A Supreme Court showdown is poised to answer a question that could reshape our field: is counseling regulated health care or “just speech”? We sit down with Dr. Chase Morgan-Swaney—assistant professor, clinician, and OCA president-elect—to break down Chiles v. Salazar, the research on SOGICE, and what a ruling could mean for minors, licensure boards, and everyday clinical practice.
We trace the legal core—speech versus professional conduct—and translate it into plain language for counselors, supervisors, educators, and allies. Dr. Morgan-Swaney explains why leading organizations like APA and ACA argue that therapy is evidence-based treatment, not casual conversation, and how decades of research tie identity-change efforts to heightened psychological distress and suicide risk in youth. We also dive into the patchwork of state and city protections, the realities in Ohio, and the practical steps clinicians can take now: audit informed consent and websites, clarify you don’t provide identity-change interventions, strengthen referral pathways, and ensure crisis resources for LGBTQ+ minors are easy to find.
You’ll hear how affirmative care can honor faith and culture without attempting identity change, how counselor education is preparing students for the broader implications of this case, and how OCA plans to coordinate guidance, training, and model language once a decision lands. The throughline is steady: protect clients with evidence-based standards, equip counselors with tools and supervision, and build coalitions that keep practice aligned with science and ethics—even in uncertain times.
If you value clear standards, safer care, and strong advocacy for LGBTQ+ youth, this conversation is for you. Subscribe, share with a colleague, and leave a review with your top takeaway—what’s the first change you’ll make in your informed consent or practice language?
OCA Link Tree: https://linktr.ee/ohiocounseling
Connect with Us
Stay in touch and join the conversation:
- Instagram: @OhioCounseling
- Facebook: facebook.com/ohiocounseling
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ohio-counseling-association-b78256165/
****
If you’re a counselor in Ohio and would like to get involved as part of production or as a guest, or know someone who might be interested, please email us at ohiocounselingconversations@gmail.com!
****
Created by the OCA's Media, Public Relations, and Membership (MPRM) Committee & its Podcast Subcommittee
·Hosted by Victoria Frazier
·Pre-Production & Coordination by Marisa Cargill and Victoria Frazier
·Editing by Leah Wood & Marisa Cargill
·Original music selections by Elijah Satoru Wood
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_02 (00:00):
Welcome to another episode of the Child Counselling
Conversations, a podcast wherewe highlight the people,
policies, and practices shapingcounselling in our state and
beyond.
Today we're diving into an issuethat could have profound
implications for our professionand the clients we serve.
The US Supreme Court has agreedto hear Child versus Celsius, a
(00:22):
case that directly challengesstate bands on conversion
therapy for minors.
At stake are not only the rightsof LGBTQ plus youth to receive
observing care, but also theability of states to regulate
harmful practices within thecounselling and mental health
professions.
Joining us is thepresident-elect of the Ohio
Counseling Association, who willhelp us unpack what this case
(00:44):
means, why counselors should bepaying close attention, and how
our professional values andethics guide us in this moment.
Dr.
Chase Morgan Sweeney is anassistant professor of
counseling at Baldwin WallaceUniversity, where he teaches and
mentors burgeoning professionalcounselors.
He earned his PhD in counseloreducation and supervision from
the University of Akron in 2023.
(01:06):
He also holds a master's inclinical mental health
counseling from the Universityof Akron and a bachelor's in
psychology from the Ohio StateUniversity.
unknown (01:14):
Dr.
SPEAKER_02 (01:15):
Morgan Sweeney brings extensive clinical
experience to his teaching.
He serves as Associate Directorat Arbor Pasama Counseling and
Wellness, where he has practicedsince 2018.
His clinical focus is on servingLGBTQ and neurodiverse
adolescents and adults usingacceptance and commitment
therapy through a culturallyhumble and affirming lens.
(01:37):
A dedicated leader in theprofession, Dr.
Morgan Swaaney currently servesas OCA president-elect and has
held leadership roles inmultiple chapters, divisions,
and committees.
His servant leadership andadvocacy have been recognized
with numerous honors at thestate and national level.
Whether you're a counselor,educator, student, or ally, this
(01:57):
is a conversation you won't wantto miss.
Welcome, Dr.
Morgan Sweeney.
Thank you so much for being withus today.
SPEAKER_00 (02:05):
Well, thank you for having me.
I wish it were under bettercircumstances, but I'm very glad
to be here.
SPEAKER_02 (02:11):
Well, we're very happy to have you.
For listeners who may not befamiliar, can you briefly
describe Chiles v.
Salazar and why it matters?
SPEAKER_00 (02:21):
Yeah, so Chilazar is a case that is before the
Supreme Court of the UnitedStates.
It is here on what is called awrit of Certi Aurora from the
10th Circuit, uh Circuit Courtof Appeals, I should say.
And it is a case that challengesColorado's prohibition on
(02:46):
licensed mental health providersperforming what is commonly
referred to as conversiontherapy, but now we call sogice
or sexual orientation and genderidentity change efforts for
minors.
And it matters because the courtwill decide, depending on how
(03:08):
broadly or narrowly they writetheir opinion after oral
arguments on October theseventh, they'll decide whether
states can regulate this asprofessional conduct to protect
youth, or whether suchregulation is barred because
(03:30):
therapy is quote unquote justspeech, like just having a
little chat, because that's sortof how it is framed by the
petitioners in this case, who isKaylee Childs.
The leading mental health andmedical organizations, so the
American PsychologicalAssociation, the American
(03:51):
Counseling Association, andothers filed an amicus brief,
which is called a friend of thecourt brief in the Supreme
Court, explaining thatcounseling and psychotherapy is
regulated evidence-basedtreatment, not mere
conversation, and that sugiesare illegitimate and can be
(04:16):
harmful, right?
We know that through theresearch, right?
It's not just anecdotal.
We have sound methodologicalempirical evidence, right, that
shows that it is not justineffective, it is also harmful,
especially to minors.
SPEAKER_02 (04:37):
If you could sum it up in a couple words, what would
you say is at the heart of thelegal arguments that are being
presented to the court?
SPEAKER_00 (04:46):
Well, I think first I should say I'm not a lawyer.
I'm not an attorney.
So I can speak as someone who isa Supreme Court aficionado.
That's I don't know why, but biginterest area of mine.
I listen to a lot of SupremeCourt oral arguments.
(05:06):
So though I'm not a lawyer, Ican speak to it at a very basic
level.
And so there are two questionsat the heart of the legal
argument.
Are states regulating treatmentdelivered by licensed
professionals where publicprotection rules apply or
restricting public protectedspeech?
(05:28):
And then secondly, does thescientific record justify bans
aimed at preventing ineffectiveor harmful practices on minors?
And the amicai, the friends ofthe court, right, in this case
APA, ACA, and others, stressthat licensure, standards of
care, continuing educationregimes distinguish counseling
(05:53):
and therapy from speech, fromtalking, right?
And that soji fails basicefficacy and safety standards.
SPEAKER_02 (06:06):
Yeah, so things that are very impactful for all of us
who are currently working withclients.
SPEAKER_00 (06:12):
Certainly, yeah, especially vulnerable clients
like LGBTQ youth.
SPEAKER_02 (06:18):
Could you speak a little on the current landscape
of state-level bans onconversion therapy and how this
has made its way to the SupremeCourt?
SPEAKER_00 (06:29):
Yeah, so a substantial share of the US
population live in states ormunicipalities with protections
for minors, while others do not,producing a patchwork that the
court is well positioned toclarify, again, depending on who
(06:58):
you know which side ultimatelyprevails.
Would that be Kaylee Childs, thepetitioner, or the respondent,
which is Patty Salazar and theColorado government?
As of now, late 2025, 23 statesplus the District of Columbia
prohibit licensed providers fromsubjecting minors to conversion
(07:20):
therapy.
The court granted review ofColorado's law in this case.
So it was heard by a districtcourt.
The respondents in this caseprevailed, and the regulation of
sojace of conversion therapy wasupheld at the just the federal
(07:40):
district court level, and it wasalso upheld at the 10th Circuit
in the 10th Circuit Court ofAppeals.
And then the Supreme Court, whenthe petitioner trials submitted,
right, to be heard by theSupreme Court, that was approved
and uh read of certiori, as Isaid at the outset, and so
(08:03):
that's how it got to SCOTUS.
SPEAKER_02 (08:06):
And how does the Ohio compare with other states?
SPEAKER_00 (08:10):
Ohio has no statewide ban.
Um, several localities haveenacted protections in September
25 this month.
Cuyahoga County became Ohio'sfirst county to ban conversion
therapy for minors and quotevulnerable adults, unquote.
(08:32):
And there have been severalothers recently: Westerville,
Whitehall cities that haveenacted bans at the city level.
SPEAKER_02 (08:43):
Yeah, so even locally for Ohio counselors,
that patchwork we see cominginto play.
SPEAKER_01 (08:52):
Yes.
SPEAKER_02 (08:53):
So with this being a national case, obviously,
obviously it has impact for Ohiocounselors, but can you speak a
little on why this is importantfor us locally?
SPEAKER_00 (09:05):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Because it directly implicatesthe authority to set scope of
practice and safety standards.
Also, our duty to avoid, I thinkis wrapped up in that, the scope
of practice and safetystandards, our duty to avoid
(09:26):
discredited or harmfulpractices, right?
And we know that from theAmerican Counseling Association
Code of Ethics.
And it's also something that wecan find in our laws and rules
that are promulgated by the OhioCounselor, Social Worker, and
Marriage and Family TherapistBoard.
(09:49):
In addition to that duty toavoid discredit or harmful
practices so as to protect thepublic, in this case, the
consumers of our services,right, our clients.
And also clarity for refusingsogice while offering ethical
affirmative care.
(10:09):
So a ruling reframing counselingas mere speech instead of as,
you know, regulated professionalconduct could have a
destabilizing effect on boardstandards here in Ohio.
And so a ruling affirming stateauthority would reinforce
(10:33):
evidence-based practiceexpectations.
SPEAKER_02 (10:39):
So if the bans are overturned, it seems like there
will be quite a few implicationsfor licensure boards and
counseling practice as well.
Do you think counselors couldsee increased pressure from
outside groups as a result?
SPEAKER_00 (11:00):
Licensure boards could face claims that
disciplining sogice when enactedin treatment by counselors,
police's speech, complicatingenforcement of these standards,
right?
The scope of practice standards,the like enshrined in the rules
(11:21):
and regulations, best practicestandards.
Clinicians may face morecomplaints or demands to provide
or refer to subjects, despitethe preponderance of the
evidence, which is against it,right?
Against that as an effective,beneficent method of treatment.
(11:46):
So, yes, without clearprohibitions, organized
campaigns may push, quote,exploratory therapy or similar
rebrands of sogist.
The scientific consensus remainsthat sogice or conversion
therapy is illegitimate, it'sineffective, and it's harmful.
SPEAKER_02 (12:10):
With that in mind, if the bans are upheld, what
protections would that reinforcefor counselors and clients?
SPEAKER_00 (12:19):
It reaffirms that states may regulate professional
conduct to prevent harm andrequire evidence-based
standards, especially forvulnerable populations, for
minors, right?
So this reduces ambiguity, itprotects counselors who refuse
(12:40):
sojiis, and it strengthensinformed consent conversations,
because that's one of the thingsthat uh petitioner their one of
their leading arguments is thatwhat we do as counselors is just
having a chat.
We're just talking, right?
It really is just speech,because they put forth the
(13:02):
argument that we don't engage inrobust informed consent process.
And so it couldn't be medicaltreatment, right?
Because that aspect isn't therewhen it very clearly is there.
We do go through informedconsent.
I mean, we know that, you knowthat, I know that.
(13:23):
The folks who are listening knowthat.
And so that argument reallyfalls flat because it's not
reflective of the facts on theground, so to speak.
SPEAKER_02 (13:35):
Yeah, I think I get more thorough informed consent
information from mental healthproviders in my life than I do
from like going to the ER.
And I think that's just abyproduct of how we conduct
ourselves as a profession, but Ithink that's a very strange
argument to have stood up tothis point.
SPEAKER_00 (13:57):
Yes.
Well, clearly, you know, theyhaven't prevailed yet.
So I and that's just the facts,right?
Like they've they've lost, thepetitioners lost in the district
court in the 10th circuit courtof appeals, and now they're at
their sort of final stop here atthe Supreme Court.
So we'll see how their argumentsfare coming up very soon.
(14:18):
Like I said, October 7th is whenthe court will hear oral
arguments in this case.
SPEAKER_02 (14:24):
With this being a national court that's hearing
it, would this create momentumfor broader national
protections?
SPEAKER_00 (14:34):
Likely.
A clear ruling can accelerateharmonization across states and
embolden localities where gapspersist.
Like I said, we're alreadyseeing active municipal action
right at the city level in Ohio.
And so yeah, I would say that'slikely we'll we'll continue to
(14:56):
see movement one way or another.
And that's largely because ofthe what I imagine will be the
publicity around this case onceit's heard, and we'll likely get
a ruling sometime between it'svery, very unlikely that they'll
rule in this case before the endof the year.
But because it is a case,depending on how it's written,
(15:18):
either broadly or narrowly,either way we'll have it by June
of 2026, a ruling, a finalruling from the court.
SPEAKER_02 (15:36):
How does this connect to our ethical
obligations, especially whenfamilies or others request the
treatment that's antithetical toour ethical obligations and you
know the body of research thatshows it's not an effective
course of care for clients?
SPEAKER_00 (15:55):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Our ethics center clientwelfare, right?
Doing no harm, non-maleficence,as well as cultural humility and
competency in that regard, andveracity, right?
Dealing truthfully with thosewith whom we come into
professional contact.
So the consensus from majororganizations is that soji,
(16:21):
again, I can't say it enough, soI'm just going to continue to
say it, is not legitimatetherapy.
It lacks evidence of benefit andcarries substantial risk of
harm, as evidenced by the harmthat folks have experienced, as
clearly laid out in the researchthat exists.
Thus, it shouldn't be provided.
(16:43):
So the Ohio Councillor SocialWorker Marriage and Family
Therapist Board has issuedguidance that licensees are
prohibited from engaging soJICEas in treatment, as treatment.
And so that's that's somethingthat's important that all
licensees, right, in the stateof Ohio should be aware of is
that our board has issuedguidance prohibiting it as a
(17:05):
practice.
Unfortunately, that does notmean that other folks can't,
because there's no state ban onconversion therapy.
So that means that otherpractitioners, religious or
secular, that are unlicensed,right, by the board, they can
(17:25):
engage that.
That's not unlawful to do.
And so that means that ourclients can seek that out.
Of course, not from licensees ofour board, but they can seek
that out from others who aren'tunder the purview of our board.
So we pivot to ethical,affirmative, developmentally
appropriate care that supportsfamily communication, coping,
(17:50):
and well-being.
SPEAKER_02 (17:57):
Of course, this isn't an argument I would make,
being familiar with ourlicensure board and just, you
know, our ethical obligationsand, you know, having an
informed opinion.
But could the argument be madethat refusing that service and
that line of treatmentintersects with cultural or
(18:20):
religious considerations thatcounselors could encounter?
SPEAKER_00 (18:24):
Mm-hmm.
Certainly.
Yeah.
And that's what's being putforth in legalese by the
petitioners, right?
They they don't, and I want tomake that clear.
This is not a like free exerciseof religion or establishment
clause case regarding the FirstAmendment.
(18:48):
So there's freedom of speech,but there's also like free
exercise of religion and like noestablishment of religion.
This is not coming to the courtunder the religion clauses of
the Constitution.
This is coming under the firstthe First Amendment free speech
clause.
So affirmative practice, we haveto remember, respects religious
(19:13):
and cultural values withoutattempting identity change.
So there are plenty, you know,one that comes to mind is the
grace model by Bozard andSanders from 2011, helps bridge
the divide between one's faithidentity and their sexual
(19:35):
orientation and or genderidentity.
So affirmative practice doesn'tsacrifice one for the other.
That you know, queer and transpeople many are not people of
faith, but many queer and transpeople are people of faith.
(19:56):
And their experience with theirfaith identity has been one that
can be really rocky because ofthe discourse around how you
know diverse, affectional, andgender identities and and faith
they don't go together.
(20:17):
But that just isn't isn't thecase, right?
So standards regulate licensedpractice, not private beliefs of
a religious sort or a culturalsort.
Within practice, we offerevidence-based care and avoid
known risks, right?
Just to put it put a nice finepoint on that.
(20:39):
So there are cultural orreligious considerations, and we
can do that affirmatively andwork with both, right?
And make space for our sexualorientation, our gender
identity, and our faith identityand values.
SPEAKER_02 (20:58):
Absolutely.
Thank you, Dr.
Morgan Sweeney.
That was a very insightful,robust answer to anyone who
might be having questions ofthat nature.
Knowing that this is upcomingand that the case will be heard
on the 7th, what can steps cancounselors take right now to
prepare for possible outcomes ofthe court's decision?
SPEAKER_00 (21:22):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, so this is a I think afantastic question.
And I'm glad that you asked it,and I'm glad that you framed it
in this way, because I want totake a moment to say, regardless
of you know, whether this casecame before the court or not, I
think that these are steps thatyou can take now.
(21:46):
Yeah, like I said, regardless ofwhether the case was before the
court or not.
So what one thing that you cando is to audit your informed
consent language, your websitelanguage, intake scripts to
clearly state that you don'tprovide sojice, right?
(22:06):
You don't provide conversiontherapy, and what you do
provide, and and provide arationale as to why you don't
provide that.
Because you know, not many folksare seeking it out, and there
are there are folks who who do.
(22:26):
And so it's important to makesure that our materials are
tailored for all you knowpotential audiences, all
potential consumers, right?
In this case, clients.
So we want to audit, we want todocument evidence-based
rationales and referral pathwaysto affirming services,
(22:47):
strengthen supervision orconsultation lines for cases and
especially regarding high-riskyouth, refresh on our continuing
education, on LGBTQ affirmingpractice and ethics in that
area, ensure crisis and suicideprevention resources are you
(23:10):
know readily available becausewe know that, you know, well, I
don't want to assume thateveryone knows that, but earlier
in the summer, in July, the 988specific resources, the uh
suicide and crisis lifeline on anational level, got rid of its
protections for LGBTQ youth withspecific services for that
(23:33):
population.
And so, you know, ensuring thatwe have those crisis and suicide
prevention resources ready forminors, because we know that
LGBTQ minors in particular tendto experience crisis and
suicidality at exponentiallyhigher rates as compared to
their heterosexual and cisgendercounterparts of the same age.
SPEAKER_02 (24:00):
With all that in mind, are there any specific
advocacy efforts or trainingsthat you would recommend for
counselors looking to beprepared?
SPEAKER_00 (24:10):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, so I would recommendfollowing the Ohio Counseling
Association, the AmericanCounseling Association, and
their divisions of SAGE at thenational level in SAGEO in Ohio.
Follow their updates, followthem on social media, take
continuing education offeringsthat are put forth by those
(24:33):
divisions, specifically on LGBTQaffirming care and ethical
decision making.
Use the association's toolkits,physicians for public comments,
or for community education.
So they're doing great work.
Also, the NASA NASW of Ohio hassome great advocacy work and
(24:58):
trainings that would be relevantfor counselors to utilize in
this in this area of LGBTQaffirming care as well.
SPEAKER_02 (25:09):
Yes, thank you.
I think it's so important rightnow that we are preparing and
just being proactive with ourtraining and our approach to
this sensitive area.
One of the things I've beenthinking about just as we've
been talking today is counseloreducation programs and how they
(25:36):
are addressing this case and howit is going to affect future
professionals.
And I know that's one of yourpassions is counselor education.
So yeah, how have you noticedthis affecting our counselor
programs?
SPEAKER_00 (25:52):
I think it's something that I've, of course,
here I am talking about it here.
So I'm talking about it in theclassroom, to be sure.
And I'm making sure thatstudents understand that the
question that's presented inthis case is much broader than
the context of soji, right, ofsexual orientation and gender
(26:15):
identity change efforts.
The question that was acceptedby the court was whether a law
that censors certainconversations between counselors
and their clients based on theviewpoints expressed, regulates
conduct or violates the freespeech clause.
So that's why I keep referencingit.
It depends on how broadly ornarrowly they tailor their
(26:38):
opinion because it could havemuch broader implications for
counseling practice than just,you know, cabined to this
particular context of conversiontherapy.
So we want to teach explicitlythat counseling is regulated
(26:58):
medical health care.
It is regulated medicaltreatment that's grounded in
research.
We also want to cover, becauseit is cabin, you know, well, the
vehicle, I should say, for thecase or for you know, for that
question is about sojice, right?
So we also want to make sure toexplicitly teach that sojice has
(27:22):
a lack of efficacy andsubstantial risk of harm.
We want to run, you know,simulations doing case vignettes
that are relevant to thesequestions in the classroom, and
have students really wrestlewith these considerations, apply
(27:43):
culturally humble ethicaldecision-making models, you
know, have an opportunity toapply knowledge of affirmative
care practices in the classroom,right?
Applying to clinicalsimulations, because that's
going to help them to be betterequipped to work with, for
(28:05):
example, LGBTQ youth and theirfamilies once they're in the
practica and internship portionof their program.
And also connect content toK-Crep standards on
evidence-based practice andculturally humble and
multicultural competentstandards of practice as well.
SPEAKER_02 (28:29):
Yeah, it's almost like this is bringing some
things into a greater spotlight,but it's not changing a lot
about what we would expect offuture counselors.
SPEAKER_01 (28:40):
Mm-hmm.
SPEAKER_02 (28:44):
What are, I know that we've kind of alluded to
the research and the fact thatthis is obviously not a practice
that we are allowed to performor encouraged to perform or
would be helpful for clients,but are there any specific
mental health harms associatedwith SOGIS that you would like
to highlight for our listeners?
SPEAKER_00 (29:06):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
So studies link and I includedfor the show notes the amicus
brief by the AmericanPsychological Association, the
American Counseling Association,and others.
They reference quitesubstantially the research in
this area in that brief.
(29:27):
So I'd highly recommend thatfolks take a look at that.
Studies link exposure toincreased psychological distress
and suicidality for folks whohave been subjected to
conversion therapy.
As I mentioned, the amicussummarizes evidence that sojoys
is ineffective and it can beharmful, right, with minors who
(29:52):
are particularly vulnerable.
And so peer reviewed research,for example, analyses in Jama
psychiatry associates conversiontherapy effort to exposure, or
I'm sorry.
Peer-reviewed researchassociates conversion therapy
(30:14):
exposure with higher odds ofsuicide attempts and severe
distress.
The 2009 APA task force found nocredible evidence of efficacy
and raised significant harmconcerns, which were findings
(30:34):
that were reinforced bysubsequent studies.
SPEAKER_02 (30:44):
Yeah, I'm just taking all of that, and I think
we know that, right?
Like as counselors or you know,future counselors who might be
listening, but there's such a anoverwhelming consensus in the
body of research, which feelslike it should be enough, right?
(31:06):
But clearly there are people whodo not agree or have more
questions.
So, and that's obviously whywe're here.
Do you foresee like this rulingimpacting client trust with
counselors?
SPEAKER_00 (31:26):
Yeah, that's again, you know, we have to think how
read in our gen pop, right?
The general population on what'sgoing on at the courts.
So I do think that upholdingbans reassures families that
(31:52):
licensed care follows science.
Striking bans risks chillinghelp seeking, especially among
vulnerable populations likequeer and trans youth, and
eroding trust if youth fearbeing steered toward discredited
practices, or that there hasbeen, you know, carte blanche
(32:16):
granted that you know anythinggoes because you know we're just
having a chat, right?
It's just speech.
So because it's just speech, youknow, you can't enact any
well-tailored, well-meaningregulations because it's speech,
right?
It's not professional conduct.
Because if the bands werestruck, that's something along
(32:39):
the lines of what we would readin the ruling, right?
Is that this is speech, right?
This isn't this isn't treatment.
So we can counter uncertainty bystating our stance up front on
sojiis, right?
On affirmative care, clarifyingevidence-based options,
documenting our decision-makingprocesses whenever faced with
(33:04):
some ethical decision-making orethical dilemma, I should say.
SPEAKER_02 (33:11):
Yeah, I think that's a really great point.
I I would wonder if those whoare going to be more heavily
affected by this are more likelyto be aware of what's going on.
SPEAKER_01 (33:24):
Oh, surely.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (33:27):
I know I've had I've had a client or two come in with
a couple of questions, and theywere actually both teens who had
questions, and so it's it's aconversation that's ongoing in
my office as well.
Which is you know, a mixed bag.
I'm glad that they're informedand I'm empathetic to the fact
(33:47):
that they're worried.
SPEAKER_01 (33:51):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (33:55):
I know that obviously we've talked about,
you know, making sure ourinformed consent and our website
language is consistent, andbeing outspoken about the fact
that we do not participate inthis practice.
Do you have any recommendationfor counselors who might be
(34:17):
newer or a bit uncomfortabletrying to communicate that
safety and support to clients inthese uncertain times?
Because I think the context ofthis is very important.
Obviously, it's not just theSupreme Court case that is
leading to some clientuncertainty.
Do you have any recommendationsfor people who maybe these
(34:37):
conversations don't come asnaturally to?
SPEAKER_00 (34:40):
Yeah, so use clear scripts.
I don't provide identity changeinterventions.
Here's what I do provide, right?
Just have it be clearlyenumerated so that you don't
have a lot of thinking to do perse.
Like you it's just very clear,and then I don't provide
(35:00):
identity change interventions.
And then here's what I doprovide speaking to, I would
hope, like affirming carepractices.
And then, of course, reviewingconfidentiality, which is of
particular importance, right,for LGBTQ youth crisis
resources, as I mentionedearlier, and any affirming
(35:23):
referrals that are, you know,for it for adjacent providers
for adjunctive, you know,therapeutic support services, or
even something as fundamental aslike primary care, making sure
that there's access to folksthat you know with whom you
liaise in the community, likeaffirming primary care general
(35:44):
practitioners.
Invite questions, right?
What questions do you have aboutthat?
So I said I don't provideidentity change interventions,
and I shared with you what I dooffer.
And I'm curious about whatquestions you have at this
point, right?
And then, of course, you know,engaging in collaborative goal
(36:04):
formulation with clients.
That in itself, making sure thatthey're a part of these
processes early on and thattheir voice is heard
communicates safety and supportand affirmation now.
We don't need to wait on SCOTUSto roll in order to do these
things.
SPEAKER_02 (36:24):
Yeah.
I think I've been thinking, youknow, just as we've been talking
about the pillar of socialjustice and advocacy in our
profession, what do you have tosay to counselors who maybe
identify as non-political or whothink this is outside of their
scope of practice?
SPEAKER_00 (36:43):
Yeah, so counseling is political, I would just say.
If we're attempting to benon-political, we're neglecting
the fact that the personal ispolitical, and as is the
professional, the professionalis political as well.
Because we've already seen justin the last several months how
(37:10):
decisions made at various levelsof government have a very
palpable impact, anon-the-ground impact, if you
will, on the work that we do andhow we do it.
So we want to make sure that weunderstand one of our core roles
(37:32):
and functions to be effectuatedas counselors is that of
advocate, right?
We're counselors, many of us aresupervisors, some of us are
educators, all of us areadvocates.
We're called upon to do that,right?
That's evident in ourprofessional values that are
clearly outlined in the preambleof our code of ethics.
(37:53):
And you'll find it embedded inthe standards as well when we
talk about social justice andadvocacy.
So we want to educatecommunities more broadly about
what counseling is, that it isregulated professional conduct,
it is evidence-based treatment,that it's easy to say it's just
(38:15):
speech because speech can't bedisentangled from it.
The way that we put forth thetreatment is speech itself,
right?
Yeah, to effectuate cognitivebehavioral therapy or CBT, for
example, you have to talk, youhave to speak, but that doesn't
(38:36):
make it anything less becauseit's being done by spoken word.
It doesn't mean that it's notregulated evidence-based health
care, right?
And we also need to educatecommunities about what
counseling is not.
Counseling is not sexualorientation and gender identity
change efforts.
(38:56):
So we want to provide resourcelists, we want to participate in
public fora, whether that be inthe state legislature or some
other venue, as experts in termsof like providing testimony in
favor of or in opposition tolegislation in this area.
We want to collaborate withschools, with faith leaders on
(39:18):
supportive approaches that avoididentity change efforts, which
we know are inefficacious andharmful.
SPEAKER_02 (39:27):
I think that was such a beautiful overview of
large actions counselors cantake and how that also impacts
our small everyday actions, andhow, you know, I am a big
proponent, I guess I would say,of like personal is political,
(39:47):
professional is political.
And advocacy is not justprotests or calling your
representatives, which areimportant actions to take, of
course, but I also think, youknow, providing safe spaces and
opening up conversations aboutuncomfortable, sensitive topics
(40:08):
is its own important form ofadvocacy, and that is very
accessible and really built intoour foundation and our
groundwork.
And I think one of the things Ihear sometimes is like, I don't
have time for advocacy work.
And I think it's so integral tohow we conduct ourselves, and
that can get lost a little bitsometimes because it it is a
(40:31):
large part, but it it doesn'thave to be as time consuming as
we think about it sometimes.
unknown (40:38):
For sure.
SPEAKER_02 (40:39):
I think even just like listening to this is a form
of advocacy and you know, ineducating yourself, and maybe it
facilitates future conversationswith colleagues or or clients or
just your your people in yourcommunity.
And that's so important.
SPEAKER_01 (40:54):
Absolutely.
SPEAKER_02 (40:56):
I'd love to shift us a little bit more internally
focused with Ohio counseling andwith our counseling association
in Ohio.
unknown (41:08):
Dr.
SPEAKER_02 (41:08):
Marshwaney, I know that you are the president-elect
of the Ohio CounselingAssociation.
Do you have any insight into howOCA is preparing to respond
depending on the court'sdecision?
SPEAKER_00 (41:22):
So I will say this isn't something that we have
spent much time discussing, onlybecause, again, as I will say, I
feel confident saying, our OCAexecutive boards, resident
court, aficionado.
I don't think that we need toright now, because it is
(41:46):
unlikely that the court willrule on this.
Like oral argument is one thing,and that's gonna make it seem,
you know, very prominent in thezeitgeist.
Like it's very gonna be veryforward right now.
But then we're not gonna hearmuch about the case for a long
time because then we'll starthearing about it again and
reading about it again closer tosummer of 26.
(42:08):
But I'll tell you, that will bewe'll we'll have received a
ruling very likely just daysbefore I step into the
presidency of OCA because ourturnover is on July 1st, right,
of 26.
And so know that depending onwhat the res you know what the
(42:32):
ruling is, we'll be prepared,right, to provide member-facing
guidance, you know, a summary ofthe ruling that is accessible
for our practitioners, right,our counselors, our members.
Yeah, so we'll be ready.
And ACA's public positionopposes conversion therapy,
(42:54):
opposes soji, and supportsregulations around this.
And we join that, right, as astate branch of ACA.
That that too is our position,right?
And our leading division forLGBTQ issues in counseling,
which is SAGEO, leads the way,leads the charge in this, as
(43:15):
well as Sage, which is thenational companion organization.
And so we will be ready torespond to the court's decision
whenever it is issued.
And that will likely be summerof 26.
SPEAKER_02 (43:32):
Excellent.
I feel that we're in very goodhands, both with our current
board and our upcomingiteration.
As president-elect andeventually president, as that
tends to work, do you care toshare any about your vision for
how counselors can help to shapean inclusive affirming future?
SPEAKER_00 (43:58):
Yes.
So three pillars (43:59):
protect clients, protect the public by
reinforcing evidence-basedstandards and policy and
practice, equip counselors,which is one of the themes of
our upcoming All of HowCounselors Conference in
October, right?
Equipping counselors throughcontinuing education, through
(44:23):
supervision and consultation andpractical tools for doing the
work, and building coalitionswith counselor educators, with
licensure board, with communitypartners and affiliates to
ensure that we're harmonizingstandards and we are reducing
(44:47):
this patchwork risk, forexample, for vulnerable
communities, LGBTQ minors inparticular.
So protect clients, equipcounselors, build coalitions,
what I that's how I would sum upmy vision for an inclusive and
affirming future with regard toaffirmative practice and sojoist
(45:12):
related concerns.
SPEAKER_02 (45:13):
I love that.
Harmonizing standards.
I think that's lovely.
SPEAKER_00 (45:18):
Let's get them all in alignment.
Let's let's let's align them,right?
There's no please.
SPEAKER_02 (45:26):
No, I was just gonna say, I feel like there is
alignment in that we're allworking towards a common goal,
but I think the approach andthings could use more harmony.
We'll say that.
I think you know there's powerand strength in numbers, and
that is something that I thinkwe would do well to remember as
(45:49):
we move forward.
SPEAKER_01 (45:51):
For sure.
SPEAKER_02 (45:53):
With that in mind, how do you see OCA leading at
state and national levels?
SPEAKER_00 (46:01):
Yeah, by convening Ohio partners, partnerships
after the decision, right afterthe ruling, issuing model
language and you know, guidanceand trainings, partnering with
ACA, with Sage, working closelywith our division, SAGEO, and
(46:24):
other allied organizations tokeep Ohio aligned with the
science and with best practiceethics, right, and best practice
treatment.
And so, regardless of what theruling ultimately portends,
(46:45):
we're already a leading voice atthe state and national level.
Very proud to say that that isverifiably true.
I love OCA and I am biased inthat regard, but it is true that
we are a leader at the state andnational level, our professional
(47:06):
counseling organization.
And I'm very excited to makethat exceedingly evident in
April in Columbus when weconvene for the American
Counseling Associationconference and Expo.
Very excited to welcomecounselors from across the
(47:26):
country, from across the worldto Columbus and to be able to
serve as the sort of welcomingdelegation, if you will, for
that event.
And it's coming at aparticularly relevant, timely
point in our professionaldevelopment, right, in our
(47:50):
professional trajectory ascounselors.
The counseling compact is cominginto fruition in terms of being
able to start applying forprivileges.
The Child's versus Salazarruling will be coming very
shortly after that.
I mean, again, it could comeanytime between October 7th and
(48:10):
the end of June.
But yeah, so I think that we'rewell positioned as a leader at
the, of course, at the statelevel, but at the national level
as well, that our voice withregard to this case in
particular will be one that issought after and one that's
heeded in terms of whateverguidance we issue as a result of
(48:34):
this ruling.
And I hope that it's not muchbecause I hope that this court,
the Supreme Court, decides touphold those regulations, like
the two previous courts beforeit have upheld, right?
Colorado's ban on so jaist.
SPEAKER_01 (48:52):
So yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (48:54):
Yeah, I think that's such a wonderful point.
And the we have so manyopportunities upcoming to, you
know, engage in that advocacywork we were talking about
before, to create a largerconversation and to unify
counselors in our response andwhat information we're
discerning to each other andalso to the greater population.
(49:21):
Are there any key takeawaysyou'd like Ohio counselors and
our listeners specifically toremember about this case and our
approach to it going forwardafter having listened to this
episode?
SPEAKER_00 (49:33):
Mm-hmm.
Counseling is regulated,evidence-based health care.
SoGIS is not that.
It is neither effective norsafe.
And states can legitimatelyregulate to protect clients.
That is one key takeaway that Ihope folks take from this.
(49:56):
One actionable step is this weekyou could audit your informed
consent and website language,right, to state that you do not
provide identity changeinterventions.
And you can cite the board'sguidance, right?
The CSW MFT board's guidancespecifically to say as a
(50:16):
licensee, I'm I'm prohibitedfrom doing so.
So not only do I not provide it,but I couldn't.
And explain what affirmingevidence-based care you do
provide.
And also, again, because thiscase, the vehicle you know
itself talks about bans on sojifor minors.
(50:39):
Um, it's of particularimportance that you make sure
that you have affirming crisisand referral resources clearly
enumerated on your website or inyour uh you know practice
informed consent documentationas well.
SPEAKER_02 (50:55):
Yes.
Thank you, Dr.
Morgan Swainey, for joining usfor this important discussion on
child versus Alzheimer and itspotential impact on counselors
and the community we serve.
We're very grateful for yourguidance and your insight.
So thank you.
SPEAKER_00 (51:11):
Thank you.
SPEAKER_02 (51:13):
As we heard today, the outcome of this case could
shape the future of ourprofession and the protections
available for LGBTQ plus youthnationwide.
It's a reminder that counselingis not just about what happens
in the therapy room, but alsoabout advocating for policies
that reflect our ethicalcommitment to do no harm and to
affirm the dignity and worth ofevery client.
(51:34):
We encourage you to stayinformed, follow updates from
the Ohio Counseling Association,and use your voice to advocate
for safe affirming practices.
Together, we can help shape thefuture where all clients,
especially young people, are metwith compassion, respect, and
care.
Until next time, thanks forlistening to Ohio Counseling
Conversations.
(51:54):
Be well, stay connected, andkeep bringing more light into
the counseling profession.
Welcome to another episode of the Child Counselling
Conversations, a podcast wherewe highlight the people,
policies, and practices shapingcounselling in our state and
beyond.
Today we're diving into an issuethat could have profound
implications for our professionand the clients we serve.
The US Supreme Court has agreedto hear Child versus Celsius, a
(00:22):
case that directly challengesstate bands on conversion
therapy for minors.
At stake are not only the rightsof LGBTQ plus youth to receive
observing care, but also theability of states to regulate
harmful practices within thecounselling and mental health
professions.
Joining us is thepresident-elect of the Ohio
Counseling Association, who willhelp us unpack what this case
(00:44):
means, why counselors should bepaying close attention, and how
our professional values andethics guide us in this moment.
Dr.
Chase Morgan Sweeney is anassistant professor of
counseling at Baldwin WallaceUniversity, where he teaches and
mentors burgeoning professionalcounselors.
He earned his PhD in counseloreducation and supervision from
the University of Akron in 2023.
(01:06):
He also holds a master's inclinical mental health
counseling from the Universityof Akron and a bachelor's in
psychology from the Ohio StateUniversity.
unknown (01:14):
Dr.
SPEAKER_02 (01:15):
Morgan Sweeney brings extensive clinical
experience to his teaching.
He serves as Associate Directorat Arbor Pasama Counseling and
Wellness, where he has practicedsince 2018.
His clinical focus is on servingLGBTQ and neurodiverse
adolescents and adults usingacceptance and commitment
therapy through a culturallyhumble and affirming lens.
(01:37):
A dedicated leader in theprofession, Dr.
Morgan Swaaney currently servesas OCA president-elect and has
held leadership roles inmultiple chapters, divisions,
and committees.
His servant leadership andadvocacy have been recognized
with numerous honors at thestate and national level.
Whether you're a counselor,educator, student, or ally, this
(01:57):
is a conversation you won't wantto miss.
Welcome, Dr.
Morgan Sweeney.
Thank you so much for being withus today.
SPEAKER_00 (02:05):
Well, thank you for having me.
I wish it were under bettercircumstances, but I'm very glad
to be here.
SPEAKER_02 (02:11):
Well, we're very happy to have you.
For listeners who may not befamiliar, can you briefly
describe Chiles v.
Salazar and why it matters?
SPEAKER_00 (02:21):
Yeah, so Chilazar is a case that is before the
Supreme Court of the UnitedStates.
It is here on what is called awrit of Certi Aurora from the
10th Circuit, uh Circuit Courtof Appeals, I should say.
And it is a case that challengesColorado's prohibition on
(02:46):
licensed mental health providersperforming what is commonly
referred to as conversiontherapy, but now we call sogice
or sexual orientation and genderidentity change efforts for
minors.
And it matters because the courtwill decide, depending on how
(03:08):
broadly or narrowly they writetheir opinion after oral
arguments on October theseventh, they'll decide whether
states can regulate this asprofessional conduct to protect
youth, or whether suchregulation is barred because
(03:30):
therapy is quote unquote justspeech, like just having a
little chat, because that's sortof how it is framed by the
petitioners in this case, who isKaylee Childs.
The leading mental health andmedical organizations, so the
American PsychologicalAssociation, the American
(03:51):
Counseling Association, andothers filed an amicus brief,
which is called a friend of thecourt brief in the Supreme
Court, explaining thatcounseling and psychotherapy is
regulated evidence-basedtreatment, not mere
conversation, and that sugiesare illegitimate and can be
(04:16):
harmful, right?
We know that through theresearch, right?
It's not just anecdotal.
We have sound methodologicalempirical evidence, right, that
shows that it is not justineffective, it is also harmful,
especially to minors.
SPEAKER_02 (04:37):
If you could sum it up in a couple words, what would
you say is at the heart of thelegal arguments that are being
presented to the court?
SPEAKER_00 (04:46):
Well, I think first I should say I'm not a lawyer.
I'm not an attorney.
So I can speak as someone who isa Supreme Court aficionado.
That's I don't know why, but biginterest area of mine.
I listen to a lot of SupremeCourt oral arguments.
(05:06):
So though I'm not a lawyer, Ican speak to it at a very basic
level.
And so there are two questionsat the heart of the legal
argument.
Are states regulating treatmentdelivered by licensed
professionals where publicprotection rules apply or
restricting public protectedspeech?
(05:28):
And then secondly, does thescientific record justify bans
aimed at preventing ineffectiveor harmful practices on minors?
And the amicai, the friends ofthe court, right, in this case
APA, ACA, and others, stressthat licensure, standards of
care, continuing educationregimes distinguish counseling
(05:53):
and therapy from speech, fromtalking, right?
And that soji fails basicefficacy and safety standards.
SPEAKER_02 (06:06):
Yeah, so things that are very impactful for all of us
who are currently working withclients.
SPEAKER_00 (06:12):
Certainly, yeah, especially vulnerable clients
like LGBTQ youth.
SPEAKER_02 (06:18):
Could you speak a little on the current landscape
of state-level bans onconversion therapy and how this
has made its way to the SupremeCourt?
SPEAKER_00 (06:29):
Yeah, so a substantial share of the US
population live in states ormunicipalities with protections
for minors, while others do not,producing a patchwork that the
court is well positioned toclarify, again, depending on who
(06:58):
you know which side ultimatelyprevails.
Would that be Kaylee Childs, thepetitioner, or the respondent,
which is Patty Salazar and theColorado government?
As of now, late 2025, 23 statesplus the District of Columbia
prohibit licensed providers fromsubjecting minors to conversion
(07:20):
therapy.
The court granted review ofColorado's law in this case.
So it was heard by a districtcourt.
The respondents in this caseprevailed, and the regulation of
sojace of conversion therapy wasupheld at the just the federal
(07:40):
district court level, and it wasalso upheld at the 10th Circuit
in the 10th Circuit Court ofAppeals.
And then the Supreme Court, whenthe petitioner trials submitted,
right, to be heard by theSupreme Court, that was approved
and uh read of certiori, as Isaid at the outset, and so
(08:03):
that's how it got to SCOTUS.
SPEAKER_02 (08:06):
And how does the Ohio compare with other states?
SPEAKER_00 (08:10):
Ohio has no statewide ban.
Um, several localities haveenacted protections in September
25 this month.
Cuyahoga County became Ohio'sfirst county to ban conversion
therapy for minors and quotevulnerable adults, unquote.
(08:32):
And there have been severalothers recently: Westerville,
Whitehall cities that haveenacted bans at the city level.
SPEAKER_02 (08:43):
Yeah, so even locally for Ohio counselors,
that patchwork we see cominginto play.
SPEAKER_01 (08:52):
Yes.
SPEAKER_02 (08:53):
So with this being a national case, obviously,
obviously it has impact for Ohiocounselors, but can you speak a
little on why this is importantfor us locally?
SPEAKER_00 (09:05):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Because it directly implicatesthe authority to set scope of
practice and safety standards.
Also, our duty to avoid, I thinkis wrapped up in that, the scope
of practice and safetystandards, our duty to avoid
(09:26):
discredited or harmfulpractices, right?
And we know that from theAmerican Counseling Association
Code of Ethics.
And it's also something that wecan find in our laws and rules
that are promulgated by the OhioCounselor, Social Worker, and
Marriage and Family TherapistBoard.
(09:49):
In addition to that duty toavoid discredit or harmful
practices so as to protect thepublic, in this case, the
consumers of our services,right, our clients.
And also clarity for refusingsogice while offering ethical
affirmative care.
(10:09):
So a ruling reframing counselingas mere speech instead of as,
you know, regulated professionalconduct could have a
destabilizing effect on boardstandards here in Ohio.
And so a ruling affirming stateauthority would reinforce
(10:33):
evidence-based practiceexpectations.
SPEAKER_02 (10:39):
So if the bans are overturned, it seems like there
will be quite a few implicationsfor licensure boards and
counseling practice as well.
Do you think counselors couldsee increased pressure from
outside groups as a result?
SPEAKER_00 (11:00):
Licensure boards could face claims that
disciplining sogice when enactedin treatment by counselors,
police's speech, complicatingenforcement of these standards,
right?
The scope of practice standards,the like enshrined in the rules
(11:21):
and regulations, best practicestandards.
Clinicians may face morecomplaints or demands to provide
or refer to subjects, despitethe preponderance of the
evidence, which is against it,right?
Against that as an effective,beneficent method of treatment.
(11:46):
So, yes, without clearprohibitions, organized
campaigns may push, quote,exploratory therapy or similar
rebrands of sogist.
The scientific consensus remainsthat sogice or conversion
therapy is illegitimate, it'sineffective, and it's harmful.
SPEAKER_02 (12:10):
With that in mind, if the bans are upheld, what
protections would that reinforcefor counselors and clients?
SPEAKER_00 (12:19):
It reaffirms that states may regulate professional
conduct to prevent harm andrequire evidence-based
standards, especially forvulnerable populations, for
minors, right?
So this reduces ambiguity, itprotects counselors who refuse
(12:40):
sojiis, and it strengthensinformed consent conversations,
because that's one of the thingsthat uh petitioner their one of
their leading arguments is thatwhat we do as counselors is just
having a chat.
We're just talking, right?
It really is just speech,because they put forth the
(13:02):
argument that we don't engage inrobust informed consent process.
And so it couldn't be medicaltreatment, right?
Because that aspect isn't therewhen it very clearly is there.
We do go through informedconsent.
I mean, we know that, you knowthat, I know that.
(13:23):
The folks who are listening knowthat.
And so that argument reallyfalls flat because it's not
reflective of the facts on theground, so to speak.
SPEAKER_02 (13:35):
Yeah, I think I get more thorough informed consent
information from mental healthproviders in my life than I do
from like going to the ER.
And I think that's just abyproduct of how we conduct
ourselves as a profession, but Ithink that's a very strange
argument to have stood up tothis point.
SPEAKER_00 (13:57):
Yes.
Well, clearly, you know, theyhaven't prevailed yet.
So I and that's just the facts,right?
Like they've they've lost, thepetitioners lost in the district
court in the 10th circuit courtof appeals, and now they're at
their sort of final stop here atthe Supreme Court.
So we'll see how their argumentsfare coming up very soon.
(14:18):
Like I said, October 7th is whenthe court will hear oral
arguments in this case.
SPEAKER_02 (14:24):
With this being a national court that's hearing
it, would this create momentumfor broader national
protections?
SPEAKER_00 (14:34):
Likely.
A clear ruling can accelerateharmonization across states and
embolden localities where gapspersist.
Like I said, we're alreadyseeing active municipal action
right at the city level in Ohio.
And so yeah, I would say that'slikely we'll we'll continue to
(14:56):
see movement one way or another.
And that's largely because ofthe what I imagine will be the
publicity around this case onceit's heard, and we'll likely get
a ruling sometime between it'svery, very unlikely that they'll
rule in this case before the endof the year.
But because it is a case,depending on how it's written,
(15:18):
either broadly or narrowly,either way we'll have it by June
of 2026, a ruling, a finalruling from the court.
SPEAKER_02 (15:36):
How does this connect to our ethical
obligations, especially whenfamilies or others request the
treatment that's antithetical toour ethical obligations and you
know the body of research thatshows it's not an effective
course of care for clients?
SPEAKER_00 (15:55):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Our ethics center clientwelfare, right?
Doing no harm, non-maleficence,as well as cultural humility and
competency in that regard, andveracity, right?
Dealing truthfully with thosewith whom we come into
professional contact.
So the consensus from majororganizations is that soji,
(16:21):
again, I can't say it enough, soI'm just going to continue to
say it, is not legitimatetherapy.
It lacks evidence of benefit andcarries substantial risk of
harm, as evidenced by the harmthat folks have experienced, as
clearly laid out in the researchthat exists.
Thus, it shouldn't be provided.
(16:43):
So the Ohio Councillor SocialWorker Marriage and Family
Therapist Board has issuedguidance that licensees are
prohibited from engaging soJICEas in treatment, as treatment.
And so that's that's somethingthat's important that all
licensees, right, in the stateof Ohio should be aware of is
that our board has issuedguidance prohibiting it as a
(17:05):
practice.
Unfortunately, that does notmean that other folks can't,
because there's no state ban onconversion therapy.
So that means that otherpractitioners, religious or
secular, that are unlicensed,right, by the board, they can
(17:25):
engage that.
That's not unlawful to do.
And so that means that ourclients can seek that out.
Of course, not from licensees ofour board, but they can seek
that out from others who aren'tunder the purview of our board.
So we pivot to ethical,affirmative, developmentally
appropriate care that supportsfamily communication, coping,
(17:50):
and well-being.
SPEAKER_02 (17:57):
Of course, this isn't an argument I would make,
being familiar with ourlicensure board and just, you
know, our ethical obligationsand, you know, having an
informed opinion.
But could the argument be madethat refusing that service and
that line of treatmentintersects with cultural or
(18:20):
religious considerations thatcounselors could encounter?
SPEAKER_00 (18:24):
Mm-hmm.
Certainly.
Yeah.
And that's what's being putforth in legalese by the
petitioners, right?
They they don't, and I want tomake that clear.
This is not a like free exerciseof religion or establishment
clause case regarding the FirstAmendment.
(18:48):
So there's freedom of speech,but there's also like free
exercise of religion and like noestablishment of religion.
This is not coming to the courtunder the religion clauses of
the Constitution.
This is coming under the firstthe First Amendment free speech
clause.
So affirmative practice, we haveto remember, respects religious
(19:13):
and cultural values withoutattempting identity change.
So there are plenty, you know,one that comes to mind is the
grace model by Bozard andSanders from 2011, helps bridge
the divide between one's faithidentity and their sexual
(19:35):
orientation and or genderidentity.
So affirmative practice doesn'tsacrifice one for the other.
That you know, queer and transpeople many are not people of
faith, but many queer and transpeople are people of faith.
(19:56):
And their experience with theirfaith identity has been one that
can be really rocky because ofthe discourse around how you
know diverse, affectional, andgender identities and and faith
they don't go together.
(20:17):
But that just isn't isn't thecase, right?
So standards regulate licensedpractice, not private beliefs of
a religious sort or a culturalsort.
Within practice, we offerevidence-based care and avoid
known risks, right?
Just to put it put a nice finepoint on that.
(20:39):
So there are cultural orreligious considerations, and we
can do that affirmatively andwork with both, right?
And make space for our sexualorientation, our gender
identity, and our faith identityand values.
SPEAKER_02 (20:58):
Absolutely.
Thank you, Dr.
Morgan Sweeney.
That was a very insightful,robust answer to anyone who
might be having questions ofthat nature.
Knowing that this is upcomingand that the case will be heard
on the 7th, what can steps cancounselors take right now to
prepare for possible outcomes ofthe court's decision?
SPEAKER_00 (21:22):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, so this is a I think afantastic question.
And I'm glad that you asked it,and I'm glad that you framed it
in this way, because I want totake a moment to say, regardless
of you know, whether this casecame before the court or not, I
think that these are steps thatyou can take now.
(21:46):
Yeah, like I said, regardless ofwhether the case was before the
court or not.
So what one thing that you cando is to audit your informed
consent language, your websitelanguage, intake scripts to
clearly state that you don'tprovide sojice, right?
(22:06):
You don't provide conversiontherapy, and what you do
provide, and and provide arationale as to why you don't
provide that.
Because you know, not many folksare seeking it out, and there
are there are folks who who do.
(22:26):
And so it's important to makesure that our materials are
tailored for all you knowpotential audiences, all
potential consumers, right?
In this case, clients.
So we want to audit, we want todocument evidence-based
rationales and referral pathwaysto affirming services,
(22:47):
strengthen supervision orconsultation lines for cases and
especially regarding high-riskyouth, refresh on our continuing
education, on LGBTQ affirmingpractice and ethics in that
area, ensure crisis and suicideprevention resources are you
(23:10):
know readily available becausewe know that, you know, well, I
don't want to assume thateveryone knows that, but earlier
in the summer, in July, the 988specific resources, the uh
suicide and crisis lifeline on anational level, got rid of its
protections for LGBTQ youth withspecific services for that
(23:33):
population.
And so, you know, ensuring thatwe have those crisis and suicide
prevention resources ready forminors, because we know that
LGBTQ minors in particular tendto experience crisis and
suicidality at exponentiallyhigher rates as compared to
their heterosexual and cisgendercounterparts of the same age.
SPEAKER_02 (24:00):
With all that in mind, are there any specific
advocacy efforts or trainingsthat you would recommend for
counselors looking to beprepared?
SPEAKER_00 (24:10):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah, so I would recommendfollowing the Ohio Counseling
Association, the AmericanCounseling Association, and
their divisions of SAGE at thenational level in SAGEO in Ohio.
Follow their updates, followthem on social media, take
continuing education offeringsthat are put forth by those
(24:33):
divisions, specifically on LGBTQaffirming care and ethical
decision making.
Use the association's toolkits,physicians for public comments,
or for community education.
So they're doing great work.
Also, the NASA NASW of Ohio hassome great advocacy work and
(24:58):
trainings that would be relevantfor counselors to utilize in
this in this area of LGBTQaffirming care as well.
SPEAKER_02 (25:09):
Yes, thank you.
I think it's so important rightnow that we are preparing and
just being proactive with ourtraining and our approach to
this sensitive area.
One of the things I've beenthinking about just as we've
been talking today is counseloreducation programs and how they
(25:36):
are addressing this case and howit is going to affect future
professionals.
And I know that's one of yourpassions is counselor education.
So yeah, how have you noticedthis affecting our counselor
programs?
SPEAKER_00 (25:52):
I think it's something that I've, of course,
here I am talking about it here.
So I'm talking about it in theclassroom, to be sure.
And I'm making sure thatstudents understand that the
question that's presented inthis case is much broader than
the context of soji, right, ofsexual orientation and gender
(26:15):
identity change efforts.
The question that was acceptedby the court was whether a law
that censors certainconversations between counselors
and their clients based on theviewpoints expressed, regulates
conduct or violates the freespeech clause.
So that's why I keep referencingit.
It depends on how broadly ornarrowly they tailor their
(26:38):
opinion because it could havemuch broader implications for
counseling practice than just,you know, cabined to this
particular context of conversiontherapy.
So we want to teach explicitlythat counseling is regulated
(26:58):
medical health care.
It is regulated medicaltreatment that's grounded in
research.
We also want to cover, becauseit is cabin, you know, well, the
vehicle, I should say, for thecase or for you know, for that
question is about sojice, right?
So we also want to make sure toexplicitly teach that sojice has
(27:22):
a lack of efficacy andsubstantial risk of harm.
We want to run, you know,simulations doing case vignettes
that are relevant to thesequestions in the classroom, and
have students really wrestlewith these considerations, apply
(27:43):
culturally humble ethicaldecision-making models, you
know, have an opportunity toapply knowledge of affirmative
care practices in the classroom,right?
Applying to clinicalsimulations, because that's
going to help them to be betterequipped to work with, for
(28:05):
example, LGBTQ youth and theirfamilies once they're in the
practica and internship portionof their program.
And also connect content toK-Crep standards on
evidence-based practice andculturally humble and
multicultural competentstandards of practice as well.
SPEAKER_02 (28:29):
Yeah, it's almost like this is bringing some
things into a greater spotlight,but it's not changing a lot
about what we would expect offuture counselors.
SPEAKER_01 (28:40):
Mm-hmm.
SPEAKER_02 (28:44):
What are, I know that we've kind of alluded to
the research and the fact thatthis is obviously not a practice
that we are allowed to performor encouraged to perform or
would be helpful for clients,but are there any specific
mental health harms associatedwith SOGIS that you would like
to highlight for our listeners?
SPEAKER_00 (29:06):
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
So studies link and I includedfor the show notes the amicus
brief by the AmericanPsychological Association, the
American Counseling Association,and others.
They reference quitesubstantially the research in
this area in that brief.
(29:27):
So I'd highly recommend thatfolks take a look at that.
Studies link exposure toincreased psychological distress
and suicidality for folks whohave been subjected to
conversion therapy.
As I mentioned, the amicussummarizes evidence that sojoys
is ineffective and it can beharmful, right, with minors who
(29:52):
are particularly vulnerable.
And so peer reviewed research,for example, analyses in Jama
psychiatry associates conversiontherapy effort to exposure, or
I'm sorry.
Peer-reviewed researchassociates conversion therapy
(30:14):
exposure with higher odds ofsuicide attempts and severe
distress.
The 2009 APA task force found nocredible evidence of efficacy
and raised significant harmconcerns, which were findings
(30:34):
that were reinforced bysubsequent studies.
SPEAKER_02 (30:44):
Yeah, I'm just taking all of that, and I think
we know that, right?
Like as counselors or you know,future counselors who might be
listening, but there's such a anoverwhelming consensus in the
body of research, which feelslike it should be enough, right?
(31:06):
But clearly there are people whodo not agree or have more
questions.
So, and that's obviously whywe're here.
Do you foresee like this rulingimpacting client trust with
counselors?
SPEAKER_00 (31:26):
Yeah, that's again, you know, we have to think how
read in our gen pop, right?
The general population on what'sgoing on at the courts.
So I do think that upholdingbans reassures families that
(31:52):
licensed care follows science.
Striking bans risks chillinghelp seeking, especially among
vulnerable populations likequeer and trans youth, and
eroding trust if youth fearbeing steered toward discredited
practices, or that there hasbeen, you know, carte blanche
(32:16):
granted that you know anythinggoes because you know we're just
having a chat, right?
It's just speech.
So because it's just speech, youknow, you can't enact any
well-tailored, well-meaningregulations because it's speech,
right?
It's not professional conduct.
Because if the bands werestruck, that's something along
(32:39):
the lines of what we would readin the ruling, right?
Is that this is speech, right?
This isn't this isn't treatment.
So we can counter uncertainty bystating our stance up front on
sojiis, right?
On affirmative care, clarifyingevidence-based options,
documenting our decision-makingprocesses whenever faced with
(33:04):
some ethical decision-making orethical dilemma, I should say.
SPEAKER_02 (33:11):
Yeah, I think that's a really great point.
I I would wonder if those whoare going to be more heavily
affected by this are more likelyto be aware of what's going on.
SPEAKER_01 (33:24):
Oh, surely.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (33:27):
I know I've had I've had a client or two come in with
a couple of questions, and theywere actually both teens who had
questions, and so it's it's aconversation that's ongoing in
my office as well.
Which is you know, a mixed bag.
I'm glad that they're informedand I'm empathetic to the fact
(33:47):
that they're worried.
SPEAKER_01 (33:51):
Yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (33:55):
I know that obviously we've talked about,
you know, making sure ourinformed consent and our website
language is consistent, andbeing outspoken about the fact
that we do not participate inthis practice.
Do you have any recommendationfor counselors who might be
(34:17):
newer or a bit uncomfortabletrying to communicate that
safety and support to clients inthese uncertain times?
Because I think the context ofthis is very important.
Obviously, it's not just theSupreme Court case that is
leading to some clientuncertainty.
Do you have any recommendationsfor people who maybe these
(34:37):
conversations don't come asnaturally to?
SPEAKER_00 (34:40):
Yeah, so use clear scripts.
I don't provide identity changeinterventions.
Here's what I do provide, right?
Just have it be clearlyenumerated so that you don't
have a lot of thinking to do perse.
Like you it's just very clear,and then I don't provide
(35:00):
identity change interventions.
And then here's what I doprovide speaking to, I would
hope, like affirming carepractices.
And then, of course, reviewingconfidentiality, which is of
particular importance, right,for LGBTQ youth crisis
resources, as I mentionedearlier, and any affirming
(35:23):
referrals that are, you know,for it for adjacent providers
for adjunctive, you know,therapeutic support services, or
even something as fundamental aslike primary care, making sure
that there's access to folksthat you know with whom you
liaise in the community, likeaffirming primary care general
(35:44):
practitioners.
Invite questions, right?
What questions do you have aboutthat?
So I said I don't provideidentity change interventions,
and I shared with you what I dooffer.
And I'm curious about whatquestions you have at this
point, right?
And then, of course, you know,engaging in collaborative goal
(36:04):
formulation with clients.
That in itself, making sure thatthey're a part of these
processes early on and thattheir voice is heard
communicates safety and supportand affirmation now.
We don't need to wait on SCOTUSto roll in order to do these
things.
SPEAKER_02 (36:24):
Yeah.
I think I've been thinking, youknow, just as we've been talking
about the pillar of socialjustice and advocacy in our
profession, what do you have tosay to counselors who maybe
identify as non-political or whothink this is outside of their
scope of practice?
SPEAKER_00 (36:43):
Yeah, so counseling is political, I would just say.
If we're attempting to benon-political, we're neglecting
the fact that the personal ispolitical, and as is the
professional, the professionalis political as well.
Because we've already seen justin the last several months how
(37:10):
decisions made at various levelsof government have a very
palpable impact, anon-the-ground impact, if you
will, on the work that we do andhow we do it.
So we want to make sure that weunderstand one of our core roles
(37:32):
and functions to be effectuatedas counselors is that of
advocate, right?
We're counselors, many of us aresupervisors, some of us are
educators, all of us areadvocates.
We're called upon to do that,right?
That's evident in ourprofessional values that are
clearly outlined in the preambleof our code of ethics.
(37:53):
And you'll find it embedded inthe standards as well when we
talk about social justice andadvocacy.
So we want to educatecommunities more broadly about
what counseling is, that it isregulated professional conduct,
it is evidence-based treatment,that it's easy to say it's just
(38:15):
speech because speech can't bedisentangled from it.
The way that we put forth thetreatment is speech itself,
right?
Yeah, to effectuate cognitivebehavioral therapy or CBT, for
example, you have to talk, youhave to speak, but that doesn't
(38:36):
make it anything less becauseit's being done by spoken word.
It doesn't mean that it's notregulated evidence-based health
care, right?
And we also need to educatecommunities about what
counseling is not.
Counseling is not sexualorientation and gender identity
change efforts.
(38:56):
So we want to provide resourcelists, we want to participate in
public fora, whether that be inthe state legislature or some
other venue, as experts in termsof like providing testimony in
favor of or in opposition tolegislation in this area.
We want to collaborate withschools, with faith leaders on
(39:18):
supportive approaches that avoididentity change efforts, which
we know are inefficacious andharmful.
SPEAKER_02 (39:27):
I think that was such a beautiful overview of
large actions counselors cantake and how that also impacts
our small everyday actions, andhow, you know, I am a big
proponent, I guess I would say,of like personal is political,
(39:47):
professional is political.
And advocacy is not justprotests or calling your
representatives, which areimportant actions to take, of
course, but I also think, youknow, providing safe spaces and
opening up conversations aboutuncomfortable, sensitive topics
(40:08):
is its own important form ofadvocacy, and that is very
accessible and really built intoour foundation and our
groundwork.
And I think one of the things Ihear sometimes is like, I don't
have time for advocacy work.
And I think it's so integral tohow we conduct ourselves, and
that can get lost a little bitsometimes because it it is a
(40:31):
large part, but it it doesn'thave to be as time consuming as
we think about it sometimes.
unknown (40:38):
For sure.
SPEAKER_02 (40:39):
I think even just like listening to this is a form
of advocacy and you know, ineducating yourself, and maybe it
facilitates future conversationswith colleagues or or clients or
just your your people in yourcommunity.
And that's so important.
SPEAKER_01 (40:54):
Absolutely.
SPEAKER_02 (40:56):
I'd love to shift us a little bit more internally
focused with Ohio counseling andwith our counseling association
in Ohio.
unknown (41:08):
Dr.
SPEAKER_02 (41:08):
Marshwaney, I know that you are the president-elect
of the Ohio CounselingAssociation.
Do you have any insight into howOCA is preparing to respond
depending on the court'sdecision?
SPEAKER_00 (41:22):
So I will say this isn't something that we have
spent much time discussing, onlybecause, again, as I will say, I
feel confident saying, our OCAexecutive boards, resident
court, aficionado.
I don't think that we need toright now, because it is
(41:46):
unlikely that the court willrule on this.
Like oral argument is one thing,and that's gonna make it seem,
you know, very prominent in thezeitgeist.
Like it's very gonna be veryforward right now.
But then we're not gonna hearmuch about the case for a long
time because then we'll starthearing about it again and
reading about it again closer tosummer of 26.
(42:08):
But I'll tell you, that will bewe'll we'll have received a
ruling very likely just daysbefore I step into the
presidency of OCA because ourturnover is on July 1st, right,
of 26.
And so know that depending onwhat the res you know what the
(42:32):
ruling is, we'll be prepared,right, to provide member-facing
guidance, you know, a summary ofthe ruling that is accessible
for our practitioners, right,our counselors, our members.
Yeah, so we'll be ready.
And ACA's public positionopposes conversion therapy,
(42:54):
opposes soji, and supportsregulations around this.
And we join that, right, as astate branch of ACA.
That that too is our position,right?
And our leading division forLGBTQ issues in counseling,
which is SAGEO, leads the way,leads the charge in this, as
(43:15):
well as Sage, which is thenational companion organization.
And so we will be ready torespond to the court's decision
whenever it is issued.
And that will likely be summerof 26.
SPEAKER_02 (43:32):
Excellent.
I feel that we're in very goodhands, both with our current
board and our upcomingiteration.
As president-elect andeventually president, as that
tends to work, do you care toshare any about your vision for
how counselors can help to shapean inclusive affirming future?
SPEAKER_00 (43:58):
Yes.
So three pillars (43:59):
protect clients, protect the public by
reinforcing evidence-basedstandards and policy and
practice, equip counselors,which is one of the themes of
our upcoming All of HowCounselors Conference in
October, right?
Equipping counselors throughcontinuing education, through
(44:23):
supervision and consultation andpractical tools for doing the
work, and building coalitionswith counselor educators, with
licensure board, with communitypartners and affiliates to
ensure that we're harmonizingstandards and we are reducing
(44:47):
this patchwork risk, forexample, for vulnerable
communities, LGBTQ minors inparticular.
So protect clients, equipcounselors, build coalitions,
what I that's how I would sum upmy vision for an inclusive and
affirming future with regard toaffirmative practice and sojoist
(45:12):
related concerns.
SPEAKER_02 (45:13):
I love that.
Harmonizing standards.
I think that's lovely.
SPEAKER_00 (45:18):
Let's get them all in alignment.
Let's let's let's align them,right?
There's no please.
SPEAKER_02 (45:26):
No, I was just gonna say, I feel like there is
alignment in that we're allworking towards a common goal,
but I think the approach andthings could use more harmony.
We'll say that.
I think you know there's powerand strength in numbers, and
that is something that I thinkwe would do well to remember as
(45:49):
we move forward.
SPEAKER_01 (45:51):
For sure.
SPEAKER_02 (45:53):
With that in mind, how do you see OCA leading at
state and national levels?
SPEAKER_00 (46:01):
Yeah, by convening Ohio partners, partnerships
after the decision, right afterthe ruling, issuing model
language and you know, guidanceand trainings, partnering with
ACA, with Sage, working closelywith our division, SAGEO, and
(46:24):
other allied organizations tokeep Ohio aligned with the
science and with best practiceethics, right, and best practice
treatment.
And so, regardless of what theruling ultimately portends,
(46:45):
we're already a leading voice atthe state and national level.
Very proud to say that that isverifiably true.
I love OCA and I am biased inthat regard, but it is true that
we are a leader at the state andnational level, our professional
(47:06):
counseling organization.
And I'm very excited to makethat exceedingly evident in
April in Columbus when weconvene for the American
Counseling Associationconference and Expo.
Very excited to welcomecounselors from across the
(47:26):
country, from across the worldto Columbus and to be able to
serve as the sort of welcomingdelegation, if you will, for
that event.
And it's coming at aparticularly relevant, timely
point in our professionaldevelopment, right, in our
(47:50):
professional trajectory ascounselors.
The counseling compact is cominginto fruition in terms of being
able to start applying forprivileges.
The Child's versus Salazarruling will be coming very
shortly after that.
I mean, again, it could comeanytime between October 7th and
(48:10):
the end of June.
But yeah, so I think that we'rewell positioned as a leader at
the, of course, at the statelevel, but at the national level
as well, that our voice withregard to this case in
particular will be one that issought after and one that's
heeded in terms of whateverguidance we issue as a result of
(48:34):
this ruling.
And I hope that it's not muchbecause I hope that this court,
the Supreme Court, decides touphold those regulations, like
the two previous courts beforeit have upheld, right?
Colorado's ban on so jaist.
SPEAKER_01 (48:52):
So yeah.
SPEAKER_02 (48:54):
Yeah, I think that's such a wonderful point.
And the we have so manyopportunities upcoming to, you
know, engage in that advocacywork we were talking about
before, to create a largerconversation and to unify
counselors in our response andwhat information we're
discerning to each other andalso to the greater population.
(49:21):
Are there any key takeawaysyou'd like Ohio counselors and
our listeners specifically toremember about this case and our
approach to it going forwardafter having listened to this
episode?
SPEAKER_00 (49:33):
Mm-hmm.
Counseling is regulated,evidence-based health care.
SoGIS is not that.
It is neither effective norsafe.
And states can legitimatelyregulate to protect clients.
That is one key takeaway that Ihope folks take from this.
(49:56):
One actionable step is this weekyou could audit your informed
consent and website language,right, to state that you do not
provide identity changeinterventions.
And you can cite the board'sguidance, right?
The CSW MFT board's guidancespecifically to say as a
(50:16):
licensee, I'm I'm prohibitedfrom doing so.
So not only do I not provide it,but I couldn't.
And explain what affirmingevidence-based care you do
provide.
And also, again, because thiscase, the vehicle you know
itself talks about bans on sojifor minors.
(50:39):
Um, it's of particularimportance that you make sure
that you have affirming crisisand referral resources clearly
enumerated on your website or inyour uh you know practice
informed consent documentationas well.
SPEAKER_02 (50:55):
Yes.
Thank you, Dr.
Morgan Swainey, for joining usfor this important discussion on
child versus Alzheimer and itspotential impact on counselors
and the community we serve.
We're very grateful for yourguidance and your insight.
So thank you.
SPEAKER_00 (51:11):
Thank you.
SPEAKER_02 (51:13):
As we heard today, the outcome of this case could
shape the future of ourprofession and the protections
available for LGBTQ plus youthnationwide.
It's a reminder that counselingis not just about what happens
in the therapy room, but alsoabout advocating for policies
that reflect our ethicalcommitment to do no harm and to
affirm the dignity and worth ofevery client.
(51:34):
We encourage you to stayinformed, follow updates from
the Ohio Counseling Association,and use your voice to advocate
for safe affirming practices.
Together, we can help shape thefuture where all clients,
especially young people, are metwith compassion, respect, and
care.
Until next time, thanks forlistening to Ohio Counseling
Conversations.
(51:54):
Be well, stay connected, andkeep bringing more light into
the counseling profession.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.