Therapist-in-training exposes nauseating secrets from the world of counselor education



Naomi Epps Best is a married Christian mother and graduate student in marriage and family therapy at Santa Clara University. Like anyone who enters the counseling profession, she wants to help people thrive.

Sadly, in today’s world, helping people thrive is often synonymous with affirming their delusions. On a recent episode of “Relatable,” Naomi sat down with Allie Beth Stuckey to share what future therapists are being taught about gender identity and care for minors.

“We were taught that if a child comes to us and they are experiencing extreme gender-related distress,” it is our “ethical obligation ... to affirm them in their belief and to not act as a gatekeeper for their medical treatment,” says Naomi. “That is what I am taught at [Santa Clara University], and that is what is being propagated down from the psychological governing bodies in this country.”

“I've talked to so many de-transitioners,” says Allie, “and every single one says that there was a therapist who didn't ask questions that checked off the boxes” and “uncritically affirm[ed]” their gender of choice. And even if the child also suffers from anorexia, bipolar disorder, or autism, the therapist is obligated to “ignore all of that, and say, ‘Yes, here is your letter of recommendation to go on puberty blockers, cross- sex hormones, [or] get your breasts cut off.”’

“Yes, exactly,” says Naomi. “[That methodology] is by design in this profession, and there are great therapists out there, who will ask deeper questions and will walk with a child who has gender dysphoria and provide them good care, but those individuals are going against the ethical standards and guidelines in our profession, and they're taking a risk by doing that.”

Earlier this month, Naomi published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal criticizing Santa Clara University’s Marriage and Family Therapy program, particularly its required human sexuality course. The article, titled “Santa Clara University’s Crazy Idea of Human Sexuality,” exposed explicit and coercive practices like assigning sadomasochistic erotica and mandatory sexual autobiographies, alongside ideological bias, unprofessional conduct, and racial stereotyping. Best argued these elements, coupled with denied accommodations, ethical violations, and retaliations against her, prioritize political agendas over neutral clinical training.

Just days after the article’s publication, Naomi was fired from her therapy internship. But before that, she was “summoned to a 15-on-one struggle meeting,” where her fellow “therapists-in-training” launched “character attacks” at her.

“These people called me unsafe. They called me a danger to the profession,” she tells Allie.

To hear more of Naomi’s wild story about what’s going on in the world of therapy education in our country, watch the episode above.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

God’s justice doesn’t sleep — and the Supreme Court just proved it



In a landmark 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tennessee’s ban on so-called gender-affirming care for minors. Wednesday’s ruling in United States v. Skrmetti affirms the state’s authority to protect children from irreversible medical interventions, declaring that such laws do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Tennessee’s Senate Bill 1 prohibits medical providers from prescribing puberty blockers, administering cross-sex hormones, or performing surgeries on minors for the purpose of treating gender dysphoria. With this ruling, the court established a powerful precedent, strengthening similar laws in more than two dozen states and shielding them from federal interference.

The Supreme Court now affirms what parents, pastors, and pediatricians have known for years: Children deserve protection — not ideological exploitation.

This is more than a legal or political victory. It’s a profoundly spiritual one.

Judgment in Pride Month

The timing of the court’s decision — handed down in the middle of Pride Month — is impossible to ignore. For years, the month of June has been co-opted to celebrate sexual perversion and radical gender ideology. Parades, corporate campaigns, and cultural rituals now elevate confusion and self-expression above truth and morality.

But God’s timing often intersects with the idols of a wayward culture.

Just as He once shattered the authority of Egypt’s gods through plagues and humiliated the pagan deities of Canaan through Israel’s victories, He now confronts the false gods of modern America. The gods of Pride Month have names: self-worship, mutilation, and moral relativism.

This ruling, like Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization before it, arrived in a season when the world celebrates rebellion. But God never abdicates. He acts — often decisively.

The right to protect children

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing in concurrence, emphasized the state’s legitimate interest in protecting children from unproven and dangerous procedures. “States could reasonably conclude,” he wrote, “that the level of young children's cognitive and emotional development inhibits their ability to consent to sex-transition treatments.”

Thomas reminded the nation that legislatures — not courts — are charged with protecting the vulnerable. The Constitution allows states to say no to radical experiments on children. That’s common sense. That’s moral responsibility.

RELATED: Matt Walsh’s crusade pays off: SCOTUS protects Tennessee kids from gender mutilation

Photo by Jason Davis/Getty Images for The Daily Wire

The court’s ruling also reinforces policies advanced by the Trump administration, which has taken steps to push back against transgender mandates. The court now affirms what parents, pastors, and pediatricians have known for years: Children deserve protection — not ideological exploitation.

‘The least of these’

At its core, this decision defends “the least of these" (Matthew 25:40). In Matthew 10:42, Jesus declares, “And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones ... truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.”

Advocates of transgender medicine call their approach “compassionate.” But compassion doesn’t mutilate. It doesn’t sterilize. It doesn’t tell children they were born in the wrong body.

Real compassion tells children the truth: They are fearfully and wonderfully made. God knit them together in their mother’s wombs (Psalm 139:13-14). He doesn’t make mistakes.

The lie that “God got your body wrong” devastates young minds. Puberty blockers, double mastectomies, and genital surgeries don’t bring peace. They usher in trauma, regret, and permanent damage.

By upholding these bans, the Supreme Court gives children the gift of time — time to grow, to mature, and to embrace their God-given identities without the pressure of irreversible decisions.

Tear down the idols

Now comes the charge to the church. This moment demands courage.

American culture has erected new high places. Gender ideology sits at the top. It demands worship, conformity, and silence. But like King Josiah, who tore down the altars of Baal, or Gideon, who smashed the Asherah poles, Christians must act.

Now is not the time for retreat. Now is not the time for timidity. The culture may roar, but the God of heaven still rules.

The Supreme Court’s ruling reminds believers that God still moves. He has not abandoned America. He still defends the innocent. He still topples idols.

Faithfulness bears fruit

Galatians 6:9 tells us not to grow weary in doing good. This ruling is the harvest of those who prayed, labored, and stood firm when the world called them hateful. Their perseverance bore fruit — in law, in policy, and in culture.

Let this be a turning point.

Let this be the moment when the nation remembers who created it. Let this be the moment when the church reclaims its voice. Let this be the moment when truth reasserts itself — and children are protected from those who would harm them in the name of progress.

America is not forsaken. God is still at work, and His purposes will prevail.

When bureaucrats rule, even red states go woke



If it’s happening in Georgia, you can bet it’s happening all over the country. Embedded bureaucrats are quietly rewriting the policies voters put in place.

Georgia’s Medicaid program exists to serve the state’s most vulnerable — low-income children and foster youth, pregnant women, and disabled adults. It was never meant to be a vehicle for radical politics. But recent revelations about how the state awarded multibillion-dollar Medicaid contracts show exactly how far left-wing ideologues inside government agencies will go to push their agenda.

When the bureaucracy pushes a progressive agenda behind closed doors, the public has no choice but to push back. Loudly. Clearly. Immediately.

Internal documents reveal that senior staff at Georgia’s Department of Community Health inserted ideological land mines into the bidding process for companies seeking to serve more than 1 million Medicaid recipients — most of them children. This included a scenario question focused on how insurers would treat a hypothetical “fourteen (14) year-old, transgender White female (assigned male sex at birth but identifies as a female).”

Responses that didn’t align with leftist orthodoxy were penalized. In other words, companies lost points unless they promised to steer kids toward hormone therapy — despite state laws banning gender reassignment procedures for minors. That isn’t just dishonest. It’s a direct subversion of the law.

Just this year, Georgia’s legislature passed bills barring men from girls’ sports and locker rooms. But inside the state’s Medicaid agency, officials rewarded insurers for endorsing gender transitions for minors. One winning bidder justified its position by claiming such treatments “could come up in the future.” Never mind that they’re illegal in Georgia.

One losing insurer offered to connect the hypothetical child with a range of community resources, including faith-based organizations. That response was met with scorn. A state official actually complained that faith-based groups shouldn’t have been included — because they weren’t mentioned in the scenario.

Never mind that faith-based organizations have served Medicaid populations for decades. They often provide the only consistent care in struggling communities. But for these bureaucrats, churches and people of faith pose a bigger danger to kids than radical gender ideology.

This is no small issue. Georgia expects to spend $4.5 billion next year on Medicaid and PeachCare, the program for uninsured kids. That makes this one of the largest contracts in state history — and leftist staffers nearly hijacked the entire process.

RELATED: Why is deep-red Oklahoma paving the way for the Green New Deal?

Photographer: Angus Mordant/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Lawmakers have a duty to step in now. During the last session, they considered a bill that would have barred ideologically charged questions from state procurements. It didn’t pass. That needs to change.

There’s still time. The Medicaid contracts haven’t been finalized. Legislators must act. They should demand a full rebid, remove these radical questions, and ensure that reviewers score responses based on biology, patient welfare, and fiscal responsibility — not on whether companies genuflect to left-wing doctrine.

Georgia’s leadership has worked hard to uphold conservative values and protect taxpayer dollars. But as we’ve seen in Washington, unelected bureaucrats can — and will — undermine that progress if no one stops them.

When the bureaucracy pushes a progressive agenda behind closed doors, the public has no choice but to push back. Loudly. Clearly. Immediately. We must call it out, correct course, and pass the kind of reforms that ensure this never happens again.

The return of common sense: HHS urges medical facilities to overhaul gender dysphoria protocols in major policy shift



Under the leadership of President Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., common sense is finally returning to the medical field. On May 1, HHS published a 400+ page report criticizing gender-affirming care, including puberty blockers, hormone therapy, and surgical modifications, for youth. The report argued that the evidence supporting gender-affirming care for minors is very low in quality and that these interventions carry significant risks, such as infertility, with limited proven benefits for mental health or long-term outcomes.

On Wednesday, the agency took it a step farther and sent a letter to health care providers, risk managers, and state medical boards, urging medical facilities to update gender dysphoria treatment protocols in accordance with HHS’ report. The letter implored providers to disregard guidelines from organizations like the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, claiming they are ideologically driven.

— (@)

Further, Dr. Mehmet Oz, as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator, announced a CMS oversight initiative targeting hospitals that perform what he called “experimental sex trait modification procedures” on children, stating CMS “will not turn a blind eye to procedures that lack a solid foundation of evidence and may result in lifelong harm.”

When Glenn Beck heard the news, his response was “amen!”

Gender-affirming care, he says, was nothing more than “Frankenstein-like experiments on children and the mentally ill.”

“This is the first big step pulling us out of this death cult,” he says. “When you are chemically castrating our children in America and the doctors are calling that a good step forward, that's a spiritual disease.”

Before President Trump was elected and began rooting out the insanity cultivated purposefully by the Biden regime, debates surrounding transgenderism were driven by ideology, not science.

“Most of it is based in, you know, shouting you're a hatemongerer or you just want to kill people or you just hate transgenders,” says Glenn, likening it to the Dunning-Kruger effect that makes people with the least knowledge the most confident.

Doctors were vehemently defending transgender medical operations, insisting that they were lifesaving, when in reality, “science did not back it up.”

They continued “to double down and double down, and it was without any information,” says Glenn.

Thankfully, the tides are turning, and we’re finally taking an honest look at the heinous results of transgender operations.

“Welcome to the return of common sense in medicine,” says Glenn.

To hear more of Glenn’s commentary, watch the clip above.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

AI Child Sexual Abuse Images Would Normalize Pedophilia, Not Cure It

In a world where AI child porn is normalized as a therapeutic tool, we'll have pro-pedophile activists normalizing pedophilia itself.

Colorado parents will lose custody for 'deadnaming'



Four new bills focused on protecting abortion care and “gender-affirming health care” are currently working their way through the Colorado legislature.

One such bill, H.B. 25, is focused on protecting “access” to this gender-affirming health care.

“Whenever you see that word 'access' used by progressives, what they mean is that they are forcing you to pay for something. They’re forcing the taxpayer to pay for something, to pay for transition so-called or to pay for abortion, and this grants access to people who maybe wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford it without the help of taxpayer dollars,” Allie Beth Stuckey of “Relatable” explains.

"This bill codifies protections for gender-affirming health care in state law. It mandates that all health insurance plans in Colorado cover 'medically necessary gender-affirming care,'" she adds.


“No gender-affirming care is medically necessary,” Stuckey says.

However, while concerning to begin with, there’s another part of H.B. 25 that puts parents and their custody of their children in jeopardy.

One part of the bill, known as the Kelly Loving Act, was passed by the Colorado House on April 6 and now awaits review in the Colorado Senate.

“This is a very scary part of this bill,” Stuckey says. “The courts must consider deadnaming, all these euphemisms, misgendering, threats to publish material related to gender-affirming care — so like outing someone — as coercive control when determining parenting time and child custody.”

“They must look at all of these things when they are determining parental custody, like a divorce custody battle, when it comes to how these parents treat their children,” she explains.

“So, they could accuse a parent of coercive control if a parent, for example, threatens to publish the individual's sensitive personal information, including sexually explicit material or material related to gender-affirming health care services or make reports to the police or authorities or deadnaming or misgendering the individual or individual’s child,” she continues.

An example Stuckey uses is a woman who is in a custody battle and is getting divorced from her husband who has now declared that he’s a woman. If she continues to call him Frank when he wants to be called Sally, the judge has to consider this in the custody battle when awarding custody to parents.

“So, the parent who acknowledges reality, acknowledges the reality of their ex-spouse’s gender or acknowledges the reality of their child, refuses to affirm these newfound identities, then that parent could be punished and should be punished, really,” Stuckey explains.

“Basically, the state will steal your child from you, will take away your custody rights from your child, if you affirm biological reality,” she adds.

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

VA will no longer offer fake breasts, dilators, other sex-change ‘prosthetics’ to end gender ideology



The Department of Veterans Affairs announced on Monday that it would "phase out" offering "gender-affirming prosthetics" and cross-sex hormones, citing President Donald Trump's executive order directing the federal government to eradicate gender ideology.

The executive action, "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government," recognized two sexes that are "not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality."

'They can do so on their own dime.'

The VA's Monday announcement explained that the department is "adjusting its policies to fully comply with the EO," which includes no longer providing veterans with "cross-sex hormone therapy" or "any other medical or surgical therapy for gender dysphoria to any patients in any circumstance."

The VA stated that it never provided "sex-change surgeries." However, in addition to cross-sex hormones, it has offered voice training and "so-called gender-affirming prosthetics, including breast forms, chest binders, dilator sets for post-vaginoplasty, packers, surgical compression vests, and wigs."

Veterans already receiving cross-sex hormones will not be impacted by the change.

The VA noted that those with gender dysphoria can continue to receive preventive and mental health care.

"Any and all savings VA achieves by stopping specific medical treatments for gender dysphoria will be redirected to help severely injured VA beneficiaries — such as paralyzed Veterans and amputees — regain their independence," the press release read.

VA Secretary Doug Collins stated, "I mean no disrespect to anyone, but VA should not be focused on helping Veterans attempt to change their sex. The vast majority of Veterans and Americans agree, and that is why this is the right decision."

"All eligible Veterans — including trans-identified Veterans — will always be welcome at VA and will always receive the benefits and services they've earned under the law. But if Veterans want to attempt to change their sex, they can do so on their own dime," he added.

Over the weekend, Collins was questioned about the Department of Government Efficiency's efforts to trim waste and bureaucracy within the VA.

"At the end of the day, I'm gonna make decisions best for my employees and best for the veterans, and they're giving us some good advice, looking with fresh eyes," Collins stated.

"We're going to do everything we possibly can to make sure that the veteran experience gets better," Collins said, noting that it is the "biggest issue" the VA faces.

Since Trump took office, the VA has already opened four new clinics.

"As government union bosses, the legacy media, and some in Congress have been spreading false rumors of health care and benefits cuts at VA, we've opened multiple brand-new clinics that will serve tens of thousands of veterans," Collins remarked.

"Don't believe the fake news," he added.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Detrans Awareness Day Heralds A Reckoning For Transgender ‘Medicine’ Fraudsters

Detransitioners' lawsuits against the medical systems that hurt them could finally undo the industry’s embrace of transgenderism.

The ‘conservative’ 5th Circuit just shielded Biden’s radical gender agenda



How does Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination, justify forcing doctors to violate the Hippocratic Oath and perform castrations to accommodate transgender ideology? No rational legal mind could reach that conclusion.

Yet the judiciary has become so politically compromised that even the supposedly conservative Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an interpretation of the law that forces doctors to perform these procedures — or risk losing Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements.

If doctors must wait until they are punished to challenge a rule, why don’t Trump’s directives get the same deference? What happened to legal consistency?

As part of the Biden administration’s relentless effort to impose transgender ideology nationwide, the president issued an order last year interpreting Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act as a mandate for doctors to perform irreversible castrations. Originally designed to prohibit sex-based discrimination under the 1972 law, Section 1557 has now been twisted into the prior administration’s legal justification for these procedures.

Yes, the deeply flawed Bostock v. Clayton County decision — thanks to Justice Neil Gorsuch — expanded the 1972 law to include protections for transgender individuals. But on what basis does an anti-discrimination law create a right to force doctors to perform procedures they believe cause harm?

Bostock involved an employee fired for cross-dressing at work. Biden’s order, by contrast, does not merely prohibit discrimination — it compels employers to provide not just dresses but irreversible medical procedures.

Questions of standing — and bad precedent

For any Republican-appointed judge, this should have been an easy decision. In 2022, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee in the Northern District of Texas, ruled in favor of the physician plaintiffs. He issued a declaratory judgment stating that the administration had completely misinterpreted the Affordable Care Act’s anti-discrimination provision. He also affirmed that physicians had clear standing to sue over the order.

In December, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit, including two Republican appointees, ruled that doctors lacked standing to sue the Biden administration.

“The plaintiffs do not consider their actions to be gender-identity discrimination, nor do they provide evidence that HHS would view them as such,” the court stated.

“Plaintiffs have failed to show they are actually violating the Notification, much less facing a credible threat of enforcement," Judges Edith Jones, Catharina Haynes, and Dana Douglas wrote in their per curiam opinion.

Last week, despite a 12-5 Republican-appointed majority, all but one judge — James Ho — refused to hear the case en banc, allowing this precedent to stand.

This case highlights how judges selectively apply standing based on political considerations. The left rarely struggles with standing. During Trump’s presidency, his executive orders faced immediate legal challenges, and liberal judges routinely granted standing.

For instance, blue states successfully sued over Trump’s order on anchor-baby citizenship, yet red states were repeatedly denied standing to challenge Biden’s immigration law violations.

The inconsistency is blatant. Doctors facing potential loss of Medicaid reimbursements supposedly do not have a “justiciable case,” but Trump’s executive orders were routinely enjoined before they even took effect.

The idea that doctors cannot sue over a regulation that threatens their Medicaid reimbursements until after they suffer consequences defies legal precedent.

A terrible double standard

Meanwhile, Trump’s executive orders have been blocked before even appearing in the federal register. How can courts enjoin a presidential directive before it becomes an official regulation?

If doctors must wait until they are punished to challenge a rule, why don’t Trump’s directives get the same deference? What happened to legal consistency?

The idea that doctors who have not yet faced punishment but could lose Medicaid reimbursements for refusing to perform castrations lack a ripe, justiciable claim is absurd given what happens in the courts daily.

I’m all for a minimalist judicial approach, but why does that never apply to those suing Republican presidents? Indeed, the courts have become a one-way ratchet for the left.

In a spirited dissent from his 16 colleagues — something he has grown accustomed to — Judge Ho argued that refusing to provide sex hormone therapy is not the same as categorical discrimination. A doctor who declines to prescribe hormones for gender dysphoria is not refusing to treat a transgender patient for a broken bone.

The Supreme Court already ruled in Geduldig v. Aiello (1974) that denying coverage for pregnancy does not constitute sex-based discrimination. “While it is true that only women can become pregnant, it does not follow that every legislative classification concerning pregnancy is a sex-based classification,” the justices ruled.

On the question of standing, Judge Ho criticized the majority for basing its argument on the notion that a podiatrist wouldn’t offer “transition” services anyway, so not every doctor should have standing to sue. He called this absurd, pointing out that Dr. Susan Neese, the plaintiff in this case, practices general internal medicine.

“She is fully capable of providing such services to minors,” Ho wrote. “She just thinks it’s wrong to do so.”

“If there’s a plausible basis for theorizing that it’s somehow outside of Dr. Neese’s specialty to simply make a referral of a minor patient to another doctor who specializes in the field, the United States has not offered one,” he concluded.

Trump is likely to overturn this policy anyway, but as Ho warned, the Fifth Circuit’s decision allows a bad precedent to remain in place for future cases.

“By denying rehearing en banc, our court today leaves on the books a published, precedential ruling that overturns the district court’s dutiful efforts and validates administrative overreach in an area of profound sensitivity,” he wrote in a footnote.

One can only speculate, but given the left-wing political attacks on the Fifth Circuit, some worry that the judges are softening their stance to avoid appearing too conservative. Whether that’s better or worse than siding with the ideological left outright is debatable. Either way, Trump should make a point of appointing more judges like James Ho in his second term — jurists who not only hold sound legal principles but also have the courage to rule accordingly.

Planned Parenthood Pennsylvania Takes Aim At Local School Board Races

Planned Parenthood will pour money into Pennsylvania school board races in an effort to normalize transgender child mutilation and the killing of babies through abortion.