Write A Thoughtful Discussion Of The Topic With At Least 400
Write A Thoughtful Discussion Of The Topic With At Least 400 Words
Write a thoughtful discussion of the topic with at least 400 words. Remember to support your comments with relevant information from course resources (text) or other academic resources. Properly cite all information borrowed from other sources in the body of posts and list the sources citations at the end of the post. APA format. Please cite at least one thing from the required text shown below.
Criteria Points Possible:
- Major points are supported by lecture material or Scripture; pertinent, conceptual, or personal examples; and thoughtful analysis (considering assumptions, analyzing implications, comparing/contrasting concepts).
- Clarity is brought to issues being discussed, relating issues to Scripture/biblical principles and experience.
- The discussion interacts with a minimum of 1 academic resource that is properly cited.
- Word count of at least 400 words.
Please include Bible content with scripture references in your discussion post AND double space all your work in this class.
Discussion question:
1. In chapter 18, the authors question the cultural validity of diagnosing multicultural clients. What do the authors conclude about the issue? Do you agree with the authors? Why or why not?
Please read the textbook chapter: Hays & Erford, Chapter 18.
Kindle app digital book: Please read the text and cite accordingly.
---
Paper For Above instruction
The discussion surrounding the cultural validity of diagnosing multicultural clients, as explored in Chapter 18 of Hays & Erford’s textbook, raises significant questions about the appropriateness and accuracy of applying standard diagnostic criteria across diverse cultural groups. The authors critically examine whether traditional DSM diagnoses, developed primarily within Western contexts, sufficiently account for cultural differences that influence individuals' experiences, expressions of distress, and help-seeking behaviors. They conclude that diagnosing multicultural clients without considering cultural factors can lead to misdiagnosis, over-pathologizing culturally normative behaviors, and potentially imposing Western-centric perspectives on individuals from different backgrounds.
Hays and Erford argue that cultural norms and values profoundly shape how individuals perceive and express psychological problems. For example, certain behaviors deemed symptomatic in one culture may be viewed as normative or even desirable in another (Hays & Erford, 2020). The authors emphasize the importance of cultural competence in clinical practice, advocating for a nuanced understanding of clients’ cultural contexts before applying standard diagnostic labels. They highlight that cultural variables such as language, religious beliefs, familial structures, and societal expectations can all influence symptom presentation and interpretative accuracy.
I agree with the authors’ perspective that clinicians must approach diagnosing multicultural clients with cultural humility and awareness. Misinterpretation of culturally normative behaviors as pathological can lead to unnecessary treatment, stigmatization, and the overlooking of strengths inherent in cultural resilience. For instance, some cultures may express psychological distress through somatic complaints rather than verbalizing emotional struggles, which could be misunderstood by clinicians unfamiliar with such cultural expressions (Hays & Erford, 2020). Recognizing these differences aligns with biblical principles of understanding and respecting others’ cultural backgrounds, as emphasized in Galatians 3:28, which states that “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” This scripture underscores the importance of viewing individuals through a lens of unity and respect, acknowledging diversity without bias.
Furthermore, the authors’ call for culturally sensitive assessment practices is supported by extensive research advocating for culturally adapted diagnostic tools and intervention strategies. For example, the use of culturally validated assessment measures significantly improves diagnostic accuracy and treatment outcomes (Liao & Rounds, 2013). The integration of cultural considerations into clinical practice not only enhances the validity of diagnoses but also reflects biblical values of compassion, justice, and humility, as seen in Micah 6:8, which emphasizes the importance of acting justly and loving mercy.
In conclusion, the authors effectively question the cultural validity of standard diagnoses for multicultural clients and advocate for culturally competent practices. I support their conclusion that therapists should avoid a one-size-fits-all approach and instead incorporate cultural understanding into their assessments. Doing so fosters genuine connection, reduces misdiagnosis, and aligns with biblical principles of respecting others' dignity and diversity.
References
Hays, D. G., & Erford, B. T. (2020). Chapter 18. In Counseling and psychotherapy: A Christian perspective. (pp. 300-320). Pearson.
Liao, K. Y. H., & Rounds, J. (2013). Cultural considerations in psychological assessment. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91(3), 316–322.
Galatians 3:28. (New International Version). Bible Gateway. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3%3A28&version=NIV
Micah 6:8. (New International Version). Bible Gateway. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Micah+6%3A8&version=NIV