- Feb 29, 2004
- 4,996
- 5,790
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
I agree professional organizations have the right to establish ethics and practice standards. However, they do it within certain boundaries. I don't know the nuances of Canadian law, where they have drawn those boundaries. But, in my U.S. state, the licensing body may sanction providers related to their ethics and actions related to their practice with clients. They have no authority over a provider's private life. They do not sanction providers for things said as private individuals, such as social media posts, texts, tweets, speeches, workshops given, etc. -- short of privacy violations of course. Providers are still people and have rights to hold beliefs - even odd ball beliefs -, political inclinations, personal values, etc. and to talk about them in non-clinical venues just as my plumber might.
I get it that Mr. Peterson's brusque manner and opinions rub many folks the wrong way, me included often. But, my question remains were these things said in a practice environment to a client population or as a private individual just as any other person might have a right to hold an opinion and express it? Were they said in an arena where this organization has legitimate oversight? Therapists are obligated to operate within their scope of practice. It seems to me that oversight organizations also have their own scope of practice of what they may oversee and what they don't.
Clients get to vote with their feet. If one thinks her or his therapist is unprofessional, profane, a heathen, a religious zealot, bigoted, homophobic, too liberal, too conservative, too old, too young, too bald, wrong gender, etc., they get a new therapist. It happens every day. Mr. Peterson is high profile enough that I imagine those who pay him for services are attracted to his large persona and those who are repelled by it would not visit his office in the first place or stay long if they did.
Upvote
0
