Did Natasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 2030
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by 2bizE » Thu Apr 15, 2021 5:59 pm

jfro18 wrote:
Wed Apr 14, 2021 6:12 pm
I don't know much about Natasha -- is she an active, believing Mormon? I was under the impression that she was mentally out and trying to find a way to help the community.

This is mostly surprising to me because I don't think NHP has been trying to get people out of the church, so to discipline someone for providing sex advice is just insane.

The Mormon church's obsession with sex really is something to behold.
Natasha has a website called the Mormon Therapist. She is a licensed sex therapist and works with many people who have been broken from Mormonism. Her website has many great insights.
~2bizE

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by jfro18 » Thu Apr 15, 2021 6:52 pm

2bizE wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 5:59 pm
Natasha has a website called the Mormon Therapist. She is a licensed sex therapist and works with many people who have been broken from Mormonism. Her website has many great insights.
I listened to her MS interview today - I honestly can't believe they are being this stupid.

They pick her to discipline but someone like RFM, who is now fairly public with regards to identity, they don't bother with. None of it makes sense.

User avatar
wtfluff
Posts: 3022
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 3:20 pm
Location: Worshiping Gravity / Pulling Taffy

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by wtfluff » Thu Apr 15, 2021 7:24 pm

alas wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:11 pm
I could go on, but I will spare y’all from reading it.
Please go on.

Please?

Pretty Please?

(I always learn something new, if not many things new when you "go on.")
Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions. -Frater Ravus

Keep the company of those who seek the truth - run from those who have found it -Václav Havel

The Beauty of Gray

User avatar
deacon blues
Posts: 1471
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:37 am

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by deacon blues » Fri Apr 16, 2021 8:40 am

wtfluff wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 7:24 pm
alas wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 1:11 pm
I could go on, but I will spare y’all from reading it.
Please go on.

Please?

Pretty Please?

(I always learn something new, if not many things new when you "go on.")
Ditto :D
God is Love. God is Truth

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1819
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by alas » Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:08 am

Over on Wheat and Tares, Hawkgirl has a blog up about this and discussing how the church has always been kind of anti psychology. And, yes, the church leaders don’t like psychology. Ever since some early psychologist (*the* early psychologist, Freud himself) attacked religion because it is so sexually shaming, the church has figured that all people working in mental health are God hating atheists. So, they don’t like them or trust them. I read her article and thought, Yup, the church still doesn’t trust the whole field of psychology and I thought about commenting, but didn’t know what to say, because I could write three books and how to narrow it down to a short comment. Then that night, I have nightmares about how I was treated because I was a. Such an evil 11 yo that I “would seduce my own father.” (Yes, that was said to me, not by a priesthood leader, but by a bishop’s wife) b. That I was so horrible as to let it bother me and not be over it without any help, And c. That I was so selfish as to seek professional help and that I was wallowing in it. So, yes, I still have PTSD, not from the abuse itself, but from the uneducated anti psychology church leaders.

No, let’s back up to being damaged by YW lessons that were very sex shaming, the licked cupcake kind of lesson and the “you are walking porn attitude toward modesty that shames girls for even having a body that can be looked at in a sexual way. See, it is the girl’s fault if the boy has a sexual thought and it is rape victim’s fault they got raped because if had to be something about them that caused it.

The only problem I have with Natasha is she doesn’t go far enough in her criticism of the church and name names. She stays kinda sweet. The “apostle of the lord” who called young women “walking porn,” well HE has a bad porn problem. If he can’t look at a young woman and not see her as a child of God, but only see her sexual body, then the man has a big problem. He is a pornaholic. Has anyone ever dared tell him he is a disgusting dirty old man? I’ll bet not. But I was told by the church that I was a disgusting sex object from the time I was 10. I don’t care what the young woman is dressed like. Even if she is naked, all he should see is a child of God. No, he has trained his brain to see bare shoulders and think of sex. Men claim they are hard wired that way, but that is a lie. They are allowed to be that was. He probably spends a lot of time thinking of sex. See, there are two way to turn a female into a sexual object instead of a person. One is to purposely over emphasize the sexual appeal. But the most damaging kind is shame her for just looking female and emphasizing modesty in shaming ways, making her responsible for protecting men from her wicked evil body. When she is taught that she has to protect men from her tempting evil body, she internalized the message that she is evil. Can’t help it. If her body is so tempting and evil and she is supposed to control the male’s thoughts, but she can’t control those thoughts, it puts her in the same situation as the rape victim, having to repent of something she didn’t choose. And no matter how modestly she dresses, she is still female and men will see that and undress her in their minds, because they are taught that it is OK. Reverse the gender for a sec, and think of some 80 yo biddy telling teenaged boys they look too sexy. People would be horrified, dirty old lady. Women are not supposed to see a man’s sexuality and lust after it. But when a “religious” old geezer tells teen girls that they look too sexy, we call it general conference. We would see that the old grandma is obsessed with sex, but we can’t see it with the dirty old man? Because our society allows men to blame women for being female and looking female.

Misogyny is so built into the church that we don’t even see it. It is just the air we breath.

I had a girl in my ward growing up, so same YW lessons that I got. After two years of her being too terrified and shamed about sex that they were unable to consummate the wedding, her husband gave up and divorced her. Yeah, what she was taught at church about sex was harmful. But let’s excommunicate Natasha for saying that the church teaches harmful things about sex.



On the other side of this coin, counselors have been sued for telling people to follow religious teachings, and then the supper shamed masturbating kid commits suicide, or the gay kid commits suicide. So, teaching religion in therapy rather than using the ethical guidelines and best practice policies can be fatal to your career.

I had a social work professor who taught that you check your religion at the door before going into the counseling room. He had a way of criticizing the “predominant religion in this state” and taught that “most of you in this class are Mormon and you need to be aware of....” and “if you practice in this state, most of your clients will be Mormon so you need to be aware of....” and “don’t perpetuate the psychological damage ...” then one day, I found out he was a stake president... :o :shock: :lol:

Hawkgirl asks the question of if it is alright to treat the damaged individuals as individuals, or do we need to look at the system that does the damage. That was a very social work type question, because psychology treats the individual, while social work tries to look at and treat the individual in their environment. Look at the sick family of the child who got arrested for assault, not just the “bad kid”. And don’t treat the kid, and fix him, then send him right back to the same sick family that got him that way to start off with. Why so many drug treatment facility’s fail, they treat the druggy, then send them back into the system that “drove them to drink” in the first place. This is what Natasha is being exed for, pointing out the systemic problem, the sick system that is creating all these clients she is trying to fix.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1323
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Rob4Hope » Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:09 am

Good to know she is Netasha Helfer without the Parker.

Lots of comments about unhealthy sexual practices messing up marriages. It seems like every year or so NOM circles back to that topic. It just goes to show how much the church STILL invades people's bedrooms.

Years ago I read several of Netasha's post on her question to find the LDS position on masturbation. As I mentioned above, I believe her conclusion was "The LDS church has no position" (in so many words). Pretty much, what she probably found was a void of information. If you go back to the "little factory" talk from BKP, you start to get focus. And, nothing is said since, more or less.

So, the position? Well,...the current position is silence. The prior position?....don't fiddle with the "little factor" so it can go to sleep. Message?...the Church DOES have a position -- just 25 years old! And we all know how RARE it is for LDS leaders to clarify/correct prior teachings.

The TK Smoothie discussion is a case in point. Hilarious!

But, more seriously. If there are teachings that are evil, destructive, or false, wouldn't you think a transparent, responsible and accountable (gees,...that is a word that contradicts TSCC in just about every way) would make corrections? I mean, didn't JS make corrections ( insert sarcasm here) to the bible?

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1323
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Rob4Hope » Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:22 am

alas wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:08 am
I had a girl in my ward growing up, so same YW lessons that I got. After two years of her being too terrified and shamed about sex that they were unable to consummate the wedding, her husband gave up and divorced her.
This stuff happens, probably more often than you would think, and frankly, It MAKES ME ANGRY!

Purity and Passion are presented in ways that women are either a Celestial Madonna or a Slut. There is no middle ground.

People tend to forget that sometimes, sex FEELS GOOD! (or at least it should and could feel good -- though for many its a nightmare.)

There is making love, and then there is <<FILL IN THE BLANK>>. Two consenting adults who are not messed up because of stupid cult teachings get to FILL IN THE BLANK. And having sex for the pleasure of it is, IMHO, a pretty good reason to.\


The church has a great deal of culpability in destroying marriages and people.

PS. I am also aware of marriages that have disintegrated because of the Madonna/Whore dichotomy.

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Red Ryder » Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:59 am

“alas” wrote:This is what Natasha is being exed for, pointing out the systemic problem, the sick system that is creating all these clients she is trying to fix.
See this is her problem. The church is creating the disease so they (and only through them) can offer the cure.

Natasha is simply interfering with their model.

I’m extremely annoyed that the church gets away with this stuff.
Those who do not move do not notice their chains. —Rosa Luxemburg

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Mormorrisey » Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:18 am

Rob4Hope wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:09 am
Years ago I read several of Netasha's post on her question to find the LDS position on masturbation. As I mentioned above, I believe her conclusion was "The LDS church has no position" (in so many words). Pretty much, what she probably found was a void of information. If you go back to the "little factory" talk from BKP, you start to get focus. And, nothing is said since, more or less.

So, the position? Well,...the current position is silence. The prior position?....don't fiddle with the "little factor" so it can go to sleep. Message?...the Church DOES have a position -- just 25 years old! And we all know how RARE it is for LDS leaders to clarify/correct prior teachings.
Not to burst your bubble, Rob, but have you seen the Washington Post article on Natasha yet? Apparently Sauron's mouthpiece, the redoubtable church spokesman Eric Hawkins, clarified the church's position on the matter thusly:

"Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for the LDS Church, said in an email that the church does not comment on disciplinary matters. He wrote: “The Church teaches its members to be morally clean in every way, and that sexual feelings are given by God and should be used in ways He has commanded.”
He said that the church condemns pornography in any form, referring to its general handbook, and masturbation is considered immoral. “These are the principles that will be considered by the local leaders in this circumstance,” he wrote."


So I don't know what section of the handbook Hawkins is referencing, but these views on masturbation have NOT changed, according to Hawkins. Does he have any authority? Who the hell knows? This is just getting stupider and stupider every time I look at it.

Edit to add: Given what Hawkins has said here, that he had a prepared statement, I'm starting to think this is not just a stupid local leader being stupid. Once again, the church is drawing lines that they don't need to draw. And it will end as badly as the 2015 policy of exclusion debacle, especially when they reverse themselves in a few years because of the backlash regarding this stupid court o' love.
Last edited by Mormorrisey on Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Mormorrisey » Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:23 am

alas wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 10:08 am
Over on Wheat and Tares, Hawkgirl has a blog up about this and discussing how the church has always been kind of anti psychology. And, yes, the church leaders don’t like psychology.
That's a great article, and also what you have written here, alas. I think the most interesting question for hawkgirl, that she mentions in her article, and it goes for others like Jennifer Finlayson-Fife, who are more "active" Mormons than Natasha, is "are you worried about your church membership now?" I know you aren't worried about it, alas (wink, wink) but it's a great question for all active members who need to treat their patients ethically. And that's a great story you tell about the stake president who figured it out, and gave some great advice to up and coming therapists in Utah. This one is not going to just go away when they chop Natasha. This is going to resonate for a long time, regardless of what they do.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

User avatar
Fifi de la Vergne
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 8:56 am

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Fifi de la Vergne » Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:40 am

Mormorrisey wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:18 am
Edit to add: Given what Hawkins has said here, that he had a prepared statement, I'm starting to think this is not just a stupid local leader being stupid. Once again, the church is drawing lines that they don't need to draw. And it will end as badly as the 2015 policy of exclusion debacle, especially when they reverse themselves in a few years because of the backlash regarding this stupid court o' love.
The thing that stuck out for me in the WP article, which I must have missed elsewhere, is that Helfer is living in SLC now, but it's her former stake president who has brought the court. How does that work? If she's in SLC and he's in Kansas, how is he still her "local" leader? Also, her husband, whom she is in the process of divorcing, was a work colleague of said stake president.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Joy is the emotional expression of the courageous Yes to one's own true being.

User avatar
Rob4Hope
Posts: 1323
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 1:43 pm
Location: Salt Lake City -- the Motherland!!

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Rob4Hope » Fri Apr 16, 2021 12:25 pm

Mormorrisey wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:18 am
Not to burst your bubble, Rob, but have you seen the Washington Post article on Natasha yet? Apparently Sauron's mouthpiece, the redoubtable church spokesman Eric Hawkins, clarified the church's position on the matter thusly:

"Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for the LDS Church, said in an email that the church does not comment on disciplinary matters. He wrote: “The Church teaches its members to be morally clean in every way, and that sexual feelings are given by God and should be used in ways He has commanded.”
He said that the church condemns pornography in any form, referring to its general handbook, and masturbation is considered immoral. “These are the principles that will be considered by the local leaders in this circumstance,” he wrote."


So I don't know what section of the handbook Hawkins is referencing, but these views on masturbation have NOT changed, according to Hawkins. Does he have any authority? Who the hell knows? This is just getting stupider and stupider every time I look at it.
:lol:
So,...there is a Church position, through this guy "Hawkins"?

That is too funny (in a sarcastic and sorrowful way)

So, masturbation is considered immoral?.....oh boy, ripples will fly. Lots of people will be going to their bishop and confessing now, and the cycle of abuse starts all over again.

If this hit the Washington Post (I haven't looked) and the church is taking this stance, leaked from there, on masturbation, there will be press releases. Natasha's case just grew in notoriety.

Edit: It is the real deal:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion ... lsion-lds/

User avatar
Mormorrisey
Posts: 1165
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:54 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Mormorrisey » Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:50 pm

So I decided to comb through the Handbook to see what it says about masturbation. And you know what? It mentions it once. Once. And it is only mentioned in section 32.6.4.1, that having a council is not necessary for it. So how "immoral" is it, if you don't even need a membership council for it?

Not only that, but a leader won't have a council on pornography except for child pornography, and for the vaguely worded, "a council may be necessary for intensive and compulsive use of pornography that has caused significant harm to a member’s marriage or family," whatever the heck that means.

So just to clarify, if one is watching "normal" porn, whatever that is, and in "normal" and non-compulsory ways, whatever that is, and also masturbating to said porn, well, that's pretty clear, a membership council should not be called at all. So just exactly how "immoral" is this behaviour?

As with every doctrine and practice in the church, it's as clear as mud.
"And I don't need you...or, your homespun philosophies."
"And when you try to break my spirit, it won't work, because there's nothing left to break."

User avatar
Red Ryder
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:14 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by Red Ryder » Fri Apr 16, 2021 3:03 pm

I’ll start making my “Normalize Masturbation” protest signs for the upcoming October GC.

Free Willy!

Rubbing isn’t a Sin!
Make rubbing ok again?
Rub a dub dub, even in the tub!

Jesus was right handed!
Jesus said love yourself!
Don’t hate the spank!

Ensign Peak Spank Bank!
Mormon Moms for Masturbation!
Hmmm...
Those who do not move do not notice their chains. —Rosa Luxemburg

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1819
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by alas » Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:02 pm

Feminist Mormon Housewives and Exponent II have a letter to the stake president that kind of explains the ethics involved from the point of view of the counselor. No, a counselor using best practice will never encourage a client to leave the church, nor will they encourage them to stay in the church. They help them decide what THEY want to do and then support them in doing it. But from a religious perspective, they constantly encourage, pressure, lead, guide, steer, force. And can a religious leader even comprehend a neutral stance toward religion? Can they comprehend letting someone decide for themselves with no pressure either way? Can a religious leader see something like masturbation as possibly good and normally harmless? Or do they see sin?

Did I “encourage” anyone to leave the church, or encourage divorce, or masturbation, or, gasp, abortion, or homosexual relationships? No, not really. Did I ever suggest any of them as acceptable possibilities? Well, yes! Many times. I worked with battered women (and some battered men) and I worked with sexual abuse survivors. With sexual abuse, masturbation can help them regain a sense of control and ownership of their body and with battered women, divorce is often the best option. But I still did not “recommend” it. Just brought it up for discussion as an acceptable option. Did I act horrified or suggest they might be sinful? No. Did other clients assure a lesbian client they knew from support group, that “yes, Anna can accept you as gay, and she won’t judge you. Just try bringing it up and you’ll see.” And, “so what if she’s Mormon, she isn’t THAT kind of Mormon.” I even discussed abortion as an option a few times. I don’t even know what they decided. And I am pretty much against abortion and honestly had to keep my feelings out of it. Because as against abortion as I am, I think it is nobody’s decision but the pregnant woman.

What would really blow that stake president’s mind is that I had three clients who were nonmembers when I met them who investigated the church just because they had heard I was Mormon and found that I wouldn’t talk to them about Mormonism, so they found Mormon missionaries. One joined, the other two decided tithing was too much and too mandatory. And it was because I didn’t tell them what to do and how to do it, but let them be them. But that stake president would never comprehend that, because Mormons don’t really believe in free agency. They believe in forcing people to do “right.”

But by this stake presidents position, I did something horrible.

Oh, in one of those discussions, they specifically asked me my opinion on the church’s stand on the topic we were discussing. I did the usual of turning it back to get what they thought and they again asked what I thought. Kind of “is the church wrong on this?” I just said that in my opinion, the church is led by a bunch of old fuddy duddies. I guess I deserve excommunication for being a social worker.

This whole thing is a big can of worms and if the church has half a brain, they will put down the bomb and back away slowly.

User avatar
moksha
Posts: 3792
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:22 am

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by moksha » Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:52 pm

Yobispo wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:22 am
I pray it gets recorded and broadcast.
Outer Darkness is wise to this. They will probably demand to pat her down as she enters the courtroom.

Natasha could always try to make courtroom sketches of the prosecuting elders afterward:

Image
Good faith does not require evidence, but it also does not turn a blind eye to that evidence. Otherwise, it becomes misplaced faith.
-- Moksha

User avatar
blazerb
Posts: 1020
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 4:35 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by blazerb » Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:03 am

alas wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:02 pm
But that stake president would never comprehend that, because Mormons don’t really believe in free agency. They believe in forcing people to do “right.”

But by this stake presidents position, I did something horrible.
I hope this isn't too far off topic. When I was in the MTC, we were discussing free agency in the celestial kingdom. I held the position that there was free agency, but those in the celestial kingdom had progressed so that they just did what was right and there may be choices to be made anyway. Another missionary asserted that free agency could not be part of the celestial kingdom because sin was not allowed. I think most agreed with him. It seems that in Mormon thought free agency and sin are synonymous. I am quite certain that this SP can not comprehend that giving people room to make decisions could do anything other than lead them out of the church.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by jfro18 » Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:40 am

alas wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:02 pm
Oh, in one of those discussions, they specifically asked me my opinion on the church’s stand on the topic we were discussing. I did the usual of turning it back to get what they thought and they again asked what I thought. Kind of “is the church wrong on this?” I just said that in my opinion, the church is led by a bunch of old fuddy duddies. I guess I deserve excommunication for being a social worker.

This whole thing is a big can of worms and if the church has half a brain, they will put down the bomb and back away slowly.
This is going off on a different tangent, but when my wife and I were first having issues discussing the church I decided to see a therapist to talk to someone who had no idea about me to just figure out how to approach this.

At the time, DW wanted to see someone from LDS services so I asked around and was told that the people who work with LDS services will not just give a religious perspective to the therapy (which seems to go against all best practices), but will report the discussions back to the bishop as part of the agreement of the church handling the appointments.

Anyway, I was explaining that to my therapist and she seemed genuinely shocked that was happening, and when I explained the things in the church that bothered me she tried so hard to not give her opinion, but you could see it in her face. I don't think I was reading too much into it, but you could just see her do like a tiny head twitch or look up quickly when I'd say certain things that she couldn't believe was true.

In a lot of ways *that* made me feel better, because even though she wouldn't give an opinion on what she thought about the church's stuff, I knew she at least seemed shocked by it.

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1819
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by alas » Sat Apr 17, 2021 12:54 pm

jfro18 wrote:
Sat Apr 17, 2021 8:40 am
alas wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 9:02 pm
Oh, in one of those discussions, they specifically asked me my opinion on the church’s stand on the topic we were discussing. I did the usual of turning it back to get what they thought and they again asked what I thought. Kind of “is the church wrong on this?” I just said that in my opinion, the church is led by a bunch of old fuddy duddies. I guess I deserve excommunication for being a social worker.

This whole thing is a big can of worms and if the church has half a brain, they will put down the bomb and back away slowly.
This is going off on a different tangent, but when my wife and I were first having issues discussing the church I decided to see a therapist to talk to someone who had no idea about me to just figure out how to approach this.

At the time, DW wanted to see someone from LDS services so I asked around and was told that the people who work with LDS services will not just give a religious perspective to the therapy (which seems to go against all best practices), but will report the discussions back to the bishop as part of the agreement of the church handling the appointments.

Anyway, I was explaining that to my therapist and she seemed genuinely shocked that was happening, and when I explained the things in the church that bothered me she tried so hard to not give her opinion, but you could see it in her face. I don't think I was reading too much into it, but you could just see her do like a tiny head twitch or look up quickly when I'd say certain things that she couldn't believe was true.

In a lot of ways *that* made me feel better, because even though she wouldn't give an opinion on what she thought about the church's stuff, I knew she at least seemed shocked by it.
This was why right out of college, I knew I could not work for LDS Family Services. They violate real confidentiality by making the bishop part of the whole process and they don’t think they should be neutral toward the church.

But, ironically, I did my master’s internship at Catholic Family services. Almost a year working for them. Now, LDS FS would have had a problem with a Catholic. But Father F told me that Mormon’s strong emphasis on family and our “there is marriage, then there is temple marriage” was similar to their own, so my core values would be a good fit. He didn’t need a doctrinal match, but a core values match, because on any doctrinal issues, I was to refer them to him anyway. I had no problems because I know perfectly well how to say, “I think that is something you should talk to Father F about.”

But what Killed me about doing that was that in my own therapy, I was told, “I think this is a question better suited for your pastor.” Um, yeah, you don’t understand about Mormons. My “pastor” is a mathematics professor at the university in Austin. He doesn’t do well with touchy-feely stuff, and besides, I tried that and he told me I was selfish to be in counseling and not whatever the hell he thought I should be doing and that trying to fix my screwed up life was just wallowing in it.

And in the places where your counselor was reacting, I would have been open about my reaction, with something like, “is that really OK with you?” And then I would have dug deeper into how that made you feel. Even if it took me saying “I want to explore that a little more because I am not comfortable with a religion that___________.” Now, if it is honestly OK with you, then I support you with that in whatever way you need. But, see, I purposely went with social work because the “social” part of it focuses on sick environments, where psychology focuses more on the individual. See, I double majored as an undergrad, so I have a BS in both psychology and social work. The reason being that I took one class in social work and one in psych and happened on two very very good professors. The best in both departments and I wanted to learn more from both of them. It wasn’t till after I decided that with my military husband, I could not do the kind of research I would like because I would need to pick where I went and sorry, the Air Force picked where my husband went. So, if I was going to work in the trenches with people I wanted to do more of the environmental aspects rather than take people out of their environment, fix them, then send them back into their sick environment. Besides, the AF sent us to San Antonio and it has one of the best SW programs in the nation.

So, I always made clients look at their environment to see if it was making them crazy. And for some people Mormonism is toxic, while for others it is healthy. See, there is a difference between, “it is crazy but it doesn’t bother me.” And “it is crazy.” See, if a religion conflicts with your core values, then it isn’t your religion anyway. So, when I would find that kind of conflict, I would encourage them to explore it more and them let them decide if they want to change their core values or their religion.

I don’t know if this is making sense, but if not then ask.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Did Netasha Helfer-Parker get Exed?

Post by jfro18 » Sat Apr 17, 2021 1:09 pm

alas wrote:
Sat Apr 17, 2021 12:54 pm
And in the places where your counselor was reacting, I would have been open about my reaction, with something like, “is that really OK with you?” And then I would have dug deeper into how that made you feel. Even if it took me saying “I want to explore that a little more because I am not comfortable with a religion that___________.” Now, if it is honestly OK with you, then I support you with that in whatever way you need.
I think that's about what she did. She would kind of have that look like "are you serious" and then she would ask how that made me feel and how that impacted my marriage being in a mixed-faith marriage.

I've only talked to three people about the church that haven't ever been a part of it because it's such a weird thing for me, but when I have it's just amazing the reactions I get. The current issue with Natasha will probably let more and more people see just how backwards they still are if they're dumb enough to actually excommunicate her.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests