Santa Clara University's New Statement Is Inadequate: My Thoughts

This PR response to my WSJ Op-Ed lacks transparency and is in my view, disingenuous.

Jun 11, 2025

Dear Readers:

Santa Clara University has issued a statement in response to my Wall Street Journal Op-Ed. All referenced files are linked at the bottom of this article below my signature.

The University’s words are italicized. My response is bolded:

The University offers a master’s degree program in counseling psychology that prepares students to become licensed marriage and family therapists. Marriage and family therapists are mental health professionals who treat behavioral and health problems, emotional and mental disorders, and otherwise work with their clients to address a complex array of behaviors, needs, and challenges.”

This is uncontroversial, true, and uncontested in my article.

California law sets forth a number of requirements that all students must meet to qualify for licensure as a marriage and family therapist. One of those requirements is to complete instruction in human sexuality that includes the study of physiological, psychological, and social cultural variables associated with sexual behavior and gender identity, and the assessment and treatment of psychosexual dysfunction. All programs, not just Santa Clara’s, must meet these requirements.

Indeed, California requires Marriage and Family Therapy students to acquire education in human sexuality. It DOES NOT require the submission of a “comprehensive sexual autobiography” to be submitted to professors. In fact, the American Psychological Association (APA) explicitly bars psychologists from requiring sexual disclosure by students, as outlined in APA Ethics Code 7.04: Student Disclosure of Personal Information. SCU’s Counseling Psychology MA program is not accredited by APA, but the psychologists who oversee the program are bound by APA ethics codes and principles.

Classroom content examines numerous aspects of human sexuality because understanding these issues is an essential part of preparing students to become licensed therapists. These professionals must be trained to effectively support individuals from a broad range of human experiences, including those that may be vastly different than their own.

I have never objected to learning how to support individuals with a broad range of experiences. In fact, learning how to “support individuals” is what has been missing from my education. Instead, we were shown a how-to bondage tutorial and a promotional video of a sex dungeon. After we were shown a woman flogged, electroshocked, wrapped in plastic, gagged and threatened with a knife, our professor asked students if we wanted to “try it.”

Nevertheless, we recognize that the coursework includes uncomfortable and sensitive topics,

A consistent, pervasive, and objectively offensive and hostile learning environment of a sexual nature is not simply “uncomfortable and sensitive.” It is a violation of students’ rights, APA ethics codes, and federal law.

and we appreciate the concerns raised by any of our students, including those expressed by this student.

I have pursued every internal channel in good faith to remedy these ethical and in my view, legal violations over the course of ten months: professor, chair, dean, provost, president, Title IX Office, Campus Ministry, and Office of the Ombudsman. I’ve been met with silence and institutional indifference.

In the course syllabus and various other communications, the program makes clear that no

student is expected to reveal personal information they do not want to share.

CPSY 211: Human Sexuality is a requirement to graduate from the program. According to Department Chair Watson, a comprehensive sexual autobiography requirement has been in place since the 1980’s.

Santa Clara University removed the course syllabus of CPSY 211 from its website after the publication of my article as of June 10th, 2025. I published it for transparency. See the assignment instructions below from the syllabus.

Note the invasive prompts and consider the incentives and power differential between student and professor when students must write an 8-10 page sexual autobiography for a grade. The perfunctory disclaimer that students don’t have to disclose anything that causes “extreme discomfort,” falls short. As stated by the professor and Chair, there was no opt-out of sexual disclosure altogether or an alternative assignment offered.

Your final paper will be a comprehensive sexual autobiography and exploration; minimum of 8 – 10 pages. Please note that you are not required to disclose anything that causes extreme discomfort, however I urge you share as deeply as you feel comfortable. The following are guidelines to help you choose what to be explored in depth:
A. Describe chronologically your sexual past and present. When did you first notice
your own genitals? When did you start masturbating? When did your parents first
talk to you about sex, or when you did you notice them not talking to you about
sex? What was the sexual culture in which you were raised? Have you experienced3
any other sexual attitudes other than what was reflected at home and/or in your
Culture?
B. When did you become aware of your own sexual preferences, orientation, identity,
etc., and how did they develop over time? What are key moments in your sexual
history? How has your view of your own (or others’) sexuality changed or not
changed over time?
C. Describe your personal sexual aspirations for your future. What do you want for
yourself in your sexual or erotic life? How are you going to achieve that?
D. What is the meaning of your sexuality for you?
E. Additionally, each paper must include comments on the following:
a. How might your past and present impact your clinical work in the future? What
will you watch for in your clients, what issues will you choose not to treat, what
might be particularly interesting to you in the clinical areas of sexuality? Use
examples of how you might apply your new understanding of self to your future
therapy practice.
b. How has this class furthered your thinking, growth, understanding, or not done
So?
F. Your paper should be professionally written, carefully proof-read, and organized.

The University statement continues:

The program encourages students to raise any specific concerns they may have about classroom content so that solutions can be explored to enable a safe and productive learning experience, while also meeting the requirements of the program and the prerequisites for licensure.

I pursued every internal channel in good faith to remedy these ethical and legal violations over the course of ten months. After the extreme events in Dr. Wei’s classroom as detailed in WSJ, I was offered a “one-time exception” by the Chair to complete this requirement through continuing education credits; this is unacceptable given that every other student is still subject to these unethical and potentially illegal practices.

Finally, we cannot corroborate all the assertions contained in the Wall Street Journal op-ed, and would not speak to them, consistent with our obligation to safeguard student privacy and our practice not to discuss student matters publicly.

This is now a public matter. My name is Naomi Epps Best. I am the student in question.

Wall Street Journal’s fact-checking team thoroughly reviewed all of my documentation and its legal team cleared the article before publication. I will provide ALL documentation to an external investigator to assess this department.

I am still waiting for Santa Clara University to acknowledge and remedy these ethical violations. Pretending like these missteps never happened does not constitute institutional accountability and also violates the Jesuit tradition of the University.

As I wrote to Provost Glaser in September of 2024:

“I wonder about all the hundreds of graduates of this program over the last four decades who were subjected to this requirement. What has been done with their sexual autobiographies? Who is in possession of them and how are they protected? What would be done with mine if I continued in this course?”

And as I stated to President Sullivan in September of 2024:

“I have also filed a formal complaint with the Title IX office for institutional sexual harassment and religious discrimination, requesting accommodations for CPSY 211. However, even if personal accommodations are granted, other students remain vulnerable to similar privacy violations, sexual harassment, and religious discrimination, exposing SCU to legal and reputational risk. Given that this requirement has been reportedly in place for forty years, it has likely impacted hundreds, if not thousands of students. I share this to not only advocate for my fellow students, but also to highlight the broader institutional vulnerability.”

Unfortunately my concerns were not addressed whatsoever. Now we are here.

Sincerely,

Naomi Epps Best

WSJ Op-Ed

SCU Statement