Week 2

I would like to start out by commenting on last week’s class.  I understand the importance of the social justice piece in counseling.  I get conflicted though when trying to incorporate trying to make the world a more socially just place while still maintaining neutrality with clients.  While it is important to help those stuck behind barriers, it is also important to understand that not everyone else’s cultural values are the same as Euro-Americans.  If a client distinguishes a problem as a social barrier and thinks there is something wrong with it, then I find it appropriate to address the social justice piece in counseling.  But for example if a female client comes from a patriarchal culture and embraces that culture, doing the socially just thing and helping her overcome her patriarchal suppression may be more harmful than helpful to her.  I believe in that case you are then flirting with what is ethical and what is not.  There is a fine line between trying to increase social justice and equality in our world, which is the Euro-American belief that we discussed, and being non-judgmental and neutral with clients from other cultures.  This is the largest barrier that comes to my mind when approaching the question what we can do to make an impact on social justice.  

Brown touched on the topic of career development being appropriate in different cultural contexts in chapter two (2012).  I think this is an important lense to view the theories we are studying through or to at least keep it in the back of your mind how you may approach and apply these theories in the context of people unlike ourselves.  Middle-class Euro-American males are not the only clients that will walk through our doors.  I think this is also an important concept to tie into Gibson’s article on genograms (2005).  

This week’s reading on the use of genograms by Gibson (2005) was interesting.  I like the idea of using it through the public educational span and evolving it over time.  Keeping culture in mind while reading the article, I was concerned if the assignment would be properly processed with students of different backgrounds, values, and specifically children of lower socio-economic status.  Gibson discussed the point that it would be necessary for the counselor to do this, not the teacher who does not have the training.  Having never had any contact with any kind of counselor in school until I was in high school, I found that it may be a lofty goal in our public education system.  The idea of having this be a project collaborated between counselors and teachers is a wonderful idea to bring career development into the classroom.  It would show children perspective as to why they are in school and open their opportunities to a variety of career options outside of their social realm.  The idea is really useful, however with the current cuts in school funding and difficulties in our country’s educational system make the implementation difficult.  If our school systems adopted the focus of career goals and career development in our education system, I think this would be a practical tool.  It helps the child not only broaden their repertoire of careers outside of the family unit but aids counselors in understanding the socioeconomic status and educational values that the child is coming from at a glance.

Brown, D. (2012). Trait-and-factor and developmental theories of career choice and development and their applications. In Career information, career counseling, and career development (10th ed., pp. 24-58). New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gibson, D. M. (2005). The use of genograms in career counseling with elementary, middle, and high school students. The Career Development Quarterly, 53, 353-362.