advertisement

Clarification deserves dominant placement

Thursday, May 3, 2007 | 12:00 a.m. CDT; updated 3:19 a.m. CDT, Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Thursday, April 27th’s edition of the Missourian ran a piece titled “Changes Afoot for Diversity Bill,” which discussed the Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act, also known as House Bill 213. The following passage is excerpted from the article. It states:

“Brooker, who graduated from Missouri State University in May, said that in a policy class she was required to write a letter advocating on behalf of gay couples who wish to adopt children. She completed the entire assignment, but would not sign the letter because she said it conflicted with her religious beliefs. For that, her grade was dropped.”

Friday, April 28th’s print edition of the Missourian then ran a clarification which stated simply that “Emily Brooker was required to sign a document agreeing to abide by the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics.”

Given that the movement for House Bill 213 is predicated on an alleged coercion to sign “a letter advocating on behalf of gay couples who wish to adopt children,” it would seem appropriate, if not imperative, that the clarification to a “document agreeing to abide by the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics” be featured more prominently. Moreover, a story which explains, or exposes, the origin of this confusion made not only by the Missourian, but apparently in the press at large, would greatly benefit the reading and voting public.

Editor’s note: To read the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics, go to socialworkers.org/pubs/code/code.asp.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Philip Schultz May 9, 2007 | 1:42 a.m.

Ms. Brooker and all social work students sign the National Association of Social Workers’ Code of Ethics when they are accepted into the program. Because the professors indicated that she did not follow the code on diversity, she had to sign it again. The lawsuit said that the professors did not follow the Code. Numerous statements by the national groups have said that there are conservative Christians in the association and the professional code would not want them to lessen the gap between their professional and private beliefs. It appears that she knew the Code!

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements