09/02/2025
I hope you never find yourself in need of this information but, just in case...
IN THE MATTER OF THERAPEUTIC CHOICE UNDER UK LAW: THE RIGHT TO BIBLICAL COUNSELLING AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SECULAR PSYCHOTHERAPY
I. Introduction
This submission respectfully presents the legal, professional, and ethical justifications for permitting a petitioner or respondent, when ordered by the court to receive psychotherapy, to exercise their right to choose a Biblical Counsellor rather than a secular therapist.
In considering this matter, it is essential to recognise that faith-based therapy is a legally protected option under UK law, that Biblical Counselling serves the same fundamental function as psychotherapy, and that compelling a Christian to receive secular therapy against their beliefs would violate religious freedoms enshrined in the Equality Act 2010 and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
II. The Legal Basis for the Right to Biblical Counselling
(A) Protection Under the Equality Act 2010
• Religion and belief are ‘protected characteristics’ under the Equality Act 2010, which safeguards an individual’s right to practice and receive services that align with their faith.
• Christian clients have a legal right to receive faith-based therapy rather than secular psychotherapy if they believe the latter contradicts their worldview.
• Courts cannot compel an individual to accept treatment that conflicts with their religious convictions—just as they cannot force a Jewish, Muslim, or Hindu person to engage in therapeutic practices contrary to their faith.
(B) Legal Precedents Supporting Religious Autonomy
Several cases affirm the right of individuals to practice and receive religiously aligned services:
• McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2010] – established that Christian practitioners cannot be forced to adopt secular therapeutic models against their beliefs.
• Eweida v British Airways [2013] – confirmed that Christian expression and belief are protected under UK law.
• Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – protects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, ensuring individuals are not forced into ideological frameworks that contradict their faith.
🚫 For a court to mandate a Christian individual to receive secular therapy while denying the legitimacy of faith-based Biblical Counselling would be a breach of religious freedoms under UK and European law.
III. Biblical Counselling as a Credible Equivalent to Secular Psychotherapy
(A) The Meaning of ‘Psychotherapy’
• The word ‘psychotherapy’ originates from the Greek ψυχή (psuche – soul) and θεραπεία (therapeia – healing or care).
• Biblical Counselling is entirely consistent with this definition, as it provides soul care grounded in Scripture, prayer, and Christian wisdom—just as a secular psychotherapist applies psychological theories.
• If a Buddhist or Islamic therapist were to offer a belief-aligned approach, courts would likely recognise it as a legitimate alternative. The same recognition must be extended to Biblical Counselling.
(B) Professional Standards & Competency of Biblical Counsellors
The selected Biblical Counsellor in this case is ###, who possesses the following credentials:
✔ BA (Hons) Theology and Religious Studies with Medical Ethics.
✔ PGCE with Child Psychology.
✔ Level Four Diploma in Christian Counselling, CAPCB Accredited.
✔ Former Accredited Member of BACP and ACC and previously on the Accredited Register of HCPC but withdrew for faith-based reasons.
✔ Continuous CPD, including courses in ACT, CBT, Mindfulness, Solution-Focused Therapy, Family Therapy, and Person-Centred Therapy.
✔ 3,000+ hours of clinical practice over 15 years.
✔ Regular professional supervision.
✔ Adheres to the ethical framework of the ‘Biblical Counseling Coalition’ and the moral and biblical ethics of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.
🚫 For a court to dismiss Biblical Counselling while recognising secular therapy with similar credentials would be an inconsistent and unfair double standard.
IV. Ethical Considerations: Client Autonomy & Freedom of Choice
(A) The Principle of Informed Consent in Therapy
All major UK counselling and psychotherapy regulatory bodies (BACP, UKCP, HCPC) uphold the principle that:
• Therapy should be client-led, meaning individuals must have the right to choose a model that aligns with their values and beliefs.
• Informed consent is essential—a client cannot be forced into a therapeutic model they do not accept.
🚫 Compelling a Christian client to receive secular therapy while rejecting their right to Biblical Counselling is an unethical breach of client autonomy.
(B) Why Secular Therapy May Not Be Suitable for a Christian Client
A devout Christian may find secular therapy ineffective or even harmful if it:
❌ Contradicts biblical principles about sin, suffering, and personal identity.
❌ Encourages self-reliance rather than dependence on God.
❌ Promotes moral or ideological frameworks that conflict with Christian teachings.
❌ Neglects the spiritual healing component, which is central to their psychological well-being.
🚫 For a court to insist that only secular therapy is valid would be to impose an ideological framework on the client, violating their right to faith-based care.
V. Conclusion: The Right to Choose Faith-Based Therapy
For a Christian client, Biblical Counselling is not merely an alternative to secular psychotherapy—it is a superior option because it aligns with their spiritual, emotional, and psychological needs.
🚫 To deny the validity of Biblical Counselling while insisting that secular therapy is the only legitimate option would be:
❌ A violation of religious protections under the Equality Act 2010.
❌ An unfair rejection of a legitimate faith-based mental health model.
❌ A breach of client autonomy and the ethical principle of choice.
Final Request to the Court
✔ The court is respectfully urged to uphold the petitioner/respondent’s right to choose Biblical Counselling as an acceptable equivalent to secular psychotherapy.
✔ Failure to allow this choice would amount to religious discrimination and a breach of legal protections for faith-based practice.
✔ A fair and just ruling should permit the individual to receive faith-aligned therapy in accordance with their conscience, beliefs, and well-being.
Respectfully submitted for consideration.
