Marriage may have religious, emotional, or financial significance depending on an individual’s view and beliefs, but the legal aspect of marriage and the rights and privileges that go along with it are common to all marriages. Marriage rights in the United States were expanded to include civil marriages between 2 individuals of the same sex between 2004, when it became legal in Massachusetts, through 2015, when it became legal nationwide. During this time and since, public support for same-sex marriage has increased to a broad majority. However, there remain those who oppose same-sex marriage, as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) individuals’ rights in general, including institutions of learning that include academic nursing programs. Given that same-sex marriage is now legal, should nursing programs at institutions where it is not condoned be accredited? —Donald GardenierPointLinda M. Gibson-YoungLinda M. Gibson-Young, PhD, FNP-BC, is an associate professor at Auburn University School of Nursing in Auburn, AL. She has over 20 years of experience as a clinician, administrator, and educator. She is an academic and practitioner on-site evaluator for the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education. Dr. Gibson-Young is a fellow of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners and a Leadership for Academic Nursing Program Fellow. Linda M. Gibson-Young, PhD, FNP-BC, is an associate professor at Auburn University School of Nursing in Auburn, AL. She has over 20 years of experience as a clinician, administrator, and educator. She is an academic and practitioner on-site evaluator for the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education. Dr. Gibson-Young is a fellow of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners and a Leadership for Academic Nursing Program Fellow. Program accreditation focuses on standards and quality that do not include larger social justice or inclusion issues. Much has changed regarding quality. Similar to business, health care indicators focus on benchmarks and use data to compare efforts and outcomes across programs. According to the US Department of Education, accreditation is intended to measure the quality of academic programs in higher education institutions by creating a culture of continuous improvement and encouraging levitation of standards. As we also consider social justice, we often deliberate on the topic of quality and judge whether or not a program is meeting required standards. Who decides whether social justice is appropriate to include or not, and how do we measure it? In nursing, the primary purpose of accreditation is to ensure that programs meet common standards of quality. The primary accrediting bodies for academic nursing programs are the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education and the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing. There are numerous reasons why attending an accredited institution is important. Accreditation substantiates the quality of a program and provides benefits upon graduation. Students completing a degree from an accredited program are more competitive in the market of health care because the quality of education has met national standards. Accreditation for nursing education uses specific standards with prescribed elements under each standard. Whether the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education or the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing, specific standards must be met to meet criteria for accreditation. Although I clearly believe we are morally entitled to open our eyes as individuals, it should not be the judgment of the programmatic accrediting body to decide matters of social justice or inclusion. This would be outside the purview of academic nursing program accreditation. CounterpointF. Patrick RobinsonF. Patrick Robinson, PhD, RN, is provost and vice president of academic affairs at Arizona College in Phoenix, AZ. He has a distinguished record of service and leadership to the human immunodeficiency virus care nursing community. He currently serves as cochair of the LGBTQ Health Expert Panel for the American Academy of Nursing in which he is also a fellow. F. Patrick Robinson, PhD, RN, is provost and vice president of academic affairs at Arizona College in Phoenix, AZ. He has a distinguished record of service and leadership to the human immunodeficiency virus care nursing community. He currently serves as cochair of the LGBTQ Health Expert Panel for the American Academy of Nursing in which he is also a fellow. The primary purpose of accreditation in higher education is to assure quality. However, quality is subjective. In accreditation, standards for quality are established by nongovernmental agencies that rely on the collective judgments of an array of constituents including faculty, administrators, employers, and the public. One widely accepted hallmark of quality in higher education accreditation is that institutions must operate with integrity. For nursing education programmatic accreditation, operating with integrity would include, at the very least, concordance with nursing’s Code of Ethics, which states, “The nurse practices with compassion and respect for the inherent dignity, worth, and unique attributes of every person” (American Nurses Association, 2015). Thus, a program that even tacitly discriminates against or marginalizes LGBTQ individuals should not be granted accreditation. Furthermore, nursing programmatic accreditation is 1 mechanism by which programs are held accountable to the constituencies they serve, including patients. If a program or its parent institution does not recognize the fundamental civil rights of any of its stakeholders, including LGBTQ individuals, then accreditation should not be possible. In a broader sense, institutional accreditors, such as the 6 regional accrediting organizations recognized by the US Department of Education, should be guided by the fundamental understanding that education is a common good and take seriously a commitment to assuring that colleges and universities are preparing students for a diverse world. This preparation includes the promotion of open dialogue, tolerance, and justice. In this frame, discrimination of any kind is incompatible with the goals of higher education. Because institutional accreditation is the gateway to the use of federal financial aid, the stakes are high. Federal funding should not be given to institutions that discriminate against any individual. Finally, higher education has been the birthplace of great ideas, societal reform, and social justice. Accreditation organizations are obligated to assure this legacy continues. Comments or suggestions for future columns should be sent to Department Editor Donald Gardenier at [email protected]