How a Little-Known Honor Society Is Shaping Who Gets to Be Your Therapist - CACREP Antitrust Part 4
Mental health access is collapsing—and this obscure group is helping it happen.
Diogenes In Exile is reader-supported. Keep the lamp of truth burning by becoming a paying subscriber—or toss a few drachmas in the jar with a one-time or recurring donation. Cynics may live in barrels, but websites aren’t free!
This is part 4 of a series. (Go to - Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)
A Life Interrupted
John, a combat veteran with severe PTSD, had just begun to stabilize his life with the help of a therapist he trusted. But when his grandmother—who had raised him—was hospitalized, he returned home to care for her, unaware that his move would sever the most important mental health relationship he had. Not because she retired. Not because she failed him. But because a powerful academic honor society had already set the rules against him.
(Names and details have been changed to protect privacy.)
Across the country, similar tragedies are playing out as distant organizations lobby to protect professional turf and advance their preferred worldview. In the counseling field, Chi Sigma Iota (CSI), is a powerful example of that dynamic.
The honor society for counseling graduate students, CSI is unknown outside of counseling circles, yet it has played an outsized role in making counseling what it is today.
The Rise of CSI and Its Influence
Founded in 1985, CSI was instrumental in sponsoring many of the early meetings and collected documents creating a foundation for the current Critical Social Justice ideological worldview. Counseling Futures, a monograph I’ve referenced repeatedly, is one of CSI’s sponsored works.
As an organization, CSI is:
dedicated to excellence in counseling through the ongoing development of the person, professional, and profession. We value Commitment, Service, and Identity.
According to its strategic plan, its goals and objectives include:
Enhancing a distinct Counseling Profession that fosters wellness and human dignity in a global society.
To develop exemplary leaders for the Counseling Profession who promote wellness.
To foster collaboration among Counselors-in-Training and Professional Counselors.
To mentor Counselors-in-Training and Professional Counselors for a global society.
To provide opportunities and support for Professional Counselor advocacy.
To promote a clear Professional Counselor Identity at an international level.
And in a later passage it continues:
To promote professional community and collegiality among members.
To promote strategic continuity with organizational values and legacy.
This strategic plan doesn’t specify definitions for, “global society”, “Professional Counselor advocacy”, or “Professional Counselor Identity”, but we can look at the actions CSI takes, what it writes, and what it supports to clarify some of those things.
CSI, Ideals in Action Reveal Character
Much like with an individual, the actions an organization takes are a more honest reflection of values, intentions, and general wisdom than its press releases.
For example, you can find CSI’s definition of what a “professional counselor” is on its About page, which includes the following:
For purposes of clarity among helping professionals who use counseling as a method or its techniques, the graduate education of members of the profession of counseling are defined by the national standards of the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP).
CSI's commitment to professional counselor identity is reflected in its commitment to chartering chapters in CACREP-accredited counselor education programs.
The CSI Executive Council (5/2010) in an effort to support solidarity in the profession endorsed the ACA and AASCB 20/20 Visions for the Future of Counseling consensus definition of counseling by incorporating it into the following statement to be consistent with the mission of CSI. CSI was a participating organization throughout the 20/20 initiative.
The 20/20 Visions statement, calls for counselors to commit to multiculturalism as a value and promote an advocacy agenda.
If you look at CSI by-laws you find this:
Chi Sigma Iota Counseling Academic and Professional Honor Society (Chi Sigma Iota) was established to recognize and promote excellence in the profession of counseling as defined by our national accreditation standards (Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs).
And this:
2.1 Chapters may be established at regionally accredited institutions of higher education that have officially designated Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) accredited counselor education
programs and the program shall meet uniform criteria determined by the Executive Council.
2.2 Reactivating chapters must be located in CACREP accredited programs. Chapters which do not maintain CACREP accreditation may be designated inactive.
To be clear, CACREP’s accreditation standards specifically call for recruiting faculty and students with an eye for diversity and require multicultural values to be infused throughout the program. This involves dividing students into racial groups that pit marginalized populations against privileged groups along racial lines.
CSI’s by-laws are backed up by its page on becoming a member which states:
Membership in Chi Sigma Iota Academic and Professional Honor Society International (CSI), as specified in the CSI Bylaws, is only by chapter invitation and only to students and graduates of the chapter's CACREP-accredited counselor education program(s) who meet the membership eligibility criteria specified in the Society's by-laws
And it is on its page devoted to Professional Counselor Advocacy that you will find, Six Advocacy Themes. The first of these is devoted to Counselor Education, and has this as an objective:
All counselor education programs will be encouraged to work toward achieving CACREP accreditation.
Given these stipulations, graduates from Masters in Psychology and Counseling Accreditation Council (MPCAC) accredited programs are locked out of CSI membership and its funnel to leadership positions in CACREP, education, and other professional organizations.
The American Counseling Association (ACA), on the other hand, still acknowledges the MPCAC as a valid accreditation body in counseling and even pushed back on CACREP’s lobbying efforts to insert the CACREP standard as the benchmark for allowing practitioners to be a part of the counseling compact.
A Closed Circle: Advocacy, Access, and Antitrust
CSI has been just as busy trying to bring CACREP standards to the counseling compact.
Through the tab on its advocacy page, we see multiple canned letters and follow-up documents for members to download and send to legislators and members of the Counseling Compact’s Executive Committee (CCEC). There is even a list of legislative hearings that members could plan to show up at, and a canned letter for CSI members to ask their legislators to send to the CCEC.
This is a selection of what CSI members were asking their legislators to send to the CCEC:
I share concerns with LPCs across {name of state} that the Licensure Compact’s current legislative text could allow professionals who are not trained in counseling the ability to practice as Licensed Professional Counselors. Most LPCs are trained in counseling by a program accredited by Council for Accreditation of Counseling & Related Educational Programs (CACREP).
With the passage of the Compact, participating states that require their in-state licensees to complete a CACREP-accredited program in counseling before obtaining a license would have to allow for counselors who did not complete an accredited program to be granted the “Privilege to Practice” in our state after joining the compact. This risks the professional integrity of the counseling profession, as training and educational requirements would not be at the highest standards in {name of state}.
There was even a series of webinars addressing the importance of CACREP accreditation in the new counseling compact, including one that featured Dr. M. Sylvia Fernandez, CACREP’s President and CEO.
Adding to CACREP’s own overt actions, These coordinated lobbying efforts, combined with CSI’s membership restrictions, raise potential red flags under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which prohibits anticompetitive agreements. At the very least, the structure creates a feedback loop where access to professional opportunities is conditioned on adopting a single, state-backed educational ideology.
The exclusion of non-CACREP programs limits competition among counselor education programs. By tying membership and leadership roles to CACREP accreditation, CSI creates barriers for non-CACREP programs, potentially foreclosing their market opportunities and reducing the supply of licensed counselors.
The result? Counselors from MPCAC-accredited schools like John’s therapist are locked out—along with their clients.
While CSI and CACREP may argue these standards ensure quality, the ACA’s recognition of MPCAC suggests the requirements may not be essential, potentially prioritizing market control over consumer access to mental health services.
Collateral Damage: Clients Left Behind
MPCAC graduates were not privy to these materials when the lobbying for the compact was underway since they are locked out of CSI membership. Now clients like John are forced to contend with fewer options as a result.
Whether this meets the standard for collusion or simple cooperation would be a question for the courts, but the documents speak for themselves.
John isn’t alone. Clients will have fewer options in therapists because of an academic monopoly built through lobbying, exclusivity, and silent gatekeeping. The question isn’t just whether this is ethical. The question is whether we will keep letting organizations like CSI quietly decide who gets to heal, and who gets left behind.
In part 5 we’ll go over some of the CSI/CACREP webinars and look at a “Dear Colleague” letter that lays bare CACREP’s ultimate ambition, shedding new light on the forces limiting access to mental health care in the midst of a crisis.
Further Reading
Chi Sigma Iota’s Professional Counselor Advocacy Page. Be sure to expand the tabs.
Help Keep This Conversation Going!
Share this post on social media–it costs nothing but helps a lot.
Want more perks? Subscribe to get full access to the article archive.
Become a Paid Subscriber to get video and chatroom access.
Support from readers like you keeps this project alive!
Diogenes in Exile is reader-supported. If you find value in this work, please consider becoming a pledging/paid subscriber, donating to my GiveSendgo, or buying Thought Criminal merch. I’m putting everything on the line to bring this to you because I think it is just that important, but if you can, I need your help to keep this mission alive.
Already a Premium subscriber? Share your thoughts in the chat room.
About
Diogenes in Exile began after I returned to grad school to pursue a Clinical Mental Health Counseling master’s degree at the University of Tennessee. What I encountered, however, was a program deeply entrenched in Critical Theories ideology. During my time there, I experienced significant resistance, particularly for my Buddhist practice, which was labeled as invalidating to other identities. After careful reflection, I chose to leave the program, believing the curriculum being taught would ultimately harm clients and lead to unethical practices in the field.
Since then, I’ve dedicated myself to investigating, writing, and speaking out about the troubling direction of psychology, higher education, and other institutions that seem to have lost their way. When I’m not working on these issues, you’ll find me in the garden, creating art, walking my dog, or guiding my kids toward adulthood.
You can also find my work at Minding the Campus