The Memphis, Tenn.-based Queer Action Coalition reported Sept. 22 that the exgay live-in “ministry” Love In Action had recruited unnamed antigay lawmakers to assist in its battle to stay open and, if possible, to use its religious affiliation to bypass accountability under laws ensuring the quality and safety of programs for the mentally ill.
But the QAC based its report about the lawmakers on a message from an unidentified individual. The report remains unsubstantiated.
Today, AP (via the Southern Voice) reports that Love In Action has been granted until Sept. 30 to obtain a license for its mental health programs. The Washington Blade and 365gay.com offer similar reports.
The Washington Blade quotes one expert who suggests that Love In Action’s claim for an exemption may hold merit.
Jeffrey Schaler is professor in the Department of Justice, Law and Society at American University and editor of Current Psychology. According to the Blade,
[Schaler] he believes that, generally, religious providers of mental health supportive living environments should be exempt from state regulation.Schaler said courts have ruled that therapeutic activities such as 12-step programs and psychotherapy, “look like religions” in that they occupy a central role in a person’s life, offer tenets to guide one’s daily life, and offer discipline where certain rituals are present.
Efforts to reclassify 12-step and psychotherapeutic programs as religions may complicate, if not obfuscate, the issue.
Peterson Toscano, former live-in participant in Love In Action, refocuses attention on LIA’s marketing and counseling, which emphasize clinical language and pseudo-clinical exercises, not mere religious prayer.
In his article Religious Hubris of LIA, Toscano recounts episodes in which LIA staffers’ reckless or negligent therapeutic behaviors endangered clients’ lives. Commenters formerly affiliated with Love In Action substantiate Toscano’s assertions.
In What’s Next for LIA? Not So Simple, Toscano conjectures that LIA will push hard for loopholes — and political friends — to remain in business. Whether LIA’s leadership learns to conduct its therapeutic programs in a more accountable and reputable fashion remains to be seen.
What Others Say:
Earlier reaction from PFLAG
Regardless of whether this facility is religious or therapeutic, it still has to comply with regulations regarding fire safety, food service, dispensing medication, etc. I don’t know how TN works it, but here in FL, the local fire marshall can close down a state prison if it isn’t in compliance.
I think it’s high time that everyone stop viewing a religious exemption from some laws as an exemption from ALL laws.
This is ridiculous: “We’re a religious organization, so we don’t have to comply with this law – if you make us, you’re persecuting us.” If a school didn’t comply with health, curriculum, or fire safety standards, and claimed a religious exemption, do you think this would stand up in even the most conservative court?
It’s time we all (and I mean society at large) stop allowing religious nuts to walk all over our laws in the name of freedom of religion.
I’m watching this LIA/R thing with trepidation.
On one hand, I’d like to see them shut down. On the other, I would hate for Tennessee to overstep its bounds and restrict their religious freedoms.
Once a secular government becomes comfortable determining what is and what is not acceptable religious practice, they tend not to rein themselves in. And, quite frankly, as my religious beliefs are not in the majority (especially in Tennessee) I don’t think I, and those who believe like me, would benefit from that mindset.
I think the best result from this is one of two things. Either:
1. LIA/R is obstinate and refuses to comply with law and is shut down. The media correctly determines the cause to be something dangerous to the public like housing mentally disturbed patients without adequate safe-guards, illegal distribution of meds, etc. The public recognizes that the cause for the shut down was purely based on public protection.
2. LIA/R cleans up its act and remains open. The administration recognizes that they are in the spotlight and ceases some of the more egregious actions. They find some folks to participate who are trained in psychology and will at least recognize that some of their procedures are destructive and potentially lethal.
However, I suspect that they will simply meet minimum requirements for a month or so and go back to they way they were. I hope I’m wrong.
Thank you Phil, that’s what I’ve been thinking. I’m not a legal expert, and frankly don’t really get why religion should be except from the law at all, and certainly don’t see how they can be above the law in a (supposedly) secular state.
When a person makes any claims that they have a cure for whatever ails you.
They have to have standards of care that the OTHERS who cure it also comply with.
Psychiatrists and psychologists have far more common, organic and clinical issues to handle.
There also have to be standard records of the efficacy of their care or cure rate.
This way they’ll know and have empirical data and proof that their methods in fact are really working.
When confronted with quality control groups, they have to come up with the records that the work they are doing, is doing it’s work.
RT or CT groups (oro individual doctors) make claims, but are not subject to serious demands for the proof.
The religious angle, brings this discipline down to one of complying with an intangible entity.
Failure of the client will be blamed on the client’s lacks or weaknesses.
Usually, when a therapy is working-the therapis reinforce the client’s strengths and encourages them. Attacking the CHARACTER of their client is indeed a no no.
When it comes to homosexuality, RT, or CT isn’t about attacking the substance of what a gay person does from day to day or how they function (when there are no other issues involved), but an attack on their very character.
This is the clear opposite of what those in the mental health community do.
The RT/CT supporters work in opposition by not acknowleging the importance of FUNCTIONING in a gay person.
Most people in need of mental health care and counseling do so or are compelled to because they are not functioning-.
LIA/R, Exodus, et al…doesn’t make this important distinction.
Religious discipline is a set up and it’s mostly unregulated.
But we can see with our own eyes often how emotionally invested a person can be with their faith, and self destruct on that too.
Religious disciplines should require regulation when dealing with vulnerable people.
Suicide bombers are but one extreme. Being religious doesn’t mean you can’t be dangerous.