Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pastoral Counseling Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee opens discussion on clarifying exemptions for pastoral counseling; staff to continue research
Summary
The committee reviewed research on pastoral-counseling exemptions, heard stakeholder input, and directed staff to continue researching statutory language options to clarify when faith-based counseling is exempt from licensure.
The Policy and Advocacy Committee reviewed staff research Jan. 24 on how California’s licensure exemptions apply to pastoral or faith-based counseling and directed staff to continue developing options to clarify statutory language.
Sarita Russo, the board’s special projects and research analyst, summarized comparative language from other states and academic definitions. Russo noted that current board law exempts individuals performing counseling services as part of their pastoral or professional duties but that the board has received complaints when unlicensed individuals appear to provide psychotherapy under the guise of pastoral counseling, sometimes charging fees or operating separate private practices. Russo cited a 2005 definition from the American Association of Pastoral Counselors: a pastoral counselor is a clergy member who has graduate training in both religion and behavioral science and whose clinical practice integrates psychological and theological disciplines; that definition also notes state licensure is required to practice independently in clinical settings.
Committee members raised constitutional concerns and enforcement limits. Christy Shields, legal counsel, explained the central tension: “the problem area is knowing where that line is when there's a practice that's faith based, versus someone actually acting in the capacity of a licensee for remuneration.” Counselers and committee members noted examples that have prompted complaints, including situations where individuals use private offices, collect fees, or otherwise operate like private practitioners while claiming pastoral exemptions.
Public commenters including Shanti Ejron of CAMFT said the association supports clarifying exemption language to protect consumers while avoiding regulation of religious exercise. Committee members agreed additional research and drafting of possible statutory options is needed; staff will return with options for further committee discussion. No formal vote was taken on statutory amendments at this meeting.
