Cultural Competency Cultural Competency Beyond Depth Psychology ...

0 downloads 280 Views 67KB Size Report
(Hillman, 1986). Effective communication between the self and the “Other” requires not only verbal but also cultural
  Running  Head:  Cultural  Competency         Cultural  Competency  Beyond  Depth  Psychology   Rashin  D’Angelo   Pacifica  Graduate  Institute   Ph.D.  Clinical  Psychology                                    

     

 

Cultural  Competency    

A  multicultural  perspective  is  similar  to  a  psychodynamic  theoretical  

orientation,  one  in  which  the  parts  are  integrated  into  a  whole,  yet  remain  distinct   and  respected  for  their  differences.  Similar  to  a  psychoanalytical  ideal  of  a   “differentiated  psyche”,  the  Jungian  analyst  Andrew  Samuels  has  referred  to  this   capacity  to  “hold  unity  and  diversity  in  balance”  as  a  “psychical  pluralism”  (1989,   p.1),  as  opposed  to  a  dominant,  monotheistic  view  of  contemporary  psychology.    

Culture  encompasses  age,  gender,  race  and  ethnicity,  religious  views,  class,  

sexual  orientation,  education,  political  affiliation,  sub-­‐cultural  identity,  and  physical   characteristics.  Cultural  competence  and  sensitivity  in  the  field  of  psychology   concern  therapists’  ability  to  treat  people  of  diverse  cultural  backgrounds  in  ways   that  respect  and  integrate  their  socio-­‐cultural  context  (Lopez,  1997).    Moving   between  the  cultural  frames  of  the  client  and  the  clinician  is  essential  to  cultural   competence,  and  can  situate  the  therapeutic  encounter  as  a  “tool  of  cultural   enrichment  rather  than  oppression”  (Hocoy,  2002,  p.  141).   Cultural  competency  in  clinical  practice  looks  beyond  therapist’s  education   and  professional  training,  to  an  awareness  of  one’s  own  cultural  lens,  personal   biases  and  dogmatic  beliefs.  It  asks  for  a  nondogmatic  psychological  perspective   that  encourages  “free  and  open  critical  inquiry  and  amicable,  diaological  relations”   (Adams,  1996.  P.4).  In  a  cross-­‐cultural  contact,  in  or  out  of  the  consulting  room,   acculturation  can  occur,  yet  personal  and  cultural  identities  do  not  need  to  be   discarded,  but  merely  transformed  to  challenge  oppressive  assumptions  of  the   “Other”.      

 

2  

     

 

Cultural  Competency    

The  “Other”  is  an  essential  vessel  for  social  displacement,  and  holds  the  

projections  of  the  dominant  culture’s  undesirable  aspects.  It  is  a  natural  human   creation,  fulfilling  basic  identity  and  affiliation,  as  well  as  intra-­‐psychic  needs  to  rid   one  self  of  undesirable  feelings  and  traits.  It  is  a  tool  for  survival  in  the  modern,   civilized  era,  creating  an  environment  of  intolerance  and  disparity.  It  is  only  in  real   contact  with  what  constitutes  the  “Other”  that  true  integration  of  marginalized  and   denounced  aspects  of  individuals  and  cultures  can  occur,  moving  the  personal  and   collective  psyche  towards  wholeness.      

The  dominant  voice  of  any  society  finds  expression  in  the  ego  of  the  

individual  through  various  modes  of  socialization.  Minority  voices  are  undesirable,   challenging  the  present  ethos,  forced  into  the  collective  unconscious  and  become  the   marginalized  shadow,  abhorred  by  society.  By  acknowledging  the  impact  of  the   collective  shadow  on  individual  consciousness,  the  therapist  can  gain  awareness   into  the  conscious,  intentional,  verbal  means  as  well  as  intra-­‐psychic  influence  of   psychotherapy  on  serving  as  a  tool  of  enculturation.    

Although  crucial  to  acknowledge  in  clinical  practice,  diversity  is  an  

archetype,  used  to  organize  differences.  It  is  much  easier  unconsciously  to  reduce   complex  differences  to  simple  oppositions  (i.e.,  black  and  white,  dominant  and   minority),  than  to  comprehend  their  infinite  possibilities.    As  emphasized  by  Sloane,   “oppositional  logic  is  a  symbolic  function,  which  allows  little  room  for  the   continuum  of  ambiguities”  (1989,  p.88).  Hillman  further  maintains  “differences   neither  compete,  contradict  nor  oppose”  (1986,  p.  39)  and  that  what  is  needed  in  

 

3  

Cultural  Competency    

      psychology,  is  an  imagination  acknowledging  differences  in  degree  rather  than  kind   (Hillman,  1986).      

Effective  communication  between  the  self  and  the  “Other”  requires  not  only  

verbal  but  also  cultural  fluency.    Bulgarian  philosopher,  Todorov,  refers  to  the   importance  of  nonviolent  communication  rather  than  violent  confrontation  (1984,   p.  182).  The  ultimate  objective  is  to  experience  “difference  in  equality”  through   “cultural  hybridization  (1984,  p.249).  Simply  experiencing  differences  as  what  they   are,  without  placing  value  judgments,  a  psychological  hybridization  can  seem   attainable.    Along  similar  lines,  James  Hillman  talks  about  departing  from  the  literal   perspective,  towards  a  more  metaphoric  sensibility,  free  from  interpretation  and   analysis.   Depth  Psychology   Traditional  schools  of  depth  psychology,  mainly  Freudian  and  Jungian   theories,  have  brought  reflection  to  the  inner  psychic  processes.  But  emphasis  has   been  on  the  human  psyche,  neglecting  the  ecological  psyche,  the  soul  of  the  world   (Aizenstat,  1995).  While  both  Freud  and  Jung  developed  systems  of  psychological   thought,  neither  placed  importance  on  the  interconnectedness  of  human  experience   and  the  world  at  large  (Aizenstat,  1995).  According  to  Adams,  “if  Freudian  analysis   has  tended  to  be  sexually  reductive,  then  Jungian  analysis  has  tended  to  be   archetypally  reductive”  (1996,  p.  35).  A  more  inclusive  understanding  of  psychic   reality  includes  a  merging  of  the  individual  self  and  the  world  into  the  notion  of  one   role,  unas  mundas.  As  the  boundaries  of  inner  and  outer  lives  dissolve,  the   potentiality  of  the  present  moment  allows  for  synchronicity.    

 

4  

   

 

Cultural  Competency    

A  more  comprehensive  understanding  of  psychic  reality  is  currently  being   explored  by  a  new  generation  of  depth  psychologists,  including  James  Hillman,   Robert  Sardello,  Robert  Romanyshyn,  Mary  Watkins,  Stephen  Aizenstat,  among   others.  Deconstructing  personal  history,  self,  identity,  gender,  individuality  and   culture,  human  beings  are  implicated  in  the  environment.  Today’s  depth   psychologist  would  advocate  that  “suffering  in  the  world,  is  reflected,  and   interactive  with,  the  suffering  of  human  beings”  (Aizenstat,  p.  99,  1995).  This   implication  stresses  that  changes  in  one’s  environment  may  be  as  therapeutic  as   interior  alterations  and  the  root  of  today’s  physiological  and  psychological  illnesses   can  be  found  in  the  ills  of  the  world  (Hillman,  1995).   James  Hillman  maintains  that  the  subjectivity  of  psychology  “equates  psychic   reality  with  experience,  needing  ego  to  be  an  interior  witness  so  that  it  can  be   imagined”  (1982,  p.  100).    He  introduces  an  alternative  perspective,  returning   reality  back  to  the  world,  to  look  at  environment  for  inspiration  as  well  as  illness,   and  to  find  beauty  amidst  the  ugliness.  Hillman  further  argues  against  reducing  soul   to  personal  subjectivity,  naming  “personalism”  as  one  of  the  burdens  of  the  modern   era.  Although  psyche  presents  itself  in  images  of  persons  and  in  personal  feelings,   soul  is  not  personal  of  itself.     Hillman  views  “anima  mundi”,  or  the  soul  of  the  world,  a  patient  in  need  of   therapeutic  attention.  Just  like  alchemists  who  described  soul  as  an  opus,  a  work,   Hillman  views  culture  as  soul  making  (Hillman,  1989).  He  revisions  psychology   away  from  a  medicine  complex  (Hillman,  1975),  and  reiterates  that  soul  does  not   need  to  be  free  from  symptoms  or  life  lived  perfectly  (Hillman,  1989).  By  seeing  

 

5  

Cultural  Competency    

      oneself  in  the  face  of  the  “Other”,  the  world’s  display  of  itself,  individuals  are  saved   from  a  narcissistic,  egocentric  distancing  from  the  world  (Hillman,  1989).   Depth  psychology  respects  the  inherent  nature  of  the  individual,  and  each   culture.    In  this  way,  depth  psychology  does  not  bind  its  concepts  to  the  individual   mind,  but  instead  extends  them  to  include  how  individuals,  groups,  cultures,   nations,  and  the  planet  are  each  affected  by  the  interactions.    To  be  truly  

multicultural,  the  field  must  extend  its  horizon.  The  collective  unconscious  needs  to   be  redefined  to  include,  not  only  personal  history,  culture,  and  ethnicity  within   archetypal  images,  but  the  ecological  influences  on  the  individual.     The  way  out  of  specialization  and  professionalism,  the  isolation  they  breed,   and  the  unreality  that  eventually  follows  upon  self-­‐enclosure  is  to  entertain  fresh   ideas  (Hillman,  1995).  Depth  psychology  would  contend  that  physiological  illness  is   connected  to  detachment  from  nature’s  rhythms  (Aizenstat,  1995),  and  work  in   collaboration  with  other  professional  organizations,  such  as  the  American   Psychological  Association  (APA)  and  the  American  Medical  Association  (AMA)  to   envision  an  integral,  multicultural  approach  to  healing.                      

6  

   

 

Cultural  Competency    

References:   Adams,  M.  V.  (1996).  The  Multicultural  Imagination:  Race,  Color,  and  the  Unconscious.       New  York:  Routledge.     Hillman,  J.  (1975).  Re-­Visioning  Psychology.  New  York:  Harper  &  Row.     Hillman,  J.  (1982).  Anima  Mundi:  The  return  of  the  soul  to  the  world.  Spring,  71-­‐93.     Hillman,  J.  (1986).  Notes  on  white  supremacy:  Essaying  an  archetypal  account  of     Historical  events.  Spring,  46,  29-­‐58.     Hillman,  J.  (1989).  A  Blue  Fire.  New  York:  Harper  &  Row.     Hillman,  J.  (1995).  A  psyche  the  size  of  the  earth:  A  psychological  foreword.  In       Roszak,  T.,  Gomes,  M.  E.,  Kanner,  A.  D.  (Eds.),  Ecopsychology:  Restoring  the       Earth,  Healing  the  mind  (pp.  xvii-­‐xxiii).  San  Francisco:  Sierra  Club  Books.     Hocoy,  D.  (2002).  Cross-­‐cultural  issues  in  art  therapy.  Art  Therapy:  Journal  of  the       American  Art  Therapy  Association,  19,  141-­‐145.   Hocoy,  D.  (2005).  Art  therapy  and  social  action:  A  transpersonal  framework.  Art       Therapy:  Journal  of  the  American  Art  Therapy  Association,  22,  7-­‐16.     Lopez,  S.  (1997).  Cultural  competence  in  psychotherapy:  A  guide  for  clinicians  and       Their  supervisors.  In  C.  E.  Watkins,  Jr.  (Ed.),  Handbook  of  psychotherapy       Supervision  (pp.570-­‐588).  New  York:  John  Wiley  &  Sons,  Inc.     Samuels,  A.  (1989).  The  Plural  Psyche:  Personality,  morality  and  the  Father.  London     and  New  York:  Routledge.     Sloane,  P.  (1989).  The  Visual  Nature  of  Color.  New  York:  Design.     Todorov,  T.  (1984).  The  Conquest  of  America:  The  Question  of  the  Other,  trans.  R.       Howard,  New  York:  Harper  &  Row.            

 

7