Well, I don't know exactly how the ethics of the terps are played out. But I do know that I do not have the right to refuse services to a client simply because I disagree with their religious beliefs, their political beliefs, their racist attititudes, their homophobia, etc. I am bound by my professional ethics to remain objective and to offer the best treatment possible for the client in spite of my personal position.I don't see how it can be ethically sticky. Suppose an interpreter was requested at a KKK rally? The interpreter has the right to refuse. I used an interpreter today and we were discussing things, and one thing she told me was that she refuses to interpret for a specific individual. I don't see the problem.
However, if I find that the disagreement is beyond my personal capability to put aside in order to be completely objective, then I must refer to another therapist so that continuity of treatment is not interrupted. Then I am also ethically bound to enlist supervision to help me work through my personal issues that are preventing me from being objective.
So, yeah...I have the right to refuse but I also have the obligation to insure that the client is provided for.