The Professional Ethics of Astrologers, part 2
May 4, 2008
Yesterday we looked at one astrologer’s release of the personal information of the D. C. Madam, Deborah Jean Palfry. The astrologer wrote in a follow up that she had obtained permission to use the information and consultation however she saw fit. One astro-blogger, known as Sunrunner, objected that the release of this information as unethical. As a response to yesterday’s post, Sunrunner writes:
I am sorry. I still smell a rat.
According to Perez’s reported notes, she was under a great deal of duress and not thinking clearly. To get such an “agreement� out of somebody in such a state, would in many professions, constitute a violation of ethics and be reason to be de-certified (sort of akin to a lawyer getting a client to make adding a clause to a will containing a personal bequest to the lawyer in exchange for services).
There is no way to spin it–such an agreement could only benefit Perez.
Elsa, who sponsored Ms. Perez’s post on her blog ElsaElsa.com replies:
For the record, Claire-France spoke with me about working with this gal many months ago (more than once) and the story is exactly as she tells it today whether it seems plausible or otherwise.
She was absolutely working in this gals best interest (and her own). They were co-conspirators - I could and would testify.
Sunrunner’s assessment is quite correct the Claire-France’s behavior would be considered unethical is she were a lawyer. There is a whole complicated history behind why certain codes of conduct are set up for lawyers. But she and we are not. We are astrologers and we do not share the lawyers’ history.
How then do we measure our roles as counselors? Do we measure ourselves against standards set by psychotherapists? Good intentions are not allowed here, because no matter what the intentions, a dual role, that of therapist and anything else, friend, landlord, sexual partner, employer, employee, even just being “nice� are not allowed
Again she is not a psychotherapist. She is a an astrologer.
So should dual roles be discouraged in astrology? Here are the thoughts of one Wiccan priestess in discussing her dual role as priestess and psychotherapist.
Shifts in professional roles include difficulties that arise when a teacher or supervisor counsels a student. Personal and professional role conflicts include sexual or romantic, social, and peer-like relationships, such as occur when collaborating on publications or engaging in a shared pastime. The predatory professional is a therapist who exploits the therapeutic relationship to meet personal needs rather than client needs. Pearson and Piazza do not agree that dual relationships are inherently unethical, “Multiple professional roles such as advisor-instructor, supervisor-mentor, counselor- advocate, and others enhance our effectiveness as counselors and educators. However, risk of harm, or the perception of harm, seems to increase as both level of intimacy and power differential increase. In addition, the influence of the power differential is not always obvious” (1997)
The AFA has a stated Code of Ethics:
I, the undersigned, subscribe to the following Code of Ethics: I recognize that a precise astrological opinion cannot honestly be rendered with reference to the life of an individual unless it is based upon a horoscope cast for the year, month, day and time of day plus correct geographical location of the place of birth of that individual, and I agree not to render such an opinion without this detailed information, unless the horoscope of the individual has been rectified by accepted astrological methods, or unless I positively state to the interested party that such conclusions are reached by alternative methods.
I agree not to interpolate or to introduce into any astrological deduction, verbally or otherwise, any interpretation which my conclusions appear to warrant, that are irrelevant to the Science of Astrology without first stating definitely that such deductions are neither based upon the life chart nor identified with the science.
I agree to honor and respect all confidences which may be reposed in me by consultation and to hold such confidences inviolable excepting wherein they may involve an act of felony or treason. (Italics mine)I agree not to use my identification with the American Federation of Astrologers, Inc. as a signature of publicity in any unethical manner. I agree to assist in any way I can in the elimination of the charlatan who may be masquerading under any form of title that can be construed to mean a connection with Astrology designed to mislead the public or trade upon their credulity in any way; and I hereby subscribe to this Code of Ethics as a condition of my membership in the American Federation of Astrologers, Inc.
The AFA’s Code of Ethics is concerned with how astrologers render their consultations, which is great as far as it goes. It is a little thin on how we interact with the client. Saying that “to hold such confidences inviolable� does not address issues such as what constitutes informed consent when a client gives you permission to use the consultation as you see fit or if dual roles unacceptable in a counselor/client relationship. What a minefield the last one is! Who us us hasn’t parsed the charts of family and friends?
The point this astrologer is trying to make is not to approve of or comdemn one astrologer’s actions. When push comes to shove, it is clear we do not have, as a profession, a comprehensive Code of Conduct. Nor does this astrologer feel that throwing the mantle of one profession or another’s Code of Conduct on astrologers is a solution. We are different from lawyers and therapists, we have a different history from those professions. We need to consider the effect of our actions as astrologers to determine what those ethics should be. We need our own standards that apply to astrologers as to how we conduct ourselves as professionals.
If you have a question you would like this astrologer answer on these pages, send it to starrynightastro@aol.com along with your birthday, birth place and birth time. No names will be published.

astrology, horoscopes, zodiac, professional ethics of astrologers









May 4th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Other than the issue of confidentiality (which I am stickler on), there are a couple of things which specifically concern me about this.
If I am reading this properly, it appears that Perez and her partner sought Palfrey out. (sort of like an ambulance chaser?) Why? (Altruism would not have required the quid pro quo)
Palfrey appears to have been unable to afford to pay Perez’s normal fee, so therefore a “trade” was worked out. She would get “free advice” and return Perez would have the right to write about Palfrey after the trial (and I must admit that I would be more comfortable with this arrangement were Palfrey still alive to verify that this was her understanding as well).
In all helping professions, codes of conduct are established to ensure that the clients needs and rights are protected. There is also ample case law which basically says that any contract made when a person is under “duresss” are not valid. Perez and her partner knew, from a reading of her chart and from observation that Palfrey was stressed and confused. She was “desperate” for astrological info/advice which might be of benefit. And self-destructive (in my book, giving ANYONE the right to write about a private consultation is rather mad, and more particularly so if you are as notorious as Palfrey, and you have just barely met the person).
From an ethical perspective, in my opinion, her death pretty much rendered the entire arrangement null and void, since she is no longer able to agree or disagree with Perez’s assessment and version of events.
(& I present these criticisms with a bit of a heavy heart, since I have long admired Perez’s approach to astrology and writing about it. And as to be expected, her assessment of Palfrey’s chart is excellent.)
May 4th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Ms. Palfrey gave her data to Robert Blaschke during a telephone conversation on May 5, 2007. He printed an article about her chart the next day in his newsletter. I would assume that she was aware that her chart might be discussed by astrologers around the world.
May 4th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
There is a big difference between astrologers discussing and writing about a chart and an astrologer divulging the contents of a private session.