Business and personal values

[ImaginaryDay2]

So I had a conversation today by phone with a potential employer. The conversation went very well, even in spite of the context of this post. The employer does a pre-screening by phone prior to going through with an interview for some of the reasons I'll bring up. Great job - the opening is for a counsellor position with a day and evening program for youth, engaging them in life skills programming, and helping them identify values and goals for themselves. The program will be running in different areas in our 'region' so it will be reaching a number of youth.This is also an organization I've been 'courting' for a while. As I said, the phone call was great - got questions answered, and a good overview of the position.

Here's the issue. He explained that they have two "organizational values" that, for any employee who accepts a position, they would need to uphold

1) They value working with a diverse population. They do not discriminate against any person based on race, religion, or sexual preference/gender identity/orientation
Here, I have no issues, and would agree to working within their values.

2)They value "teaching and supporting a person's right to an abortion, as an equally positive option among other options"
Problem. I recognize that a person has a right to an abortion. It is a choice they have, and they should have access, if they make that choice. However, the trouble comes in for me with teaching, supporting, and presenting abortion as an equally positive option, because that goes against my personal values. While I recognize the right , I don't support abortion as an "equally positive option among other options".

So... I need to know if I'm over-thinking this, or if I should just trust my gut. We've agreed to have another conversation soon before setting an in-person meeting to talk a bit more about the issue - basically to let him know where I stand.

 

[Lamb]

It sounds as if you'll be required to teach something at some point in your job that you are against. Are you able to live with having to do that? They obviously won't change their minds on it if it's specifically pointed out as one of their values.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I think what it comes down to ultimately is their wording about presenting it as an equally positive option. As far as the "law of the land" is concerned, it is a legal option, and I can't (and wouldn't) get in the way of someone who wanted to pursue that option. I'd also be ethically bound to provide information about the option if I were asked. But as an equally positive option? No.

 

[ValleyGal]

Arm yourself with peer-reviewed studies on the psychological effects of abortion. For many women, years after the abortion, they come to regret their decisions... especially for those who eventually do go on to have children. If you can provide it as an option, but not a positive option, would that make a difference?

You could also present the term "positive" as the agency asserting their own values. Isn't the determination of positive or negative actually formed by the person who is making that decision? Ultimately, their own words are disempowering clients, when you really look at it. If they can see it from that perspective, maybe they will take the judgement out of it by providing it as an objective option rather than placing positive OR negative value on it?

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I typed an update, but the internet went out before it posted. I had a conversation with the supervisor and he clarified some things for me. Basically, their HR wrote the policy the way it's worded, so he's responsible for stating it that way. I can understand that. In practice, however, my role would be as it is with a number of other issues that youth could present with - being an objective voice in their own decision making process. That would mean that clinicians don't take either a 'pro' or 'con' position, but come alongside the client in making a decision on their own. Any number of things could come into play as well. If a youth is in supportive housing, they might have questions about having a child while in that environment, if they could stay in housing, connecting with their social worker about custody issues, family interventions, etc.

So where things look 'cut and dry' on the surface, it isn't always that way. And I won't deny that, whatever decision youth might make, they need all the support they can get.

 

[IACOBVS]

Arm yourself with peer-reviewed studies on the psychological effects of abortion. For many women, years after the abortion, they come to regret their decisions... especially for those who eventually do go on to have children. If you can provide it as an option, but not a positive option, would that make a difference?

You could also present the term "positive" as the agency asserting their own values. Isn't the determination of positive or negative actually formed by the person who is making that decision? Ultimately, their own words are disempowering clients, when you really look at it. If they can see it from that perspective, maybe they will take the judgement out of it by providing it as an objective option rather than placing positive OR negative value on it?

"Arming" oneself with such arguments wouldn't be helpful in gaining employment with such an agency here in Canada. The interviewer has made it clear that they are a pro-choice entity, and require a pro-choice counselling approach.

 

[IACOBVS]

I typed an update, but the internet went out before it posted. I had a conversation with the supervisor and he clarified some things for me. Basically, their HR wrote the policy the way it's worded, so he's responsible for stating it that way. I can understand that. In practice, however, my role would be as it is with a number of other issues that youth could present with - being an objective voice in their own decision making process. That would mean that clinicians don't take either a 'pro' or 'con' position, but come alongside the client in making a decision on their own. Any number of things could come into play as well. If a youth is in supportive housing, they might have questions about having a child while in that environment, if they could stay in housing, connecting with their social worker about custody issues, family interventions, etc.

So where things look 'cut and dry' on the surface, it isn't always that way. And I won't deny that, whatever decision youth might make, they need all the support they can get.

Would you be able to unconditionally support a girl or woman if she made her own decision to end her pregnancy? And would you be able to present such an option to her in an unbiased way? Those are the two questions that you will need to answer.

 

[tango]

Arm yourself with peer-reviewed studies on the psychological effects of abortion. For many women, years after the abortion, they come to regret their decisions... especially for those who eventually do go on to have children. If you can provide it as an option, but not a positive option, would that make a difference?

You could also present the term "positive" as the agency asserting their own values. Isn't the determination of positive or negative actually formed by the person who is making that decision? Ultimately, their own words are disempowering clients, when you really look at it. If they can see it from that perspective, maybe they will take the judgement out of it by providing it as an objective option rather than placing positive OR negative value on it?

I suspect the term "equally positive" suggests the agency doesn't look to take any particular stance on whether abortion is a good thing or not, merely taking a more passive stance that any decision the client makes is as positive as any other decision they might have made.

I'd have thought presenting all options equally might involve giving the client information about the relative pros and cons of aborting the pregnancy compared to carrying the child to term with a view to either keeping it or giving it up for adoption. Perhaps it would mean accompanying them to have an ultrasound so they can see what is growing inside them so they can make a decision for themselves whether it counts as a human or a bunch of cells.

ImaginaryDay - what kind of support does the role involve providing? It seems that a woman having an abortion may have ongoing regrets about it but it's not exactly a walk in the park for a young woman living in transient accommodation and struggling to get by on her own to think about adding a baby to the mix. The concept of "support" fails if it merely accompanies her to the abortion clinic and then abandons her, likewise it fails if it persuades her to carry the child to term but then abandons her to fend for herself.

 

[ValleyGal]

"Arming" oneself with such arguments wouldn't be helpful in gaining employment with such an agency here in Canada. The interviewer has made it clear that they are a pro-choice entity, and require a pro-choice counselling approach.

I AM Canadian. My husband (IDay) is American. I was using language that an American would identify with. Ftr, I am also pro-choice, as it is a harm-reduction approach.

When employers have these kinds of conversations, it is not a deal-breaker to bring up potential items for discussion. After all, that is what pre-screening is for. And in a values-based profession such as IDay's and mine, it is an important discussion to have. My response to him is very evidence-based, as a practitioner such as IDay should be. As well, the second paragraph offers objective reasoning and language - another part of his profession.

In a nutshell, I was offering IDay a means to conversation and informed dialogue rather than just a moral opinion. I am not here for debate or to be criticized. I was trying to support my husband in his profession.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

I suspect the term "equally positive" suggests the agency doesn't look to take any particular stance on whether abortion is a good thing or not, merely taking a more passive stance that any decision the client makes is as positive as any other decision they might have made.

That hits it right on the head. The clinician's role is to assist the person in navigating that decision for themselves.

I'd have thought presenting all options equally might involve giving the client information about the relative pros and cons of aborting the pregnancy compared to carrying the child to term with a view to either keeping it or giving it up for adoption. Perhaps it would mean accompanying them to have an ultrasound so they can see what is growing inside them so they can make a decision for themselves whether it counts as a human or a bunch of cells.

providing that information may/may not be part of my role. Most likely, if a person was interested in that it would involve referring them to the appropriate person/professional outside our agency. My responsibility would be the willingness to make that referral as opposed to inserting my own 'pro-life' values by refusing, or trying to talk them out of it.

ImaginaryDay - what kind of support does the role involve providing? It seems that a woman having an abortion may have ongoing regrets about it but it's not exactly a walk in the park for a young woman living in transient accommodation and struggling to get by on her own to think about adding a baby to the mix. The concept of "support" fails if it merely accompanies her to the abortion clinic and then abandons her, likewise it fails if it persuades her to carry the child to term but then abandons her to fend for herself.

Accompanying them wouldn't be part of my role, necessarily. The support is more in the form of "coming along side" the person in making the choice for themselves. And, as you said, whether a choice is made to abort, or have a child, or adopt, those are heavy decisions for a youth. There is, indeed, a process (typically) afterward where there may be some questioning, doubts, strong feelings, etc. So the counselor would help to process those issues as well.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

"Arming" oneself with such arguments wouldn't be helpful in gaining employment with such an agency here in Canada. The interviewer has made it clear that they are a pro-choice entity, and require a pro-choice counselling approach.

Yes. Pro-choice in the sense that one clinician cannot insert their values against abortion with a youth who may be considering it, just as another clinician cannot insert their values in favor of it with a youth who is considering having their child, or is considering adoption. Some Christians consider adoption against Christian values as well, or single-parent homes. There are actually a lot of 'nuances' behind their policy.That's what I was alluding to earlier about what seems "cut and dry" not being so at all, and why I really needed the time to consider this.

 

[faramir.pete]

So I had a conversation today by phone with a potential employer. The conversation went very well, even in spite of the context of this post. The employer does a pre-screening by phone prior to going through with an interview for some of the reasons I'll bring up. Great job - the opening is for a counsellor position with a day and evening program for youth, engaging them in life skills programming, and helping them identify values and goals for themselves. The program will be running in different areas in our 'region' so it will be reaching a number of youth.This is also an organization I've been 'courting' for a while. As I said, the phone call was great - got questions answered, and a good overview of the position.

Here's the issue. He explained that they have two "organizational values" that, for any employee who accepts a position, they would need to uphold

1) They value working with a diverse population. They do not discriminate against any person based on race, religion, or sexual preference/gender identity/orientation
Here, I have no issues, and would agree to working within their values.

2)They value "teaching and supporting a person's right to an abortion, as an equally positive option among other options"
Problem. I recognize that a person has a right to an abortion. It is a choice they have, and they should have access, if they make that choice. However, the trouble comes in for me with teaching, supporting, and presenting abortion as an equally positive option, because that goes against my personal values. While I recognize the right , I don't support abortion as an "equally positive option among other options".

So... I need to know if I'm over-thinking this, or if I should just trust my gut. We've agreed to have another conversation soon before setting an in-person meeting to talk a bit more about the issue - basically to let him know where I stand.

Hi there, I am newbie to this forum so you will not know me (yet). Iwould like to offeryou some advice here, and like all advice you can always ignore it if it does not chime with you .

I am 60 years old and have worked in about 8 different positions many as a consultant which meant I was asked to support other companies that I did not choose to work for and some of them had ethics I did not agree with. So to a certain extent I recognise your dilema and problem.

Thankfully, for you, it is you that has the final call on this decision. You can choose to not work for this new company and turn down any interview and save yourself and your prospective employer a great deal of heartache.

The truth is you do NOT agree with their stated ethical position on abortion. And for the record I share your views in ths. Thequestion running through your head at the moment is will you be able to take the job and keep your views private? That is what are the chances of you having to counsel a pregnant woman who wants an abortion?

Well all I can say is if the company has this as a stated value, then it will happen sooner than later. And you will then be in a worse place than you feel right now, because you will have said you can work within the constraints when in truth you cannot.

Make the decision now. Look elswhere and move on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Stravinsk]

I typed an update, but the internet went out before it posted. I had a conversation with the supervisor and he clarified some things for me. Basically, their HR wrote the policy the way it's worded, so he's responsible for stating it that way. I can understand that. In practice, however, my role would be as it is with a number of other issues that youth could present with - being an objective voice in their own decision making process. That would mean that clinicians don't take either a 'pro' or 'con' position, but come alongside the client in making a decision on their own. Any number of things could come into play as well. If a youth is in supportive housing, they might have questions about having a child while in that environment, if they could stay in housing, connecting with their social worker about custody issues, family interventions, etc.

So where things look 'cut and dry' on the surface, it isn't always that way. And I won't deny that, whatever decision youth might make, they need all the support they can get.

Would you be able to unconditionally support a girl or woman if she made her own decision to end her pregnancy? And would you be able to present such an option to her in an unbiased way? Those are the two questions that you will need to answer.

What I have made bold and underlined in your quote (coupled with the wording of the policy as abortion being an "equally positive" option) is rhetoric that will be used to undermine your moral position should you choose to act on it in your role. IACOBVS's post further illustrates that you may have to make such a decision to support your client against your morals - by the wording of the policy and it's explanation given to you by your potential employer.

I think if you are honest with yourself you'll see that the policy, the explanation of it, and the weight of the ultimate decision of a client (in favor of abortion) introduces a double standard that you will be obligated to adhere to in your Advisor role should you take the position.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

The reality of counseling is that there are many decisions I'm called on to make in support of clients that go against my personal morals, values, and ethics. That's the nature of the work. So I can't act as if I didn't know this was part of the job. Making a change to doing youth work was a conscious decision I made about a year ago. It's something that really began to interest me, and if I was honest with myself, I know that this issue would be part of the work. So, aside from my personal views on the subject, youth who may have been through this, or are now, have probably been condemned enough. The other side, that no-one has chosen to acknowledge yet (and it does exist), are those youth who have decided to go through with having their child. The challenges are enormous. So I need to ask - what's more important, my values and ethics, or helping someone navigate those decisions and challenges? I think the bigger failure would be to violate a person's trust through abandonment because of my values.

 

[Stravinsk]

The reality of counseling is that there are many decisions I'm called on to make in support of clients that go against my personal morals, values, and ethics. That's the nature of the work. So I can't act as if I didn't know this was part of the job. Making a change to doing youth work was a conscious decision I made about a year ago. It's something that really began to interest me, and if I was honest with myself, I know that this issue would be part of the work. So, aside from my personal views on the subject, youth who may have been through this, or are now, have probably been condemned enough. The other side, that no-one has chosen to acknowledge yet (and it does exist), are those youth who have decided to go through with having their child. The challenges are enormous. So I need to ask - what's more important, my values and ethics, or helping someone navigate those decisions and challenges? I think the bigger failure would be to violate a person's trust through abandonment because of my values.

Sounds like you are already leaning toward a decision. The last statement especially indicates that.

I'm not in your position, but here's what I have had to come up against lately.

My mother has cancer. Prior to finding this out we were in agreement on many of the "orthodox" methods of treating it as being at the least unhelpful and at worst making the condition worse.

Since that time she has become involved with "cancer support groups". Now she says to me that "the main thing" she "keeps hearing" is that she has to "stay positive". This trite little thought filter has come to mean that "thinking positive about whatever treatment she is now doing is going to make it more effective."

I want to scream at her "Mother! Jump out of a plane without a parachute and see how much 'thinking positive' is going to help you!!"

Because of the brainwashing she has recently gotten, along with family influence (a husband and a brother who have not researched this at all and just do "whatever everyone else does" no matter how many people suffer needlessly and die) - she's made this an ultimatum.

"Son, support me in this or we cannot discuss this topic".

I told her I DO NOT support her choices. In doing this I am NOT abandoning her, NOR am I violating her trust. I am standing by what I believe and not allowing her to cow me - for what I sincerely believe to be HER benefit.

 

[ValleyGal]

"Son, support me in this or we cannot discuss this topic".

I told her I DO NOT support her choices. In doing this I am NOT abandoning her, NOR am I violating her trust. I am standing by what I believe and not allowing her to cow me - for what I sincerely believe to be HER benefit.

Maybe you have not violated her trust, but you sure likely broke her heart when she is already having a hard go of it. You added to her stress, making it all that much harder for her body to heal. How sad.

But your relationship with your mother is not a client/counsellor one. It's a familial one, not a professional one. There are laws, standards of conduct and codes of ethics that guide the client/counsellor relationship that don't guide a personal relationship. All that guides a personal relationship is your own conscience. If your own rules mean more to you than supporting your mother in her time of need, then I am glad you are not my son and I will pray for her that she will have others in her life whose support will counterbalance her broken heart at your words.

 

[Stravinsk]

Maybe you have not violated her trust, but you sure likely broke her heart when she is already having a hard go of it. You added to her stress, making it all that much harder for her body to heal. How sad.

Much like I might have added to the stress of someone under the delusion that they aren't going to fall once they get out of the plane...but...because of thinking, they can simply spread their arms and soar like a bird.

So yeah, I'll add to the dreaming jumper's stress ANY DAY than to comfort them with bs that is akin to murder. But hey, just as long as I don't break anyone's heart while I shove them out of the airplane or onto some railroad tracks, right? My mother's heart is not broken - she knows well where I stand.

But your relationship with your mother is not a client/counsellor one. It's a familial one, not a professional one. There are laws, standards of conduct and codes of ethics that guide the client/counsellor relationship that don't guide a personal relationship. All that guides a personal relationship is your own conscience. If your own rules mean more to you than supporting your mother in her time of need, then I am glad you are not my son and I will pray for her that she will have others in her life whose support will counterbalance her broken heart at your words.

1) The question in the OP is about sacrificing moral values - or the risk of doing so. So in essence the question asked by the OP is ALL ABOUT conscience. His conscience.

2) "My own rules" prevent me from saying to the mountaineer "when you get to the fork in the road, just take the left path and run as fast as you can" - when I happen to know that running off to the left path is going to see him fall to his death as it's a cliff face without a warning sign. This does not change if some group of people have convinced him otherwise.

Personally - I do not think the OP is all that strong in his belief. At the end of the day if he takes the job he will have to serve his employer and his client - which means - taking a positive stand towards abortion when his client decides that, and taking a positive stand towards having a child when his client decides that. That isn't really the role of a Councilor, in my opinion - it's the role of an Advisor until a strong decision is come to - then the Advisor status fades to a "yes man" status.

That's the truth of it - your digs about my mother and my relationship with her be damned.

 

[IACOBVS]

Yes. Pro-choice in the sense that one clinician cannot insert their values against abortion with a youth who may be considering it, just as another clinician cannot insert their values in favor of it with a youth who is considering having their child, or is considering adoption. Some Christians consider adoption against Christian values as well, or single-parent homes. There are actually a lot of 'nuances' behind their policy.That's what I was alluding to earlier about what seems "cut and dry" not being so at all, and why I really needed the time to consider this.

I agree. Take your time. You need to really know what you're getting yourself into.

 

[IACOBVS]

Sounds like you are already leaning toward a decision. The last statement especially indicates that.

I'm not in your position, but here's what I have had to come up against lately.

My mother has cancer. Prior to finding this out we were in agreement on many of the "orthodox" methods of treating it as being at the least unhelpful and at worst making the condition worse.

Since that time she has become involved with "cancer support groups". Now she says to me that "the main thing" she "keeps hearing" is that she has to "stay positive". This trite little thought filter has come to mean that "thinking positive about whatever treatment she is now doing is going to make it more effective."

I want to scream at her "Mother! Jump out of a plane without a parachute and see how much 'thinking positive' is going to help you!!"

Because of the brainwashing she has recently gotten, along with family influence (a husband and a brother who have not researched this at all and just do "whatever everyone else does" no matter how many people suffer needlessly and die) - she's made this an ultimatum.

"Son, support me in this or we cannot discuss this topic".

I told her I DO NOT support her choices. In doing this I am NOT abandoning her, NOR am I violating her trust. I am standing by what I believe and not allowing her to cow me - for what I sincerely believe to be HER benefit.

This is off-topic, but I would be more than happy to talk with you privately about this. My Mum had cancer ... and died. But her mindset wasn't helpful ... positive, etc... yet she died, and no one got to say good-bye, because in her head, she was going to live.

 

[IACOBVS]

Maybe you have not violated her trust, but you sure likely broke her heart when she is already having a hard go of it. You added to her stress, making it all that much harder for her body to heal. How sad.

But your relationship with your mother is not a client/counsellor one. It's a familial one, not a professional one. There are laws, standards of conduct and codes of ethics that guide the client/counsellor relationship that don't guide a personal relationship. All that guides a personal relationship is your own conscience. If your own rules mean more to you than supporting your mother in her time of need, then I am glad you are not my son and I will pray for her that she will have others in her life whose support will counterbalance her broken heart at your words.

!?!