Against the tide

Local psychologist battles new McCarthyism

Posted by: Rhonda Robinson

Friday, November 17, 2006 12:57 PM

"I am an example of somebody who has been told that because he belonged to a group and because he is a Christian-he is a believer- that he is not qualified to compete in the market of ideas, and function in his profession." Dr. Michael Campion


Dr. Michael Campion, of Campion, Barrow, & Associates; a well known psychologist based in Champaign, has filed a civil rights action lawsuit against the city of Springfield in order to defend not only his constitutional freedoms, but his Christianity and his profession.

It began in the late spring, early summer of 2005, when a 15 year working relationship between Dr. Campion and the city of Springfield came to an abrupt end. Until that time, Dr. Campion had enjoyed a successful, professional relationship with the city, and provided an array of testing and assessment services for the Springfield police and fire departments--without the city expressing concerns of any kind.

Until, that is, two articles appeared in the Illinois Times that put Dr. Campion's private affiliation with the Illinois Family Institute and by default, his Christianity on trial in the court of public opinion–where a choice few, namely one mayor and a couple of councilmen, found him guilty by association.

What was he found guilty of? Conservatism and Christianity.

The judgment: You can't be a psychological screener with a conservative Christian belief system (they are biased and judgmental).

The first in the series of articles aimed at Dr. Campion was published in August of '04 by Dusty Rhoades-- ironically titled,: Psychologist who screens firefighters is leader with anti-choice, anti-gay group. A highly critical opinion piece that was skeptical of the testing results, comparing two applicants, one that passed and one that failed; making a point to imply the possibility of bias by injecting his personal value system as part of the process.

In keeping with her title "Partial disclosure," Ms. Rhoades neglected to disclose the fact that psychological assessments used for screening are not subjective to interpretation anymore than is an X-ray. Nor the fact that there are APA ethic's rules, licensing laws, the accepted standards for evaluating tests, not to mention accepted scientific standards for developing tests. Call me crazy, but I think that would be an important piece of information.

But Ms. Rhoades' narrow view and anemic knowledge of the process was also shared by some on the Springfield city board, who obviously thought it best to stick to the high road of political correctness, rather than actually following the facts.

Such as the fact that no one had complained of bias, or the fact that Dr. Campion's work had been investigated, and reviewed several times, which had always turned up glowing reports of the highest standards resulting in recommendations, never an indictment.

Be that as it may, the following spring Dr. Campion read in an article by the same author, this one titled,"The Last Straw" that his contract (which had been renewed a couple months prior) had been terminated and he had been replaced.

Rhoades gloated that it was the Illinois Times that had "revealed" Campion as a leader of a group of conservative "activists"- which was the "last straw" for some councilmen.

Rhoades went on to quote an alderman who boasted that as soon as the article appeared he told the Mayor to find a new psychologist for the police and fire departments, saying "Hey, this guy's gotta go&He's out of touch with the mainstream."

The alderman went on to admit that it was purely ideological and political discrimination when he stated, "He has an absolute right to his conservative views, and we have an absolute right to change reviewers."

Dr. Campion was fired on the spot.

No explanations were given, nor was there an opportunity for rebuttal, nor his phone calls returned.

Dr. Campion was replaced by another psychologist; a psychologist with higher qualifications?

No.

The only thing noteworthy for print was that an investigation produced "no political affiliations" and that he enjoyed creative writing, and had written short stories about baseball and hummingbirds.

This obviously was an important point for them.

As wrong, and illegal as Dr. Campion believed Springfield's actions to be, he did not pursue a legal course at first. However, he has since found that the damaging remarks left unchallenged, have been used as ammunition by activists in Minneapolis, Minnesota to prompt that city to fire him as well.

So here we are--America 2006. Where a soft spoken gentleman, who has lead an accomplished professional life as a psychologist for 32 years, has done psychological screening for over a hundred police and fire departments, is no longer considered mainstream because he is a Christian with traditional views, and where a public official can publicly stomp on his first amendment rights without a public outcry.

I have blogged this story more than once. There is a couple of reasons for this. Many people watching the case have called it a landmark case, stating if Springfield's decision is allowed to stand, it will severely affect the free exercise of psychology across the United States.

But I think it will do more than that. I believe it could usher in a new McCarthyism, where Christians are goaded into silence and freedom of speech will be reserved only for those with the correct agenda.

Comments

Previous Entries

• 6/6/2008
  How do you explain the unthinkable?
• 4/25/2008
  In the Mother Hood-- a place to go to laugh at yourself
• 3/13/2008
  California court rules home schooling illegal
• More…