I agree that it usually might be somewhat inappropriate for a therapist to quickly whip out a little paper about a loving perspective of God (“Your Heavenly Father”) on the very first visit (except, of course, for one who is upfront from the beginning about being the type who works “within a faith based Christian framework”).
However, I think that the therapist showing a patient such a paper should really be viewed as simply presenting an example of the essence of Christian values among the vast majority of Christian adherents; i.e., from a psychological/sociological and statistical perspective. In other words, I think that the therapist was merely illustrating the basic difference categorically between the popular non-judgmental love and tolerance espoused by modern Christianity and the rather cold, legalistic, and indeed even draconian policies of a religious “group” such as Jehovah’s Witnesses.
In all fairness to the therapist, I think that the motive behind presenting that paper was not to effect some sort of opportunistic brainwashing session but, rather, simply to illustrate a simple point – that being the noticeable difference (statistically and substantially) between the Watchtower religion and the vast majority of nominal Christianity, and where the Watchtower’s corporate-agenda-based version of “Christianity” stands in comparison (i.e., not really so loving or psychologically beneficial). And I think that the therapist illustrated the point effectively (assuming, of course, that that was the point being conveyed).
I appreciate the modern political correctness and professional etiquette perspective in general; however, as to ascribing negative judgment as to motives and methods, all I can say is, Fair is fair. Let’s not clamor for a hanging when none should really be deserved.