Anthony Furey’s Perspective: The Worrying Implications of the Jordan Peterson Ruling
A recent court ruling in Ontario has raised concerns about professionals in the province being censured for making unrelated online political comments. This ruling came as a result of a dispute between author and psychologist Jordan Peterson and the College of Psychologists of Ontario (CPO). Peterson, who is a member of the College, was ordered to undergo additional education regarding professionalism in public statements. Peterson chose to challenge this ruling in court, and it was upheld.
The dispute began after unidentified individuals complained to the CPO about posts Peterson made on Twitter, mainly concerning transgender issues. The College argued that Peterson’s posts could undermine public trust in the profession of psychology and raise doubts about his ability to fulfill his responsibilities as a psychologist. However, these posts were personal commentary and not made to or about clinical patients.
Peterson’s popularity and influence in the field of psychology could be seen as enhancing the public’s interest and trust in the profession, rather than undermining it. He is a renowned psychologist, drawing large audiences during his lectures and enjoying great success with his books.
The CPO added a moralizing statement to their ruling, stating that demeaning and unprofessional public statements can cause harm. Peterson responded by vowing to continue fighting, asserting that free speech rights are being violated. He believes that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent for all regulated professions.
This ruling creates a chilling effect on free speech within regulated professions. Professionals may now be hesitant to express opinions that fall outside of the narrow window of currently acceptable views. This is a significant problem, which is why Peterson’s fight against the ruling is crucial for defending basic free speech rights for all individuals.
Source link
