Blog 8-Brown Chap 4 & 5

            Byars-Winston and Fouad (2006) discussed in their article the seven steps of the Culturally Appropriate Career Counseling Model (CACCM), as well as the importance of metacognition in working with culturally diverse clients.  I think it is interesting that the authors emphasized that the self-reflection domain of cultural competence is necessary for practice and if this third domain is not utilized then the overconfidence effect can occur (Stewart, 2002 as cited in Byars-Winston & Fouad, 2006). I am wondering if metacognition or self-reflection can be utilized without bias from the counselor. An individual’s world view impacts decision making and if individuals are ethnocentric in their views, metacognition may not serve the welfare of the client. Even though there are three processes of metacognition (plan formation, self-monitoring, and evaluation) each of these processes are dependent on the initial thoughts/impressions of the counselor. The counselor could engage in self-reflection during each step of CACCM, however their own thoughts/impressions may reinforce biased thinking. I think in theory the aspect of metacognition could enhance multicultural counseling practices however the actual effective use of this by all counselors may be minimal.

            I have a hard time accepting the notion of client centered advocacy for several reasons discussed by Brown (2012) in Chapter 5. I can see the benefit for the individual and advocacy may be necessary, however there are too many risks for the counselor and the client-counselor relationship. First, boundary crossing will occur as the counselor takes on an advocacy role for the client. This is an ethical dilemma and can potentially result in an ethics complaint. Second, the therapeutic relationship can be impacted. This can take many forms including the client feeling indebted to the counselor for helping him/her in the advocacy work. The client may also develop negative feelings toward the counselor if the plan for advocacy fails.  With this in mind, the client may feel even more powerless if the intended advocacy goal is not reached. Third, the counselor may dedicate additional time to advocating for one client. This can affect the work of the counselor and limit his/her availability for others seeking career counseling. Fourth, the working relationship between the counselor and local companies may become strained even though the counselor may not be challenging those particular companies. Lastly, due to laws and policies the counselor may have to consult a lawyer to effectively navigate company policies calling into question available funding. I am much more comfortable with either empowering the client to engage in self-advocacy or taking social action against laws or policies (Brown, 2012). I find the benefits outweigh the risks in both of these approaches.

           

Brown, D. (2012). A Values-Based, Multicultural Approach to Career Counseling and Advocacy. In Career Information, Career Counseling, and Career Development (10th ed., pp. 96-115). New York: Pearson Education, Inc. 

Byars-Winston, A. M., & Fouad, N. A. (2006). Metacognition and Multicultural Competence: Expanding the Culturally Appropriate Career Counseling Model. The Career Development Quarterly, 54, 187-201.