|
Article Excerpt
This article responds to four reactions to Weinrach and Thomas's (2002) critique of the AMCD Multicultural Counseling Competencies. Among the major points made in the present article are the following: Although racial discrimination exists, both within and outside of the counseling context, the Competencies do little to combat it. In fact, the Competencies actually promote viewing persons primarily as members of specific racial and ethnic groups. The Competencies exist at a symbolic and an applied level Significant problems exist for mental health counselors at both of these levels. The Competencies' greatest flaw is their preoccupation with perceived deficits in clients, the counseling profession, and American society. It is virtually impossible to separate the content of the Competencies from the political process that has surrounded efforts to promote their universal adoption.
**********
It has been our goal in the several articles that we have written about multicultural counseling in general (Thomas & Weinrach, 1998a, 1998b, 1999, 2002a, 2002b; Weinrach, 2002a, 2002b; Weinrach & Thomas, 1996, 1998) and the Association for Multicultural Counseling and Development's (AMCD) Multicultural Counseling Competencies (the Competencies; Arredondo et al., 1996) in particular (Weinrach & Thomas, 2002) to advocate for an agenda that responds to the needs of all clients in an environment that is ethical, moral, and as free as possible from external political pressures. In this present article, we will respond selectively to points made by the other contributors to this special feature as well as address issues that we believe will move the debate forward.
SEARCHING FOR COMMON GROUND
In this section, we focus primarily on where we agree and, to a lesser extent, disagree with our colleagues. Not unexpectedly, we tended to agree more readily with the sentiments expressed in this January issue by Patterson (2004) and by Vontress and Jackson (2004), who were selected because of their having previously taken stands in opposition to the Competencies. We agreed less with Arredondo and Toporek (2004) and with Coleman (2004), whose views in support of multicultural counseling, in general, and the Competencies, in particular, are well established. That said, we found Coleman's comments in support of establishing some type of multicultural counseling competencies to be particularly thought provoking.
Patterson (2004) started from the philosophical and clinical premise that humans are more similar than dissimilar and that cultural differences cannot possibly justify differential treatment for clients. Therefore, he concluded, there is absolutely no need for any form of multicultural counseling competencies. His logic is persuasive. There is insufficient evidence that cultural differences account for sufficient variance in the mental health of clients from different groups to justify unique treatment protocols. And even if there were sufficient evidence, the myriad of permutations of protocols would be impossible to achieve.
Vontress and Jackson (2004) have been equally long-standing critics of the Competencies and advocates for multicultural counseling. We agree with Vontress and Jackson that mental health counselors should be involved in community contact insofar as it enables them to establish better rapport with clients and potential clients. They restated our (Weinrach & Thomas, 2002) and their own objection to the limited or selective scope of the Competencies at the expense of other culturally distinct groups. Vontress and Jackson are correct that the environment can influence mental health, though we do not have a science that results in clear predictions. We wish to emphasize Vontress and Jackson's position about the imprecise distinction made in the Competencies between the terms multicultural and diversity and the implications on the unequal delivery of counseling services. Vontress and Jackson astutely observed:
that mental health counselors should look at all factors impacting a client's situation. Race may or may not be one of them. In general, race is not the real problem in the United States today. The significance that clients attach to it is the most important consideration. Individuals who perceive their race to be an impediment to achievement in life usually create for themselves a self-fulfilling prophecy. (p. 76)
Finally, there is perhaps no stronger an indictment of the Competencies than Vontress and Jackson's having labeled them as "anti-therapeutic." (p. 79)
It is imperative to note that there were points in the important contributions made by Arredondo and Toporek (2004) and by Coleman (2004), with which we wholeheartedly agree. For example, we agree with Arredondo and Toporek that the 119 Explanatory Statements provide greater specificity and, in many cases, greater flexibility and a nod toward greater inclusiveness than do the vast majority of the 31 Competencies, themselves. We also agree with Arredondo and Toporek's assessment that "the arbitrary distinction [between multicultural and diversity] was an attempt to maintain culture, ethnicity, and race as the principal constructs of the Competencies" (p. 50). However, it was at the expense of other equally valuable client characteristics. Moreover, we agree that its developers see the Competencies as "a living document ... subject to further refinement,...
|
