lOMoARcPSD|22015503
Reaction Paper THIS IS A PAPER THAT WAS WRITTEN
IN ORDER TO COMPLETE COURSEWORK
Orientation to Counseling Professional Identity (Liberty University)
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
Running head: REACTION PAPER 1
Navigating Counselor-Client Value Differences: Reaction
Paper Michael B. Blue
Liberty University
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
REACTION PAPER
2
Summarize
One of the most difficult things to deal with in a counselor-client relationship is the topic
of values-based referrals. Counselors and counselors-in-training may find themselves in an
ethical dilemma when they find themselves sitting across from a client that is pursuing a value
that is at odds with their own values. There are three articles written by Kocet and Herlihy
(2014), Martz, E., & Kaplan, D. (2014), and Sells, J. N., & Hagedorn, W. B. (2016) that deal
with this very topic.
Kocet and Herlihy (2014)
Kocet and Herlihy (2014), approach the issue of value-based conflicts from a pragmatic
point of view. After many court cases over instances of counselors or counselors-in-training
referring their clients to another counselor because of a difference in values, this issue is still
largely debated in the counseling community. The majority of these cases were between
counselors with a religious value system and the LGBT community (Kocet and Herlihy, 2014).
The issue becomes an ethical one for counselors because their differences in values may lead to a
disconnect between the counselor and the client, leading to a detrimental counseling relationship
that could harm the client (Kocet and Herlihy, 2014).
While it could be argued that a difference in values moves the counselor into the
category of being unqualified to meet the client’s needs, it could just as easily be argued that as a
mental health professional the counselor should be qualified to meet all needs of his clients
(Kocet and Herlihy, 2014). The conflict that arises here is the question, does the counselor have
to set his values aside? To answer this question the Ethical Bracketing method is introduced
(Kocet and Herlihy, 2014). Kocet and Herlihy, (2014), give the counseling community a great
definition of Ethical Bracketing (EB).
“the intentional separating of a counselor’s personal values from his or her
professional values or the intentional setting aside of the counselor’s personal values in
order to provide ethical and appropriate counseling to all clients, especially those whose
worldviews, values, belief systems, and decisions differ significantly from
those of the counselor” (Kocet and Herlihy, 2014).
This strategy is an important tool for counselors and counselors-in-training to be able to
set aside their misgivings of violating their values and protect the client.
Martz, E., & Kaplan, D. (2014)
The bracketing method is also endorsed ACA Director of Ethics and ACA Chief
Professional Officer Erin Martz and David Kaplan (2014). In response to the changes of the ACA
Code of Ethics (2014), the changes were made to shift the focus from the needs of the counselor
to the needs of the client (Martz & Kaplan 2014). When asked about this Martz and Kaplan,
(2014), responded, “Since counseling is for the betterment of the client, counselors need to
bracket — set aside — personal values that are not in line with the legitimate counseling goals of
the client” the ide behind this ethic is that the counselor is allowed to maintain any value that he
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
REACTION PAPER
3
wishes while not imposing those values on a client (Martz & Kaplan 2014). Values cannot be
used as a legitimate reason for a counselor to argue that they are not competent to counsel their
clients, a counselor cannot make referrals based on their personal values (Martz & Kaplan 2014).
However there are issues with a client that may lead to other medical issues or procedures that a
counselor may not be prepared to handle, and in these cases, it is the ethical thing for the
counselor to refer the client to another counselor or medical professional that is more equipped to
handle the client’s needs (Martz & Kaplan 2014).
Sells, J. N., & Hagedorn, W. B. (2016)
Sells and Hagedorn (2016) wrote a response to Smith and Okech’s (2016), reasoning that
protections for sexual minorities can coexist and flourish alongside protections for religious
liberties. A model is presented in this work, called the Christian Model which assumes that there
is a divide between conservative religious counselors and socially or religiously liberal
counselors (Sells & Hagedorn, 2016). It is posited that Christianity’s purpose is restoration and
reconciliation and that if religious professionals practice exclusion towards those that hold a
differing set of values that message becomes negated. However, going to far to the extreme of
inclusiveness creates an exclusion of those who do not align with one’s views on inclusion (Sells
& Hagedorn, 2016). The consensus that Sells and Hagedorn, (2016), land on in this response, is
that Christians need to find a Christ-like balance of inclusivity. They believe that as Jesus sat
with sinners, counselors can do the same (Sells & Hagedorn, 2016). Students that are in an
accredited counseling program are encouraged to develop a distinctive moral code that can assist
them in connecting their faith to their profession (Sells & Hagedorn, 2016).
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
REACTION PAPER
4
Reflect
Having read these articles I have learned things about ethics that I have never considered
before. I have always thought of ethics as issues of honesty, privacy, morality, and fairness.
However, values-based referrals was not an issue that was at the forefront of my mind. Having
this understanding has opened my eyes to a whole new side of what it means to be a counselor.
I feel that I have always been open-minded about the inclusivity of those around me,
including those that do not live the same lifestyle as myself. However, I have never been in a
situation where being inclusive of someone else could potentially be exclusive of my values.
The stance that the ACA has taken on values-based referrals is understandable from a legal
social justice point of view, but admittedly disconcerting from a religious point of view. when
considering this incongruity of values and inclusivity, I have to go back to the values in the ACA
Code of Ethics (2014) and remember that client autonomy has to remain paramount when
dealing with someone who chooses to align themselves with an ideology that does not match
mine. The client is responsible for their choices and not the counselor because they have
autonomy. The difficult issue with inclusivity is being able to successfully bracket my values
and the client’s autonomy
Since values-based referrals are not allowed under the code of ethics, I believe that I
would have the hardest time dealing with these two client populations difficult to deal with, a
high school girl that is wanting to come out to her parents as a lesbian and a couple that believes
sex with multiple partners is ok. The dilemma that I see with the young girl wanting to come out
to her parents, is that she came to counseling to find a way to validate her lifestyle to her parents.
As someone who does not believe that any sex outside of a biblically-based marriage is moral,
helping someone validate that lifestyle to someone else feels like an endorsement of that
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
REACTION PAPER
5
lifestyle. With a couple that believes sex with multiple partners is alright would be an especially
difficult counseling relationship to maintain. First of all, if the couple is in agreeance on this
point why are they in counseling, and if deep down one of the adults in the relationship is not
okay with multiple partners, is it the counselor’s place to lead them down a road towards
divorce?
Act
This information has caused me to think about how I am going to approach this issue as
get closer to becoming a professional counselor. First, I am going to take the next eighteen
months of education that I have ahead of me and dedicate it to fully defining my moral and
spiritual values. If my moral values are not clearly defined I risk harming my client and my
integrity by acting in an unethical way. I will also commit to learning the ACA code of ethics.
These ethics, although client-centered, are there to protect the counselor and the client. And
lastly, I will develop a professional standard for myself that will exceed that of the ACA. I am a
Christian that will be working in a secular professional environment and I want to be the light of
Christ to them.
In my years of ministry and the military, I have learned the value of having a mentor. In
my opinion, a mentor is someone who is strong and capable in the field or profession that you
are in. When I was a pastor, I went to other seasoned pastors who would be able to guide me
through whatever my struggles were. In the military, it was a higher-ranking person that has
done the time and ground his way up through the ranks. In times where I may face dilemmas in
the counseling world, I am going to seek out other counselors of faith and ask them to mentor
me through professional values-based issues. I will also continue to read and study
contemporary journals and books on the topics as well as the ever-developing code of ethics.
lOMoARcPSD|22015503
REACTION PAPER
6
References
American Counseling Association. (2014). ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author.
Kocet, M. M., & Herlihy, B. J. (2014). Addressing value‐based conflicts within the
counseling relationship: A decision‐making model. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 92(2), 180-186.
Martz, E., & Kaplan, D. (2014). New responsibilities when making referrals. Counseling
Today, 57(4), 24-25.
Sells, J. N., & Hagedorn, W. B. (2016). CACREP accreditation, ethics, and the affirmation of
both religious and sexual identities: A response to Smith and Okech. Journal of
Counseling & Development, 94(3), 265-279.
Smith, L. C., & Okech, J. E. A. (2016). Ethical issues raised by CACREP accreditation
of programs within institutions that disaffirm or disallow diverse sexual
orientations. Journal of Counseling & Development, 94, 252–264.
doi:10.1002/jcad.12082
