Ethics of Online Counseling
by Kathryn DonevWe live in a fast-paced society where virtually everything is just a click away. With the click of a button, you can pay your bills or even have merchandise shipped to your front door without ever leaving the comforts of home. The Internet has made this and much more a reality. The number of Internet users today is reported at 972,828,001, which is 15.2% of the world’s population and the percentage of population usage growth during 2000-2005 was reported at 169.5% (Internet World Stats, 2005). As the number of Internet users across the globe continues to soar, more and more resources are becoming accessible online. The possibilities of services that can be offered on the Internet are endless. Today, one can even receive online professional services such as counseling.
Online counseling is a relatively new service. Therefore, there currently exists limited research to support or disconfirm its effectiveness. The long-term ramifications of such an experience are yet unknown. There are many concerned with the ethical dilemmas associated with online counseling. Below I will briefly explore the ethical issues centered around online counseling, beginning with a definition of a traditional counseling relationship:
A traditional counseling relationship is an interpersonal relationship between a client and counselor in which the counselor provides the client a reflection of the client’s self in a safe atmosphere in which the client feels comfortable enough to completely relay information to the counselor in order to gain order over personal conflicts.
Confidentiality:
The first and most obvious ethical dilemma with rendering mental health services over the Internet is one of confidentiality and privacy. The Internet is an open network and therefore is not secure. Consequently, when communicating through an insecure source one cannot be completely guaranteed that what is being revealed in a counseling relationship remains only in that relationship.
Because the Internet is not secure, there are numerous opportunities for an invasion of privacy. Such could occur if one were receiving counseling while at the work place where his or her email is subject to being read because it is considered company property. Other possibilities include, but are not limited to, that another could access confidential emails intentionally by eavesdropping or unintentionally if information was misdirected and intercepted.
Identification:
Another ethical issue associated with online counseling involves client and counselor identification. Without being able to confirm the identity of a client during each interaction, one cannot be certain of who is being counseled. The danger in this circumstance is that one could easily misrepresent him or herself and the counselor could be mislead to believe that he or she is counseling a particular individual when in fact this may not be the case. If this were to happen, confidential information could be unintentionally divulged to a third party.
Additionally, if the client were to misrepresent his or her own identity, for instance their sex or ethnicity, this could be just as damaging and could hinder the counseling process. If a counselor does not fully know with whom he or she is working, then the story which is being revealed by the client cannot appropriately be put into context, thus resulting in misinterpretation of what the client is communicating.
Virtual Relationship:
One of the most common negative results of interacting online is the phenomenon of being in a virtual relationship. Both the counselor as well as the client are in a sense unreal, they are simply “cyber-beings” as the author likes to describe them. Being in a virtual relationship causes an individual to have no sense of commitment to the counseling process. The client is simply writing another email via a keyboard and has minimum personal connection to the counselor.
Due to the lack of a personal relationship with the counselor, a client may be more easily offended by the advice that is given in an online counseling session. A client may feel that a cyber-being has no right to become so personal. If this is the case, then a client may also be more apt to end the relationship either temporarily or permanently by simply clicking a button.
The first and foremost responsibility of a counselor is to protect the welfare of his or her client. Yet, if one is counseling a virtual person then it is nearly impossible to be able to ensure the client’s safety. A counselor does not even truly know whom they are counseling or the location of the client’s residence. With this being the case, a counselor cannot intervene if a client is a danger to him or herself or others. A counselor’s hands are tied when it comes to his or her “Duty to Warn.”
Dishonesty:
As a result of communicating over an insecure source to a cyber-being, a client receiving online services may not be willing to be straightforward about all information. Additionally, when information is shared with a lack of commitment to the counseling process this could lead the client to actually falsify information. Not only is there a danger that a client might be misleading or may even lie, but there is also the risk that a client could intentionally leave out parts of his or her story. A client may feel the need to be deceitful due to the fact that he or she may fear a breach of confidentiality or simply feel no responsibility to be honest because no personal relationship exists between counselor and client. If this is the case, then the counselor cannot work at full capacity because of a lack of all the pieces of the client’s history.
Dishonesty leads to confusion which makes the counseling process difficult if not impossible. If a client were able to be assured that what is said would stay only between counselor and client, then there would be more freedom to be completely honest. Also, if a client were in a face-to-face relationship, they may perhaps feel more of an obligation to be upfront.
Lack of Nonverbals:
Nearly 94 percent of all communication is nonverbal. We communicate with our facial expressions, posture, eye contact and so forth. Needless to say, reading nonverbals is an essential element of counseling. If one is being counseled online, these nonverbals are unobservable and such is detrimental to the counseling process. Nonverbals which cannot be observed during an online session are nervous behaviors, whether eye contact is maintained, angle and distance of body in relationship to the counselor, etc. Also, a client may be typing content which appears to be uplifting, but at the same time may be crying. Conversely, a client may be typing distraught messages but may be laughing while doing so. Such is evident of inappropriate affect and is a good indicator of possible mental diagnoses.
Abandonment Issues:
Another responsibility of the counselor is to not abandon a client. Yet, abandonment may be impossible to avoid when counseling occurs online due to the instability of the Internet. Communication could be hindered because of technology failures or glitches or as a result of a poor Internet connection.
If a relationship is suddenly ended for any reason, it would be almost, if not, impossible for a counselor to get back in touch with his or her client due to the fact that in an online counseling relationship the client is anonymous in most of the cases; thus making abandonment impossible to avoid. Furthermore, if a client were to abruptly leave a counseling session after threatening to harm him or herself or others, then not having the ability to protect your client would be the ultimate case of abandonment.
Conclusion:
There appears to be many “ifs” in the ethical dilemma of online counseling and not enough certainty. “If” we as counselors could guarantee the privacy of our clients, “if” we could make certain of who we are counseling, “if” our client is completely truthful and “if” we were guaranteed they would not terminate before a session is over, then there would be little debate over whether online counseling should be attempted. Nevertheless, as of now, the “ifs” do exist.
Counseling, whether online or in person, involves much responsibility. When counseling an individual, you are placed in a position where you are a major influence in that person’s life. A counselor holds much control over the mental health of another. If Internet counseling is attempted, it should only be done by a competent professional who is well-educated in the field and should only be done via secure websites or with an encryption technological e-mail communication application.Counseling online is a great responsibility as is counseling an individual face to face. As well, such a relationship should be treated with the highest ethical professionalism. Regardless of that an online client is communicating in a virtual world, his or her problems are still very much real.
Reference:
Internet World Stats (2005). Usage and Population Statistics, downloaded from http://www.Internetworldstats.com/stats.htm on 12/2/05. 10 a.m.
Pomacs and Macedonians
Both groups represent special cases in terms of history, magnitude, and impact on political life. More significant are the Bulgarian Muslims (‘Pomaks’) because of their number and ‘borderline’ position between the Bulgarian majority, with which they share a common mother tongue, and the Turkish minority whose religion they profess. Bulgarian Muslims are ethnic Bulgarians who were converted to Islam during the Ottoman yoke. Their number was approximately 20,000 immediately after restoration of the Bulgarian state in 1878, and by the 1920’s reached 88,000. The sharp increase in figures between 1910 and 1920 was due to re-integration of Bulgaria with newly liberated territories in the Rhodopes and Rila regions. Present day their number is estimated between 200,000 and 280,000. In spite of their ethnic origin, Bulgarian Muslims’ historical fate is identical in many respects to that of other Muslim groups. Bulgarian Muslims have been subject to influences for assimilation in both possible regards. On one hand, study of Turkish language has been stimulated in order to integrate all Muslims into Bulgarian society as a whole. The result is that the Turkish language is perceived as a mother tongue by some 6% of community members.
The issues of ‘Macedonians’ are not any less complicated or controversial. One thesis defines them as a regional community based on the argument that they are an Orthodox population speaking a Bulgarian dialect in common with Bulgarian history, traditions, and values. Based on the right to self-determination, a contrary thesis defines them as a separate ethno-cultural community. Both views have political expression in the activities of the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization -VMRO (a party seated in Parliament), and the United Macedonian Organization – OMO Ilinden (an unrecognized and unregistered separatist movement). Bulgarian policy towards ‘Macedonians’ has swayed between two extremes. In the 1940’s, much support was given to the idea of a socialist-oriented Balkan Federation (to includes all Balkan states and thus to resolve every and each ethnic and religious problem in the area). The population of the Pirin district bordering FRY Macedonia and Greece was stimulated, even forcibly, to identify itself as ‘Macedonians’. According to the 1956 census, 187,789 Bulgarians declared themselves as ‘Macedonians’. Later on, the policy altered sharply, and ‘Macedonians’ disappeared from official statistics. They have not turned up there till today.
Roma Community in Bulgaria
The third largest ethnic and cultural group in the country is the Gypsies (or Roma). According to the last census, their number is 313,396. Analysts insist that these figures should be handled carefully because, as they say, 30% of the Gypsies prefer to declare external ethnic self-identification. Their larger part is from the Muslim Gypsy circles that present themselves as Turks; a part of the Christian Gypsies identify themselves as Bulgarians, and a third small part – as Wallachs (Romanian origin). The variety of empirical references of self-identification is manifested in regard to both the ethnic adherence and denomination, and to the language. Most Gypsies speak more than one language at home, the most used being the Gypsy language (67%), followed by Bulgarian (51%), and Turkish (34%). The situation of the Roma population in the country is extremely complicated. Their living conditions are more than poor. Despite the fact the at the end of 1970’s about 15,000 Roma families obtained long-term, low-interest loans to construct homes, a lot of them are still living in poor quarters resembling ghettos. The Roma child mortality rate is much higher than that of the Bulgarians: 240 per 1,000 versus 40 per 1,000, and some diseases like tuberculosis is three times more frequent. The degree of unemployment is three times higher than the national average. The Roma community is characterized by a lower level of education, which makes its representatives less competitive. There are strong prejudices against the Gypsies shared by the Bulgarian majority and other major minority groups. Unfortunately, the media and especially some nationalistic-oriented newspapers play a considerable role in reproducing and expanding these negative attitudes by emphasizing that Gypsies have a higher crime rate than other groups.
Turkish Minority in Bulgaria
The Turks are the largest minority group and at the same time the one with the highest degree of ethnic consciousness. They are basically concentrated in two regions – in northeastern Bulgaria and in the Rhodopes region at the Turkish frontier. The Turkish population is mostly rural: 68 out of 100 people live in villages and 32 in cities. The Turkish community in Bulgaria is conditioned by two opposite factors: a birth-rate higher than the national average and numerous, massive emigration waves. The first emigration of Turkish people occurred after Liberation from the Turkish yoke. In the 1878-1912 period, Bulgaria saw the exodus of 350,000 Muslims (Turks, Bulgarian Muslims, Circassians, and Tartars). Roughly 100,000 of them had emigrated by 1884, 250,000 after unification of Eastern Romenlia and the Bulgarian Principality from 1885 till World War I. Until 1934, the average annual number of emigrants was 10,000, and after the nationalistic coup d’etat in 1934 it became 20,000. The next massive wave of emigration occurred at the beginning of the 1950’s: 155,000 persons. Another 115,000 left the country after the signing of the Bulgarian-Turkish Agreement on reuniting separated families in 1968. The emigration peak was in 1989-1992 when more than 300,000 left the country.
Ethnic Minorities in Bulgaria
The country of Bulgaria was established in 681 A.D. on the Balkan Peninsula. Through the centuries of its existence, ethnic and religious groups have crossed its territory, reforming its borders and creating a multicultural context where more than 100 languages and dialects are spoken. Today the Bulgarian people live along with several ethnic minorities in the clash between Christianity, Muslim and Judaism.
Bulgaria could be referred to as a country of emigration, since there were several major migration waves mostly toward Turkey during the 20th century. Nevertheless, the population’s ethnic composition remains relatively homogeneous, 85.7% being Bulgarians, yet characterized by ethnic and religious diversity among the rest of its population. The two major ethnic groups are Turks and Gypsies, which represent 9.4% and 3.7% of the Bulgarian nation. The number of Jews has decreased tangibly both in absolute and relative figures due to a massive emigration of about 45,000 people to Israel in 1848. It is worth mentioning that Bulgaria is one of the few European countries which preserved its Jewish community during the World War II. Not a single Jew from Bulgaria was deported to Nazi concentration camps.
As regards religion and language, Orthodox Christianity and Bulgarian are the most widespread ones. The huge majority of Bulgarians (and around 60% of Gypsies plus 1% of ethnic Turks), declares adherence to the Christian cultural tradition. The second significant religion is Islam, professed by most Turks, all Bulgarian Muslims, and 39% of the Gipsy/Roma population. All Bulgarians speak their mother tongue. Almost the same is true for the Turks who speak Bulgarian as a second language beside Turkish (one third of their families even speak Bulgarian at home).
Purpose in the Midst of Chaos
by Kathryn Donev
The manner in which God works is unexplainable and incomprehensible to the human mind. His ways are not our ways. Yet, ultimately in the midst of what appears to be chaos or random acts, His ways are always immaculately planned and in perfect order such that design by man would be impossible. Read more
Protestant Revival in Bulgaria
On November 10, 1989, a day after the border between East and West Berlin opened, the Bulgarian Communist leader of over 30 years resigned and change toward democracy began (Lalkov, 62-63). For those of us, who lived in the final days of Communist Bulgaria, the Fall of the Wall was a modern-day miracle. Emerging from severe Communist persecution and surrounded by the Balkan religious wars, the country of Bulgaria suddenly experienced a time of liberation. Before our very eyes, began a national spiritual revival despite a collapsing economy and political insecurity. Read more
Pentecostalism in Bulgaria
Fifteen years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Bulgarian Protestant movement claims over 100,000 members. This number is almost ten times higher than a 1975 German study which presented proof of approximately 13,000 Protestants in Bulgaria (Klaus-Detlev Grothusen, Bulgarien, (Guttingen: 1990, p. 564). In the 1980s, this number had grown to 55,000, as this was the time when many Western missionaries were able to visit Bulgaria and gather information about the underground churches outlawed by the Communist Regime (http://www.gospelcom.net/lcwe/LOP/lop19.htm).
Although international reports confirmed the existence of over 100,000 Protestants in Bulgaria as early as 1994 (GCN – EP: Sofia, Bulgaria, June 8, 1994), the Bulgarian National Statistical Institute counted only 42,000 Protestant believers in Bulgaria for the 2002-2003 National Census. This number was detested recently by Dr. Stephen Penov, a professor at the Sofia University and a member of the Bulgarian Academy of Science, who has served as a Parliament expert on human rights and faith confessions. Dr. Penov stated that the members of classical Protestant denominations in Bulgarian exceeded 100,000 with over 60,000 identified as classical Protestants and a membership in the new Protestant denominations of approximately 50,000 (Religia BG, 31 July, 2004 http://www.religiabg.com/?p=oldnews&id=1514). During the past fifteen years, Bulgaria has experienced an ongoing Pentecostal revival. Therefore, it is not a surprise that over eighty percent of Bulgarian Protestants are Pentecostal or claim Pentecostal experience.
Protestant work on the Balkan Peninsula began in the 1800s when British and American missionaries were allowed to enter the Ottoman Empire. In the 1820s, the British Bible Society developed a Protestant translation of the Bulgarian Bible, which was completed and published in Constantinople in 1871. During this same period, various Protestant denominations began mission work in Bulgaria, among which were Congregationalists (1856), Methodist (1857), Baptists (1865) and Seven Day Adventists (1891). In 1871, the first Bulgarian Protestant Church was founded in the town of Bansko. By the time Bulgaria was liberated in 1878 and became an independent Balkan state, Protestantism was well established in the Bulgarian culture.
Pentecostalism was introduced in Bulgaria in 1920 as Ukrainian immigrants Zaplishny and Voronaev preached in the Congregational church at the Black Sea port city of Bourgas, where several were baptized with the Holy Spirit. This event marked the beginning of Bulgarian Pentecostalism.
In the next decade, the movement had spread throughout the country. The establishment of a consistent national structure occurred under the leadership of Nikolai Nikolov. The new denomination was formally recognized as the Union of the Evangelical Pentecostal Churches in Bulgaria, at a national assembly on 28-31 March, 1928. The organization, also known as the Pentecostal Union, was affiliated with the Assemblies of God denomination.
Legally, the newly formed organization was required to register with the Bulgarian government. This caused a great deal of controversy and division. A conservative Pentecostal group, with congregations located mainly in Northern Bulgaria, emerged from the split and adopted the name, Tinchevists, after the name of the leader Stoyan Tintchev. The Tinchevists, who are often called Northern Brothers due to the fact that most of their congregations were located in Northern Bulgaria, later became commonly known as the Bulgarian Church of God (lit. Bulgarian God’s Church).
The split between the Pentecostal Union and the Church of God was mainly due to leadership instability and internal organization disagreement. Unfortunately, due to the historical developments which followed, true attempts to reunite both Pentecostal wings did not take place even after the original leaders were replaced.
In 1944, the Communist Revolution took place in Bulgaria. In 1949, Communist authorities tried and convicted fifteen protestant leaders on false charges of treason and espionage. The division among Bulgarian Pentecostals continued during the Communist Regime. The Pentecostal Union pursued legal existence by registering with the Communist state. This action led to the government’s interference with church business and the implanting of secret agents within the denomination’s structure.
The Bulgarian Church of God, on the other hand, chose to remain underground and was severely persecuted by the authorities. Archives report that in 1974, the Bulgarian Church of God had only 600 members nationwide. This number grew to 2,000 members with congregations in 25 cities by 1981 and doubled by 1986 when the denomination was affiliated with the Church of God (Cleveland, TN).
At the same time, the Bulgarian Pentecostal Union had approximately 10,000 members and when the Berlin Wall fell, the denomination entered the Pentecostal revival that swept the country. In the decade that followed, the Pentecostal Union multiplied its congregation to 500 with over 50,000 members and adherents. A recent interview with Ivan Ivanov, the student pastor of the Pentecostal College in Sofia, indicated that the membership of the Pentecostal Union might have experienced a decline since 2002.
Meanwhile, the Bulgarian Church of God continued to grow reporting over 32,000 members with close to 400 congregations in 2001. Its work among the ethnic minorities in the country has resulted in the emergence of large Roma congregations like the ones in Samokov with 1,700 and in Razlog with 450 members.
It is reasonable to ask the question why is Pentecostalism so attractive to Bulgarian culture in the beginning of the 21st century? How is Pentecostalism responding so well to the need for faith within the postcommunist Bulgarian society? What is the reason Pentecostalism has spread so rapidly in the postcommunist age? Is Pentecostalism simply filling a spiritual gap or is it successfully responding to postmodern thinking?
The answers to the above questions are found in Pentecostal theology, which claims the five-fold Gospel. The results of a recent survey of one hundred randomly selected Bulgarian Protestants asking about the fundamentals of their faith is shown in the following table:
Yes | No | Question
78% | 22% | Does a person have free will?
75% | 25% | Can a person choose to be saved or not?
97% | 3% | Must a person accept Jesus Christ as a personal Savior in order to be saved?
75% | 25% | Can a person lose his/her salvation?
60% | 40% | Is the use of alcohol sin?
72% | 28% | Can a person be saved without being baptized in the Holy Spirit?
63% | 37% | Are you baptized with the Holy Spirit?
10% | 90% | Have the spiritual gifts described in the Bible ceased?
64% | 36% | Are there apostles today?
73% | 27% | Do you go to church each week?
88% | 12% | Do you pray daily?
77% | 23% | Do you read the Bible daily?
35% | 65% | Do you fast more than once a week?
According to the preliminary survey results, the profile of the average Bulgarian Protestant is: (1) fundamentally evangelical in doctrine, (2) more Armenian than Calvinistic, (3) more Pentecostal/Charismatic in experience, (4) more traditional than contemporary in conviction, (5) more theoretical than practical in teaching, (5) more conservative than liberal in practice and (7) more agreeing than disagreeing in fellowship.
The last characteristic is prompted by the obvious fact, that where two or three Bulgarian Protestants agree, one disagrees with them. It is for future researchers to determine if this is a reflection of Bulgarian cultural mentality, suspicion remaining from the Communist Regime or simply Pentecostal experiential curiosity with existential need for opposition of social norms even within itself.
Fortunately, Bulgarians remain in almost complete agreement on issues such as the person and work of Jesus Christ in the salvific mission of God and the importance of the Holy Spirit in the mission of the church. Perhaps, these are the points of agreement which future Bulgarian Protestants should use to build unity and construct strategies for the future development of the movement. Because these also serve as the cornerstone of Pentecostal doctrine and practice, a movement toward unity within the Bulgarian Protestant movement should be initiated by Bulgarian Pentecostals. However, before such initiation can be realized, Pentecostals must reach a balance between their numerical advantage and their social action.
New Church in the Spirit
The struggles surrounding the Bulgarian Confessions Act are not over. The search for a democratic paradigm which integrates religious freedom and freedom of conscience is not completed. As religious pluralism in Bulgaria occurs, unfortunately, in the forming postmodern context, the time has come for the Bulgarian Church to rediscover its historic identity by revisiting its Biblical theology. Common theological presuppositions presented within the faith of all Bulgarian Christians must lobby religious tolerance and create a healthy environment for the implementation of a new paradigm for ministry which will successfully incorporate interdenominational partnership.
The first step toward such a paradigm may have been made as Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant believers came together on October 23, 2004. In an “Universal Character of the Christian Church” round table discussion, they considered the possibility of the establishment of a religious community where Christians from various denominations can come together to worship in freedom from fear and according to their religious convictions.
As a direct result of the round table, on February 19, 2005 the participants came together again to establish a new church based on unity and tolerance. It was named, Christian Catholic (with the meaning of Universal) and Apostolic Church. Orthodox priests and protestant pastors came together to set forth into ministry the pastor of the new church the Pentecostal minister and scholar, Vili Altanov. The service was moderated by bishop Alexy Dardakius from the Russian Orthodox Reformed Church.
The participation of protestant and orthodox ministers in one church by itself is a global precedent. In Bulgaria it is an indication of religious freedom and tolerance. The new paradigm incorporates the protestant style of preaching along with eastern experiential theology. The church claims this is not simply a new form of institutional ecumenism, but a new paradigm for ministry in unity created by the Spirit.
The idea for the new formation comes from father Christo Pissarov, who was involved in the struggles for new social space within the Bulgarian Orthodox Church in 2004. According to him, this new paradigm of ministry does not purpose reform of any of the existing in denomination. On the contrary, it is an attempt of coming together in the Spirit and ministering in the presence of God in unity.
