what I was doing ?

I personally will take blunt honesty over political correctness any day. As I would rather some one  tell me they can't help me due to XYZ rather than get subpar or mediocre care or attention due to XYZ as I can always take my money somewhere else. 

 

[Guest Sarah Faith]

5 hours ago, Sakura said:

I think the bigger question should be ." would you really want a Doctor Therapist or surgeon monkeying a around with your mind or body that was not fully dedicated to helping you but is being forced to legally oblige ? " I came to this conclusion about 7 years ago when I had my breast augmentation done. My mother and sister had BA while I was shopping around for Dr to do the op I had my mom ask their surgeon what he thought about doing mine. His response was " While he personally had no problem against transgendred peoples he was not comfortable preforming the surgery on the "male" chest. He also went on to say that his staff consisted of many nurses that where Pentecostal  and he would worry that due to their religious beliefs may not give me the proper care " I could respect that answer  as it also made sense. Would I( or you) really want some one in charge of any aspect of my personal health and well being that was not 100% on board with what I was doing ?

I personally will take blunt honesty over political correctness any day. As I would rather some one  tell me they can't help me due to XYZ rather than get subpar or mediocre care or attention due to XYZ as I can always take my money somewhere else. 

 

 

Agree completely. I don't need laws to force doctors who aren't comfortable with the whole trans things to work with me. I'd rather just make the effort of finding one that will be happy to work with me. In life you don't always get what you want.

[Drea]

While Carolyn feels it is draconian, she makes the point that it is hard to fathom a professional to treat someone.  This being the case, what is the issue?

A therapist with PTSD may have a problem treating someone with PTSD...is that not legitimate for the person to recuse themselves?

I feel the assertion that this means people in rural areas is phony.  Such carries much assumptions, such as that in rural areas the professionals are conservative, that professionals would have moral objections, etc.  The objections certainly originate by people who don't even live in rural areas themselves.

I am constantly amazed, though I shouldn't at this point, at how prejudiced urban and surban folks are against those in the more rural areas.

Sakura and Sarah are right.  Would you really want someone treating you that has issues?  I know a key element in therapy is disclosure, when a therapist should disclose their own issues when their clients issues cross into their own.

There is a right to free association in this country  Forcing people to do something against their will is functionally a from a slavery.  Really, what is there to be gained by making a therapist with moral objection treat someone that is against their mores?  It seems to me such is just a recipe to provide a basic to declare malpractice if the outcome is not what one expects.

[Charlize]

I can't see how being asked to do what you are educated and licensed to do has anything to do with slavery or is in any way a violation of ones rights.  Next thing you know Doctors will be allowed to refuse treatment for gunshot wounds because they don't like some class of citizen.  It is and has been quite normal for professionals to provide treatment for people whose opinions or actions they might not approve of.  The argument that we should allow everyone to pick and choose is absurd and highly divisive.  I do believe that one might be better served by a person who isn't antagonistic towards one but during wars  a good doctor treats the enemy as well as their own troops.  Perhaps the question should be whether a doctor who refuses to treat one is worthy of the name and the license. 

I must admit that this is a non issue for me.  I live in a state that is not only liberal but is filled with easily accessible urban,  accepting areas.  if i lived in an area where there were huge distances between services and my ability to get around was limited was limited i would be even more upset by this kind of reaction.  

This society can hopefully become more tolerant not less so. 

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize

[Mia]

I'm going to have to agree with Sakura, Sarah, and Drea. I also wouldn't want someone (for example) operating on me if their heart isn't in it.

[Mayo]

I'm going to agree with Charlize. If you train to be a doctor, it's to treat people who come to you for whatever your specialty is. You don't get to say "I don't like your looks" or "I refuse to touch you because you're sick". That's part of the job. Doctors, psychiatrists, EMTs & ambulance techs have to treat the cases they are presented with with. So do lawyers, for that matter. And we are never going to see a cop refuse to arrest someone because they're gay and dealing with homosexuals is against their religious principles - sorry, just not gonna happen.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Mayo said:

I'm going to agree with Charlize. If you train to be a doctor, it's to treat people who come to you for whatever your specialty is. You don't get to say "I don't like your looks" or "I refuse to touch you because you're sick". That's part of the job. Doctors, psychiatrists, EMTs & ambulance techs have to treat the cases they are presented with with. So do lawyers, for that matter. And we are never going to see a cop refuse to arrest someone because they're gay and dealing with homosexuals is against their religious principles - sorry, just not gonna happen.

Unfortunately "care" givers in New Brunswick are free to discriminate against anyone.

 

Huggs,

 

Joann

[Mayo]

17 minutes ago, Joann60 said:

Unfortunately "care" givers in New Brunswick are free to discriminate against anyone.

Oh, Canada! Don't embarass me!

[Drea]

To inject some facts in the discussion.  This is what the bill actually says:

No counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the counselor or therapist; provided, that the counselor or therapist coordinates a referral of the client to another counselor or therapist who will provide the counseling or therapy.

First thing to note is that this only refers to the clients goals, outcomes or behaviors, it does not permit the counselor to deny treatment based on who the client is. 

Also note it refers to counselor or therapist and in later sections counselor is "any person, whether or not such person is licensed, registered, or otherwise regulated by this state".  So we aren't just talking "licensed professionals" and it includes many others including religious based counselors.

The bill does not permit abandonment of the client and all other provisions of the ACA code of ethics remains in effect.  This referral is not just giving the person a name it requires:

When a counselor does refer a client, he or she must ensure that appropriate clinical and administrative processes are completed and open communication maintained.

It is also notable that under existing regulations prior to passage of this bill, someone who objected to treating someone, even if they had no competence in the field, could be held liable even if they have no competence in the field requested.  In other words someone could go to their preacher seeking transition advice and if the preacher says "sorry I can't help you because it goes against my teachings and I have no experience" that preacher can be held liable.

Really, people are going to want to insist someone with moral objections treat them?  To what end?  Far more plausible in my mind would be to seek someone out just so they would object and then use that to rake them over the coals.  A very common political tactic.  That in and of itself I feel is more about trying to force acceptance, to create examples of how anyone who doesn't like them can be destroyed.  It doesn't create acceptance, only resentment and a climate of fear.

I really don't see anything here to worry about.  Especially considering my own experience in so called "liberal" area where:

Doctor fired myself and perhaps another 50 trans clients for no other reason than we were trans and they decided, despite 10 years of treating trans that they no longer would.

A few doctors who simply said they didn't want to provide service.

 

[Guest Sarah Faith]

2 hours ago, Drea said:

Really, people are going to want to insist someone with moral objections treat them?  To what end?  Far more plausible in my mind would be to seek someone out just so they would object and then use that to rake them over the coals.  A very common political tactic.  That in and of itself I feel is more about trying to force acceptance, to create examples of how anyone who doesn't like them can be destroyed.  It doesn't create acceptance, only resentment and a climate of fear.

I really don't see anything here to worry about.  Especially considering my own experience in so called "liberal" area where:

Doctor fired myself and perhaps another 50 trans clients for no other reason than we were trans and they decided, despite 10 years of treating trans that they no longer would.

A few doctors who simply said they didn't want to provide service.

 

Thanks Drea for taking the time to do a little fact checking.

To answer the question above, of course people are going to want to force others regardless of their own moral objections treat them...

1. Because of the perception that all goals of the trans community are pure and morally superior

2. Because said objectioner is an evil unenlightened bigot in the eyes of many, and it brings them great satisfaction to know that they are essentially forcing someone to do something they don't want to do.

3. Last but certainly not least.... Forcing them to treat you regardless of moral objections is essential a win for this mentality... and in the end for many that's all that counts regardless of the broader concerns or bigger picture.

[Charlize]

Pity the last clause of this bill wasn't in place when you had your experience with a doctor Drea.

  Quote 

No counselor or therapist providing counseling or therapy services shall be required to counsel or serve a client as to goals, outcomes, or behaviors that conflict with a sincerely held religious belief of the counselor or therapist; provided, that the counselor or therapist coordinates a referral of the client to another counselor or therapist who will provide the counseling or therapy.

 

I might also guess that doctor wasn't acting "with a sincerely held religious belief".  I'm not sure where the separation of church and state comes into this but i get quite anxious when ones religious beliefs are enforced by civil law.  How can this relationship between religious beliefs and law not open the door for different localities, regardless of what religion might be predominate within them, to pass laws to protect their religious beliefs?  If that is allowed what happens to  same sex marriage, marriage after divorce, or one step further out killing a woman because her brother raped another woman.  

The discussion here is not whether we should force someone to treat us. Only a fool or desperate person would want therapy from a person who has completely opposite goals.  It has nothing to do with bigotry, moral superiority, or wanting to feel superior.  It is a discussion based on the separation of church and state.  To allow and mandate that religious grounds are a reason to deny services is something that we should certainly try to avoid.  Religious states exist throughout the world but this country as the melting pot it his has attempted to avoid that and the ensuing conflict since it's founding.

There are certainly those here and elsewhere who have different beliefs and that's fine as long as their beliefs don't stop me from having my own.

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize