School counselors; delete requirement of counselors to abide by the American School Counselor Association Code of Ethics.
Summary
SB 2611 amends Mississippi Code Section 37-9-79, which governs professional school counselors in K-12 schools. The bill removes the statutory requirement that school counselors abide by the American School Counselor Association (ASCA) Code of Ethics, while leaving the rest of the counselor framework in place. That framework still requires counselors to hold at least a master’s degree in guidance and counseling (or appropriate emergency certification), and it continues to describe the counseling services counselors must provide, including academic, personal/social, career, crisis, referral, consultation, and conflict-resolution services.
The bill also preserves the existing requirement that counselors spend at least 80% of their contractual time on direct services to students and related school community interactions, and it leaves intact the State Department of Education’s authority to adopt regulations that are not inconsistent with the statute. The act would take effect July 1, 2025. In practical terms, the bill narrows the state-law ethics mandate for school counselors by deleting a specific reference to the ASCA ethics code, but it does not otherwise change counselor qualifications, duties, or local school board assignment authority.
Impact
If enacted, SB 2611 would amend Section 37-9-79 of the Mississippi Code by striking the provision that expressly requires professional school counselors to follow the American School Counselor Association Code of Ethics. The bill does not alter the statutory definition of counselor duties, the 80% direct-service time requirement, or the education/certification standards for employment. Its main legal effect is to remove a state-level incorporation of an outside professional ethics code from the counselor statute, potentially giving school districts and the State Department of Education more flexibility in setting or interpreting ethical expectations within their own rules.
Sentiment
Based on the bill caption and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be a targeted, technical policy change rather than a broadly controversial overhaul. The bill’s framing suggests support for reducing a specific external ethics-code mandate, likely appealing to those who favor state control over counselor standards. At the same time, because the bill removes a professional ethics requirement, it could draw concern from educators or counseling professionals who view the ASCA Code of Ethics as an important baseline for practice. No formal vote history or transcript evidence is provided to show organized support or opposition.
Contention
The main point of contention is the deletion of the ASCA Code of Ethics requirement. Supporters would likely argue that Mississippi should not statutorily bind school counselors to an external professional association’s code and that state law should define counselor obligations directly. Opponents may argue that removing the ethics-code reference weakens professional accountability or creates uncertainty about the ethical standards counselors should follow. No specific stakeholder objections or endorsements are included in the record provided, so the disagreement is inferred from the substance of the change rather than from documented debate.