TALKING ABOUT RACE USING CRITICAL RACE THEORY: RECENT TRENDS IN THE JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY...

Journal of Marital and Family TherapyJanuary 2004,Vol. 30, No. 1, 81–94

January 2004 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY 81

Teresa McDowell, EdD, Behavioral Medicine Clinic and Counseling Associates, Aberdeen, Washington; Laurel Jeris,EdD, Department of Counseling, Adult and Health Education, Northern Illinois University.

The authors express sincere thanks to Layne Prest, PhD, Department of Family Practice, University of Nebraska MedicalCenter for his consultation on this study.

Address correspondence to Teresa McDowell, Behavioral Medicine Clinic and Counseling Associates, 1812 Sumner Ave,Aberdeen, Washington, 98520. E-mail: [email protected]

TALKING ABOUT RACE USING CRITICAL RACE THEORY:RECENT TRENDS IN THE JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY

Teresa McDowellBehavioral Medicine Clinic and Counseling Associates

Laurel JerisNorthern Illinois University

This study uses critical race theory as an interpretive lens to critique recent race related articlesin the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (JMFT). Our primary goal is to contribute to andinspire dialogue about the perspectives marriage and family therapists (MFTs) are taking inrelationship to race. We situate our exploration within the broader context of continuing profes-sional education. We describe the main themes of critical race theory and use them as theconceptual framework. Analyzing 127 articles, we found that only topics related to couples anddivorce occurred more frequently than race and social justice. Within the articles on race, evidencesuggests that issues of race and racism are emerging as key informants of MFT practice. We pointto areas for consideration in future MFT research and practice.

Over the last decade, there has been a call for marriage and family therapists (MFTs) to become moreracially aware and sensitive in the therapy room (Lazloffy & Hardy, 2000), for more attention to be paid torace in supervision and training (Hardy & Lazloffy, 1992; McGoldrick et al., 1999; McDowell, Fang,Brownlee, Gomez Young, & Khanna, 2002; McDowell et al., 2003), and for the field of MFT to becomemore racially diverse (Killian & Hardy, 1998; Wilson & Stith, 1993). To use McGoldrick’s (2001) words:

The time is long overdue for us to become uncomfortable with the impact of white privilege onthe economics of our field and our society and on the well being of the families we serve. (p. 17)

Our primary goal for this article is to contribute to and inspire dialogue about the perspectives MFTsare taking in relationship to race. We do this by using critical race theory (CRT) to inform our review ofarticles recently published in the Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (JMFT), a signature journal widelycirculated to MFT clinicians, researchers, students, supervisors, and educators. Although these articles donot tell the whole story of the work being done in the field by those committed to the issues of race andsocial justice, they provide an important source for analyzing trends in the field.

Our secondary goal is to situate this exploration and analysis within the broader context of continuingprofessional education (CPE). Knox (1992) noted that each profession maintains a normative, field-specificcognitive structure and higher-level concepts that serve as “metacomponents and are used by experts toreflect on combinations of knowledge and experiences” (p. 98). Hence, the challenges facing MFTs inmeeting McGoldrick’s (2001) charge are ubiquitous among the health and social care professions. Similarly,

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 81

both academic- and practitioner-focused journals provide key resources for self-directed CPE. Althoughprofessional regulation occurs at the state level, growing numbers of continuing education providers invarious professions (e.g., nursing, dentistry, medicine, accounting) are designing self-directed componentsof continuing education that can be awarded credit toward relicensure requirements (Continuing medicaleducation, n.d.). In addition, journal articles, both materially and symbolically, represent the currentthinking in many fields and are highly influential in shaping thinking and practice of preservice and noviceprofessionals. Given the privileged status of the JMFT (and signature journals in other professions) asvessels for carrying new knowledge to the field, a rational expectation is continuously to locate and hold theexamination of the commitment to social justice and equality as a primary component of the editorialagenda. Further, we see this article as providing a model for other professional groups to undertake anexamination of their publications’ positions on racism and commitment to social justice (Jeris & Armacost,2002).

CRITICAL RACE THEORY AS AN INTERPRETIVE LENS

Critical Race Theory and MFT: Building a Bridge Critical Race Theory offers an existing, well-developed lens through which MFT literature can be

analyzed. The beginnings of CRT can be traced to the 1970s, when legal scholars Derrick Bell, AlanFreeman, and Richard Delgado began challenging the slow progress of racial reform in the US (Delgado &Stefancic, 2001). Advances in racial equality via the Civil Rights Movement, such as affirmative action,have continued to be challenged by a backlash of political and legal attempts to disregard race in favor of“color-blind” meritocracy (Brady, Eatman, & Parker, 2000). Critical race theorists have attempted tocounteract this “color-blind” approach by disrupting the status quo in favor of greater racial equity. AlthoughCRT began as legal discourse, it has been applied in numerous other areas of study. For example, Hermes(1999) used a CRT approach to center marginalized voices and encourage social justice via buildingcommunity vision; Taylor (1999) completed historical research on desegregation from a CRT perspectiveusing historical analysis; and Fernandez (2002) used storytelling as a CRT methodology to trace theeducational experience of a Latino student. CRT informed research has also been used to explore the racialexperiences of MFTs-in-training (McDowell, 2003). Viewing recent MFT field knowledge through this lensoffers us a broader social perspective for assessing our direction in relationship to race.

Historically, we found a good fit between CRT and MFT. Over the last 25 years, there has been aserious critique of male generated MFT knowledge by feminist theorists (Avis, 1996). Driven by an interro-gation of power relationships, this critique pointed to the need to consider how knowledge is produced, whatis considered legitimate knowledge, and who benefits from existing MFT theories and practices. Morerecently, the feminist critique, which originally centered on gender equity, has been expanded and joined byothers critiquing racism, classism, heterosexism, nationalism, and so on. A focus on the intersection ofmultiple social identities is present in both CRT and MFT literature. Likewise, trends in MFT toward socialconstructivism, social justice, and amplifying marginalized voices are in keeping with the basic themes ofCRT. None of these arguments are new to MFT, yet pulled together under the CRT umbrella, we believethey can offer fresh insights into our practices as educators, supervisors, researchers, and therapists.

Critical Race Theory: Core Themes Although there is no set of agreed upon tenets of CRT, numerous scholars have identified consistent

themes (Bernal, 2002; Delgado & Stefancic, 2001; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1999; Parker & Lynn, 2002;Soloranzo & Yosso, 2002). We have grouped these themes in a way that seems most relevant to existingMFT literature and practice.

First, CRT acknowledges that race has historically been, and continues to be, a fundamental organizingprinciple in U.S. society (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1999). A “color-blind” approach to race attempts to denythe material and experiential consequences of racism in favor of an “equal but different” system ofmeritocracy that assumes a level playing field while turning a blind eye to discrimination. Likewise, viewingrace from a liberal, pluralist, “multicultural” perspective fails to examine critically the historic and contem-

82 JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY THERAPY January 2004

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 82

porary significance of race/racism as well as the significance of the processes of immigration, acculturation,and colonization. Critical Race Theory challenges the idea that any one of us has a single, stationary identityor that racial groups are monolithic, acknowledging that our many and often overlapping (or evenconflicting) loyalties and identities are socially positioned and relative.

Second, critical race theorists take the position that, far from being the exception, racism is “normal”or “ordinary” in that it is “the usual way society does business, the common, everyday experience of mostpeople of color in this country” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, p. 7). Critical Race Theory critiques theperspective that racism is primarily an individual, psychological problem, arguing that this perspectivemasks the more significant problem of systemic racism. White supremacy is so ingrained in our institutionsand cultural practices that it is often unrecognizable, creating an “invisible norm” against which all otherraces are measured. Critical race theorists challenge White-dominated “truth” and support revisionisthistory, which accounts for the experiences of those who have been silenced in the original telling. Whilere-narrating is an important part of CRT, materialists argue that it is idealistic to assume that changing racialattitudes and racial representation alone will change actual physical circumstances.

Third, the ultimate goal of CRT is social justice. Far from politically neutral, CRT supports theargument that theories are never neutral or objective, but reflect the worldview, social position/perspective,and interests of the theorist. Critical Race Theory relies on this social-constructionist stance to understandrace and racism as “products of social thought and relations. Not objective, inherent, or fixed, theycorrespond to no biological or genetic reality; rather, races are categories that society invents, manipulates,or retires when convenient” (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, p. 7). For example, different minority groups havebeen racialized by the dominant culture at different times for different purposes.

In one era, a group of color may be depicted as happy-go-lucky, simpleminded, and content toserve white folks. A little later, when conditions change, that very same group may appear incartoons, movies, and other cultural scripts as menacing, brutish, and out of control, requiringmonitoring and repression. (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, p. 8)

Theories about race once considered “objective” and “neutral” (e.g., eugenics, social Darwinism) haveproven to reflect socially constructed ideas of reality that socially and materially benefited Whites over thoseof color.

The fourth theme in CRT is that people of color have a unique voice in racial matters because of theirsocial position and experiences with oppression. Critical Race Theory emphasizes the importance of raciallymarginalized members of society telling their stories. Counter stories, or stories that deconstruct existingnarratives, challenge “embedded preconceptions that marginalize others or conceal their humanity”(Delgado & Stefancic, 2001, p. 42). Finally, CRT draws from many disciplines including history,philosophy, law, anthropology, sociology, economics, and political science to analyze the complexities ofrace relations and encourage change.

It is also important to note the concept of “Whiteness as property” from a CRT perspective (Delgado& Stefancic, 2001; Harris, 1993; Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995). Harris (1993) argued that the law hasprotected those expectations that are based on White privilege, therefore these expectations have becometantamount to property that is protected and gives the owner the right to exclude. Delgado and Stefancic(2001) suggested that the normative function of whiteness is a form of property as it sets the standard for allothers. Thus, racism and White privilege maintain cultural reproduction along racial lines.

Defining Race, Racism, and CultureMany contemporary scholars agree that race is a socially constructed concept without biological

determinants and that it is important to understand the relationship between racial thought andpolitical/economic practices to contextualize the meaning of race (Dei, 1996). The meaning of race in theU.S. is influenced by the history of immigration, economic oppression, and European colonization that hassustained racism. Specific examples include Slavery, Jim Crow laws, and the genocide of indigenouspeoples. Soloranzo and Yosso (2002) identified three important components in the definition of racism. First,racism requires that one group considers itself superior to all others. Second, that group has the power to


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 83

discriminate. Third, the discrimination benefits this group while harming other racial groups. Hence,antiracism, for the purpose of this article, refers to attempts to dismantle the ideology of superiority that isused to justify unjust social practices; confrontations of and attempts to eliminate racially defined powerinequities; and interrogation of the use of social, economic, political and all other forms of institutionalpower that favor one racial group over another. Further, it is important to consider the relationship betweenrace and culture. Particularly in the US, culture in the form of shared beliefs and social practices oftencorrelates with race as immigrant and indigenous groups of color have not assimilated to the same degreeand/or enjoyed the same privilege as immigrant European ethnic groups, creating a dual lifeworld for manypeople of color.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Using the five themes of CRT as an interpretive lens for the analysis of recent JMFT articles, we asked:(1) What racial perspectives are we taking in MFT literature? (2) How are racism and White, dominantideology being considered? (3) How committed are we to social justice? (4) Are we making space formarginalized voices and subjugated stories? And, (5) To what extent are we integrating interdisciplinarydiscourse to challenge racism? We operationalized these thematically derived research questions in thearticle-rating tool (see Appendix) by including several indicators that are relevant to each question. Inconsidering racial perspective, we evaluated the degree to which authors focused specifically on race, theintersection of race with other social identities (e.g., class, gender, sexual orientation, abilities), and theiremphasis on culture, acculturation, and immigration (when applicable). In rating the degree to whichauthors attended to racism and the influence of White, dominant ideology we considered their attention tosystemic racism, individual racism, and ethnocentrism. To measure commitment to social justice, weconsidered the degree to which authors advocated for, and suggested ways to advocate for, social justice. Inasking about voice, we wanted to know if authors identified their own racial identity and to what degree theyincluded the direct experience of members of marginalized groups. Finally, we considered the degree towhich authors integrated interdisciplinary discourse about racial relationships into their work.

POSITIONING OURSELVES

We believe that the process of becoming racially self-aware, aware of the impact of racism in society,and competent in combating racism is important for members of all races. We recognize that we enter thedialogue of race and racism as White women who are attempting to become increasingly racially aware andactive in antiracist efforts. We absolutely acknowledge that we have not “arrived” in this process. Werecognize that, as Helms (1990) suggested, we act from a number of White identity statuses depending onour understanding of the context and our present level of racial awareness. We hope that as we gain self andracial awareness, we will be better prepared to act more frequently out of what Helms (1990) identified asa state of autonomy, which is marked by internalizing a positive White racial identity and engaging in a livedcommitment to antiracist activity, continued self-examination, and increased interpersonal effectiveness inmultiracial settings. This status is similar to what D’Andrea and Daniels (1999) defined as a principledactivist disposition in which Whites develop a deeper understanding of how racism is embedded in society,become better able to articulate specific types of changes societal institutions need to make, and arecommitted to changing conditions and rectifying the effects of racism.

METHOD

Building the Counter-Story: Data Collection Based on our review of the CRT literature and the research questions/subquestions, we developed a

rating sheet as our tool for analyzing JMFT literature (see Appendix), which provided a basis forcomparisons among the raters. The JMFT was chosen for this study because it is: (a) Produced for andreflects the ongoing education and clinical competence of MFTs; (b) representative of the most recent trends


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 84

in the field; (c) blind refereed by advanced members of the field; and (d) widely circulated among students,clinicians, supervisors, and educators.

First, we reviewed all 127, refereed articles published in the JMFT (excluding editor’s notes and bookreviews) between 1999–2001 to determine the distribution of topics covered. Eight (6.3%) of the articles inthe JMFT during this period centered on race, ethnicity, or cultural competence. Next we analyzed thoseeight articles more thoroughly in reference to each of the five research questions through the use of the ratingtool.

The raters considered the degree to which each article addressed the concerns raised in the thematicallyderived questions and rated article content in each of the those areas using the scale of “Very evident,”“Somewhat evident,” and “Not evident.” We purposely did not frame the rating categories from theperspective of traditional content analysis (counting instances). Our rationale was that the main purpose ofthe tool is to stimulate dialog among professionals and support interrogation of personal perspectives, thusprivileging subjectivity over quantitative objectivity. Reconciling “how much” is central to that dialog.Using constant comparison, the raters resolved minor differences and major differences were retained.

Data Analysis Both authors and a consultant independently analyzed all eight articles using the rating form. Item

ratings that differed among raters were determined by recording the score that reflected agreement betweentwo out of three raters. When no two raters agreed on an item rating, the lack of agreement was recorded assuch.

We originally included five additional articles that emphasized race or ethnicity/culture even thoughthis was not their primary topic (Almeida & Durkin, 1999; Bograd, 1999; McGoldrick, 2001; McGoldricket al., 1999; Waldman, 1999). We later decided that because these authors did not position race or ethnicityas their primary focus, it did not make sense to analyze them using CRT criteria. These five articles aresignificant in what they reveal regarding research, teaching, and practice trends related to race in the MFTfield. We believe individually and as a group, they represent the field’s movement toward an emergingawareness of race. They also provide an important pedagogical contribution as both preservice andcontinuing professional education resources.

Limitations One of the serious limitations of our study is that all of the raters are White, majority culture academics.

MFT literature needs to be critiqued by students, therapists, supervisors, educators, and researchers of allraces to consider trends and future directions more fully. Another limitation is that the articles reviewed werefrom only one journal source and spanned only 3 years of scholarship. Although this allowed for an in-depthlook at a small group of articles, it cannot be assumed that the trends demonstrated in this review arenecessarily indicative of the work being done in the MFT field in general.

We also limited the findings of this review by imposing an established lens on our analysis, whichpredetermined the nature of the findings. We imposed this lens post facto. The authors of the articlesincluded in this study completed their scholarship without the expectation that they would be critiqued fromthe perspective of CRT. However, to the extent that this lens permits a counter-story of race in the MFT field,it contributes as Haraway (1996) pointed out, “to engender situated knowledge that offers different values,perspectives, and understanding of everyday reality” (p. 255).

RESULTS

Overview of Selected Articles Out of a total of 127 articles published in JMFT in 1999, 2000, and 2001, race was the primary topic

of eight. The subject matter of these articles included: guidelines for working with Hispanic families (Bean,Perry, & Bedell, 2001); the development of a typology for African-American marriages (Allen & Olson,2001); family therapy with biracial youths (Milan & Keiley, 2001); ethnic identity development of interna-tionally adopted children and adolescents (Friedlander, 1999); therapist’s perceptions of ethnicity issues in


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 85

MFT (Nelson, Brendel, & Mize, 2001); racial histories and identities of interracial couples (Killian, 2001);relationship satisfaction of interracial couples (Negy & Snyder, 2000); and multicultural competency andrace-related attitudes among White MFTs (Constantine, Juby, & Liang, 2001). The results of our analysisof these articles are summarized in Table 1.

Racial Perspectives Several articles referred to “race” and “ethnicity” or “culture” interchangeably (Allen & Olson, 2001)

or almost exclusively used the term “ethnicity” when referring to race (Bean et al., 2001; Negy & Snyder,2000; Nelson et al., 2001). The relationship between culture and race was often blurred, with terms such as“cultural diversity” and “multicultural” used in ways that seemed to refer to the overlap between race andculture, but without clear definition or distinction. Race was not defined in any of the articles, althoughreferences were made to phenotype and self-report as indicators of race (Friedlander, 1999), and thedifficulties inherent in definition were mentioned (Milan & Keiley, 2000). One article defined ethnicity, butseemed to use the term in reference to race at times (Nelson et al., 2001).

Some articles clearly associated race with relative social power (Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000).For example, Killian (2001) argued that “racism positions persons of different racial and ethnic origins in a


Table 1JMFT Articles Relating to Race

Item category Very evident Some what evident Not evident

Racial perspectiveFocus on race 8 0 0Focus on culture 7 1 0Intersecting identities 2 4 1Acculturation/immigration 2 3 3

Racism and dominant ideologyEthnocentrism acknowledged 3 1 3Individual racism 2 3 3Systemic racism 3 4 0

Commitment to social justiceAdvocated 3 3 2Ways to advocate 3 3 2

VoiceAuthor’s race identified 1 0 7Direct experience of marginalized groups 2 2 4

Interdisciplinary discourseMultiple disciplines 1 3 4

Note. Numbers reflect articles rated as very evident, some what evident, and not evident in each itemcategory. There were two separate articles (one in each of two categories: “intersecting identities” and“ethnocentrism acknowledged”) that received different ratings from each of the three reviewers. Theseratings were therefore excluded from the respective category totals.

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 86

web of exploitation and oppression” (p. 28). Others mentioned power only briefly, if at all, focusing moreon race as an issue of cultural difference (Allen & Olson, 2001; Bean et al., 2001; Nelson et al., 2001).

The intersection of race, class, gender, nation of origin, and other social signifiers were considered ina variety of ways. Two authors clearly noted the importance of intersecting social locations to identity,relative social power, privilege, and oppression (Friedlander, 1999; Killian, 2001). Another noted thisintersection more as an issue of diversity (Bean et al., 2001). Several authors made a specific connectionbetween White racial privilege and class advantage (Killian, 2001) and/or racism and economicdisadvantage (Allen & Olson, 2001; Bean et al., 2001; Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000). As Milan andKeiley (2000) noted, “We live in a society in which the classification of individuals by their ethnic heritagehas taken on profound importance as a means of allocating social rewards” (p. 310). Gender was also notedas an important intersection with race (Bean et al., 2001; Negy & Snyder, 2000). Sexual orientation andabilities were mentioned as part of a “string” of identity signifiers, but were not central to any discussion.White racial identity and racial attitudes were noted in one article (Constantine et al., 2001) as were concernsregarding lack of racial awareness among Whites (Nelson et al., 2001).

Acculturation and immigration received the most direct attention in relationship to Latinos/Latinas(Bean et al., 2001; Negy & Snyder, 2000). Assimilation and the development of bicultural identity were ofparticular interest in a study of internationally adopted children (Friedlander, 1999).

Consideration of Racism and White, Dominant Ideology All of the articles referred in some way to individual and/or systemic racism. This included familial and

social disapproval of cross-racial relationships (Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000; Negy & Snyder, 2000);dominance and oppression by Whites of other racial groups (Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000; Negy &Snyder, 2000); social inequality and discrimination against groups of color (Allen & Olson, 2001; Bean etal., 2001; Friedlander, 1999); individual acts of racism (Killian, 2001; Friedlander, 1999; Milan & Keiley,2000); racism/racial attitudes among White therapists (Constantine et al., 2001); and the intersection ofoppressive social structures such as racism, sexism, and classism (Killian, 2001). Three articles discussedpower and oppression as relevant to the history of race relationships and/or through the lens of currentdominant and marginalized social discourses (Bean et al., 2001; Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000). Onevery clearly connected the consequences of these forces to contemporary material inequities via theintersection of race and class (Killian, 2001). In Killian’s (2001) words, “The history of slavery, differentialaccess to resources and ongoing racism and classism operating in tandem at the systemic level of individualand social institutions continues to influence socioeconomic status along racial lines” (p. 37).

One-half of the articles mentioned the importance of therapists becoming aware of and not imposingtheir own ethnocentric perspectives (Bean et al., 2001; Constantine et al., 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000;Nelson et al., 2001). For example, Constantine et al. (2001) argued:

Without raising awareness about the impact of their own worldviews in counseling situations, thenstudents . . . may not be fully cognizant of the ways in which they may impose Eurocentricthoughts, expectations, and behaviors in the context of therapeutic relationships. (p. 359)

A number of articles suggested that inquiring/becoming knowledgeable about clients’ worldviews(Bean et al., 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000; Nelson et al., 2001), and/or the impact of social forces on clients’and therapists’ perspectives (Killian, 2001). The authors of one article made overt their use of researchinstruments with African American couples that were originally designed and normed with EuropeanAmerican couples (Allen & Olson, 2001). No mention was made in this article of the potential negativeconsequences of using majority culture research methods on subjects from marginalized groups. However,two other articles noted the power inherent in the norms and goals of the majority culture and the potentialfor these dominant narratives to result in subjugating narratives for people of color (Killian, 2001; Milan &Keiley, 2000).

Commitment to Social Justice In some ways, all of the articles at least acknowledged injustice via some mention of racism. All but

two of the eight articles (Allen & Olson, 2001; Negy & Snyder, 2000) at least implied that therapists should


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 87

advocate for social justice. Three of these articles demonstrated a significant argument in favor of socialjustice, as indicated by a focus on the brutal history of racial oppression in the U.S. (Killian, 2001; Milan &Keiley, 2000), the historic legal support for discrimination (Milan & Keiley, 2000), the connection betweenracial oppression and the unequal distribution of social and material rewards (Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley,2000), and the power of subjugating stories and experiences in the lives of people of color (Milan & Keiley,2000). Several articles also included discussions about the dynamics of colonization (Milan & Keiley,2000), oppressive social structures and institutions (Killian, 2001), and/or the pervasiveness of racistideology and racist acts (Constantine et al., 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000; Killian, 2001). For example, Milanand Keiley (2000) argued, “It is crucial that the therapist be able to deconstruct the existing culturaldiscourse that emerges from the labels, laws, stories told, and stories withheld about interracial families” (p.310).

Suggestions for ways to advocate included: Therapists helping clients deal with individual acts ofracism (Friedlander, 1999); encouraging clients of color to develop stories of strength and resistance(Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000); relying on the historic survival, resistance, and resilience of ancestorsof color (Milan & Keiley, 2000); openly discussing the history of race relationships and legal discriminationin the U.S, (Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000); using cultural genograms to uncover stories of strengthand adversity (Milan & Keiley, 2000); making room for the stories of immigration and advocating forimmigrant families (Bean et al., 2001); breaking the “no racial talk” rule in the therapy room to help familiesspeak previously “silenced” racial stories (Killian, 2001; Millan & Keiley, 2000); and contextualizingexperiences of discrimination (Killian, 2001). Other suggestions that related to best practice and researchincluded therapists providing services in clients’ native languages (Bean et al., 2001); developing a safeenvironment and knowing how/when to talk about race in therapy (Freidlander, 1999); helping immigrantfamilies to acculturate without losing their own cultural traditions and preferred family relationships (Beanet al., 2001); realizing the relevance of race in client–therapist relationships (Nelson et al., 2001); completingresearch that accentuates the experiences of clients of color (Killian, 2001; Nelson et al., 2001); andattending to variance in class and cultural values when completing research on race (Allen & Olson, 2001).

Voice Only one article specifically revealed the social location (including race) of the author (Killian, 2001).

Likewise, the direct experience of members of racially marginalized groups was a primary resource in onlyabout one-half of the articles. One article specifically targeted racial attitudes among White therapists(Constantine et al., 2001). Another researched perceptions of ethnicity in the family therapy field; however,only three of 24 participants were not White (Nelson et al., 2001). One article drew conclusions byconsidering a subset of existing data to compare the functioning of biracial to monoracial youths (Milan &Keiley, 2000). Another article reviewed the most commonly cited literature on Latino/Latina families tomake suggestions for cultural competence; however, these sources were not identified or chosen in referenceto the authors’ social location/race (Bean et al., 2001). Two articles used existing instruments to generatequantifiable data or drew from existing sets of data on populations of color (Allen & Olson, 2001; Negy &Snyder, 2000). One of these also included room for participants to comment, relying on a mix of quanti-tative and qualitative methods (Negy & Snyder, 2000). One study applied existing literature to a caseexample or composite case involving a multiracial family (Friedlander, 1999). Finally, one article relied onqualitative methods through interviewing interracial couples and using the subjects’own words to exemplifyresults (Killian, 2001). Killian (2001) explained his research approach in the following way, “Thisqualitative, narrative informed project opened space for interracial couples to share individual and coupleexperiences of racism and prejudice, stories about the families of origin, and personal and family historiesrelegated to silence” (p. 37).

By nature of their focus on clients’ racial and cultural experience, as well as building therapist culturalcompetence, all of the articles indirectly supported the importance of therapists’ listening to the voice ofclients of color. Several articles referred to the importance of the client’s voice in the therapy process morespecifically, including the need to make room for untold, silenced, or previously marginalized stories(Killian, 2001; Milan & Keiley, 2000; Nelson et al., 2001).


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM 8

Integration of Interdisciplinary DiscourseSeveral articles drew from at least some interdisciplinary knowledge. One in particular integrated

history, law, and even stories from the Bible to understand and challenge racial oppression (Milan & Keiley,2000). In referring to the importance of law in therapy with interracial families, Milan and Keiley (2000)argued, “Understanding how recent and widespread the existence of antimiscegenation laws was may helpfamilies contextualize their experience within a larger cultural story in transformation” (p. 311). Anotherreferred to the relevance of law, history, and socioeconomic analysis to understand race relations in the U.S.(Killian, 2001). One article drew from family studies (Allen & Olson, 2001) and another, although drawingprimarily from mental health literature, included studies on transracial adoption and literature from culturalstudies (Friedlander, 1999). Milan and Keiley (2000) pointed to the relevance of racial history in the US inthe following passage:

The story of slavery or the Jim Crow laws, when told from the perspective of Whites, may becolored by guilt. The same story told from a Black voice is rarely one of guilt. The same could besaid for the story of colonization as seen by Native Americans. (p. 313)

DISCUSSION

Racial Perspective Our review pointed to the need to more thoughtfully consider the definition and meaning of race in

MFT scholarship. The implications of using terms such as “ethnicity,” “diversity,” or “culture” in referenceto race and/or failing to consider race as different from culture or ethnicity may seriously detract frominterrogating power inequities. In fact, it has been suggested that a new racism has emerged that is oftenhidden behind discussions of culture, ethnicity, immigration, welfare, and affirmative action (Dei, 1996).How we talk about race is indicative of the stance we take on social equity as a profession.

As we mentioned earlier, most articles at least noted the importance of intersecting, socially locatedidentities as factors that mitigate racial experience in some way and/or contribute to relative positions ofpower. The relationship between race and class (relative economic and social influence) is of particularinterest because it reflects existing power inequities and highlights the problem of White privilege. Althoughthe intersection of gender and race was considered in some articles, serious discussion of sexual orientationand abilities in relationship to race was missing altogether. None of the articles attempted to analyze thecomplex nature of the intersection of numerous multiple identities such as race, gender, sexual orientation,abilities, nation of origin, and class. There needs to be continued attention paid in MFT literature to identitypolitics, which more accurately describes individual experience by situating individuals within a historical,structural context and acknowledges that our identities are fluid, changing as we move in and out of thecomplex networks resulting in continually shifting power dynamics (Tisdell, Hanley, & Taylor, 2000). Ourdiscussions of multiple identities in MFT also need to be expanded to include more nuanced understandingof the impact of nation of origin, language/accent, bicultural identity, immigration, and colonization.

Our review suggested that acculturation, assimilation, and colonization are discussed in MFT literaturein relationship to some but not all racial groups. It cannot be assumed that these processes are relevant, orrelevant in the same ways, to all members of all marginalized groups. There is certainly diversity in theissues members of each group encounter. They are, however, important considerations in developing abroader understanding of the relationship between dominant and marginalized groups in the U.S. Anexample of the importance of analyzing these processes can be found in W. E. B. Dubois’s (cited inAnderson, 1990) exposure of a “double consciousness” among African Americans who often exist in twodistinctly different worlds. Frequently it is necessary for members of marginalized groups to accommodatemajority cultural expectations, but this bicultural competence remains unacknowledged by Whites becauseit is outside of their life experience. This dynamic is highly relevant for White therapists working withpeople of color, because accommodation may be misread as agreement or assimilation. Furthermore, the useof theories, interventions, and research methods/instruments generated from a dominant cultural perspectivecan at best fail to be effective and, at worst, function as attempts (even if inadvertent) to further colonizeclients, supervisees, students, and research participants from marginalized groups.


Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 89


Consideration of Racism and White, Dominant IdeologyThe majority of articles in this review acknowledged individual and/or systemic racism. Many Whites

believe only others are racist and that racism is only demonstrated by overt, intentional, mean-spirited actsthat occur in isolated instances. This personal prejudice approach to racism assumes that changingindividual beliefs, building sensitivity through contact with other races, and discarding stereotypes willeliminate racism (Bedard, 2000). Although this is important, it is only a starting place for therapists tochallenge their own racial perspectives and to act in ways that help dismantle racism in themselves and theirclients. The social-constructionist trend in MFT, evident in a number of articles we reviewed, is also animportant but limited perspective for supporting racial equity. Although making space for those who aremarginalized to voice their experience and to interrogate dominant, oppressive narratives is an importantstep, stopping with re-narration runs the risk of supporting the status quo by encouraging those who areoppressed to change their thinking without necessarily helping them change their circumstances. Finally, afew of the articles brought up the importance of accentuating stories of resistance and strength in the livesand heritage of people of color. Human agency, acts of self-formation, strategies for survival, and politicalresistance are integral to the experience of marginalized peoples and need to be punctuated to promotechange (Giroux, 1983).

It is also imperative that we interrogate systemic racism and White privilege within the MFT field itself(McGoldrick, 2001). The field of MFT has been repeatedly criticized as lacking diverse membership(Killian & Hardy, 1998), relying on dominant culture knowledge, research, and curriculum, supportingEurocentric theories and practices (Hardy & Lazloffy, 1994), failing to interrogate White privilegeadequately (McGoldrick, 2001; McIntosh, 1998), and ignoring the needs of its members of color (Killian& Hardy, 1998; Wilson & Stith, 1993). Inherent in this critique is the expectation that members of color willassimilate to dominant MFT culture and practice. Eurocentric ideas and practices need to continue to becritiqued and room made for other ideologies and life worlds. White privilege, whiteness as the norm, andWhites holding the right to exclude, are important concepts when considering the direction the MFT fieldis taking in relationship to race. We must ask, does the field “belong” to Whites that by majority and intheir/our positions as academics, administrators, supervisors, and conference/journal referees, decide howmuch and in what ways race will be considered an important issue within the field? Do all MFTs have avoice, and are the experiences of MFTs of color centered in dialogue about racism? When research iscompleted on clients of color, is it completed in comparison to Whites or from a Eurocentric perspective?

Commitment to Social JusticeOur review revealed that there is an emerging trend in MFT literature toward advocating for social

justice and resisting socially unjust relationships. Understanding antiracist efforts in MFT from a frameworkof resistance means acknowledging that there are multiple competing realities and interests within societyand that therapy can inadvertently serve to reproduce dominant cultural, economic, and political systems ofprivilege and oppression, or operate in an emancipatory and counter-hegemonic manner. Therapists,supervisors, educators, researchers, and clients are not passive players simply caught in the cogs of existingpower structures; they are intentional participants who bring with them their own cultural, economic, andpolitical agendas. Although the very real effects of oppression and marginalization, including lack of accessto material resources, cannot be underestimated, all players in the therapeutic system are capable of exertingpersonal agency in support of or in resistance to social injustice. There needs to be continued efforts madein MFT to develop antiracist approaches to therapy, supervision, education and research to advocate activelyfor social justice.

VoiceAs readers, we were often left wondering who was speaking and from what social location and racial

history. This oversight may have important consequences as it suggested a failure to acknowledge that ourracial lens affects the way in which we approach and understand research, theory, and practice. Althoughthere seemed to be a trend toward including the voices of people of color in MFT research, the experiencesof clients, students, therapists, supervisors, educators, and researchers of color need to be uniquely valuedin the study of race and racism.

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 90


Integration of Interdisciplinary Discourse The results of this review indicated that the field of MFT underutilizes knowledge from other

disciplines when attempting to understand the impact of race and racism. There are many fields of study thatMFTs can explore to better understand and challenge existing race relations. Situating race in an historicalperspective is important not only in re-narrating stories of survival and resistance, but also in recognizinghow the history of race relations in the U.S. supports contemporary racism. Punctuating the importance oflaw in understanding race relations by acknowledging that law is not neutral and tends to support existingpower structures validates experiences of people of color in relationship to the legal system. For example, itis imperative for therapists working with families of color to be aware of racial profiling by police (Johnson,2001) and that racial tracking occurs routinely in schools, in most cases without legal consequences (Green,1999). If therapists are unaware of these dynamics, how can they validate the experiences of their clients orhelp support resistance to such oppressive forces? Considering race from a socioeconomic perspective isimperative to combat classism and understand the economic plight of many people of color. Other importantareas of study include sociology, education, cultural anthropology, cultural studies, and political science.MFT researchers can also expand their perspectives by exploring epistemologies and research methods fromother fields of study, such as education and cultural studies, that have emerged from groups of color ratherthan majority cultural research traditions.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Resituating these eight articles within the wide range of topics covered in the three volumes of theJMFT included in the study, our review of all articles revealed that only five other topics were addressedwith greater frequency: Couples/divorce issues and therapy approaches; MFT education and training;therapy models and techniques; domestic violence and family aggression; and supervision. When combinedwith articles focusing on social justice, only one topic, couples/divorce issues and therapy approaches, wasincluded more frequently than those concerned with race or social justice. This is encouraging news for thefield and a trend that merits both editorial and readership support. This support appears to be present asevidenced by a number of articles relating to race that have since been published in the 2002 volume of theJMFT.

It would be naïve and far from our purpose to view all MFT scholarship through the CRT lens in aneffort to force all perspectives on race and social justice through one keyhole. However, it is not enough tosimply offer a critique; CRT helps makes space for counter-stories to emerge providing alternative visionsof knowing. As Minnich (1990) noted, “we must beware of taking inherited standards of what is good,significant, meaningful, to be more than they are” (p. 85). Returning to Knox’s (1992) characterization ofhow professionals reflect on knowledge and experience, we hold out the hope that CRT has potential as anew “metatcomponent” for broadening the “normative, field-specific cognitive structure” (p. 98) of the MFTfield as well as other health and social care professions.

We hope that our research will inspire clinicians, supervisors, researchers, and educators to criticallyexamine existing MFT literature from a CRT perspective. We suggest that readers use our research ratingform to review articles for themselves and discuss their findings and observations in supervision and trainingsessions to promote more critical consumption of literature on race for use in therapy. In addition, our CRTrating tool offers MFT scholar/practitioners the opportunity to examine work-in-progress critically.

We further believe that CRT is a useful lens that can inform MFT practice in education, research, andtherapy. For example, educators can use CRT to critique Eurocentric MFT curricula, integrate marginalizedvoices in course readings, and engage students in critical discussions about racism and social justice.Supervisors working from a CRT-informed perspective can be better prepared to engage supervisees inconversations about the intersection of identities, exploring the relevance of social location in supervisoryand therapeutic relationships. They can also better guide supervisees in considering the influence of socialforces in the lives of their clients and in considering their own positions regarding social justice. Therapistsworking from a CRT-informed perspective can more purposefully make space for racially marginalizedvoices and the lived experience of racially oppressed clients. Drawing from multiple disciplines, such as law

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 91


and history, can help CRT-informed therapists gain the ability to analyze racial dynamics more fully and toinvite clients to use interdisciplinary resources in shaping their own lives. We believe CRT holds significantpromise for MFT by critically considering multiple identities, acknowledging sources of dominantideologies, committing to social justice, creating space for marginalized voices, and spanning boundaries tobuild interdisciplinary knowledge of racial relationships.

REFERENCES

References marked with a double asterisk indicate articles in which race was the primary topic.

**Allen, W. & Olson, D. (2001). Five types of African-American marriages. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27,301–314.

Almeida, R., & Durkin, T. (1999). The cultural context model: Therapy for couples with domestic violence. Journal of Maritaland Family Therapy, 25, 313– 324.

Anderson, T. (1990). Black studies: Overview and theoretical perspectives. Pullman, WA: Washington State University Press.Avis, J. M. (1996). Feminist-informed training in family therapy: Approaching the millennium. Journal of Feminist Family

Therapy, 8, 75–83. **Bean, R., Perry, B., & Bedell, T. (2001). Developing culturally competent marriage and family therapists: guidelines for

working with Hispanic families. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27, 43–54.Bedard, G. (2000). Deconstructing whiteness: Pedagogical implications for anti-racism education. In G. Dei & A. Calliste

(Eds.), Power, knowledge and anti-racism education (pp. 41-56). Hallifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood.Bernal, D. (2002). Critical race theory, Latino critical theory, and critical raced-gendered epistemologies: Recognizing students

of color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8, 105–125.Bograd, M. (1999). Strengthening domestic violence theories: Intersections of race, class, sexual orientation, and gender.

Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 25, 275–289.Brady, K., Eatman, T., & Parker, T. (2000) To have or not to have? A preliminary analysis of higher education funding disparities

in the post-Ayers v Fordice era: Evidence from critical race theory. Journal of Education Finance, 25, 297–322. **Constantine, M., Juby, H., & Liang, J. (2001). Examining multicultural counseling competence and race-related attitudes

among White marital and family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27, 353–62.Continuing medical education. (n.d.). Retrieved August 12, 2003, from http://cme.nejm.orgD’Andrea, M., & Daniels, J. (1999). Exploring the psychology of White racism through naturalistic inquiry. Journal of

Counseling and Development, 77(1), 93–101. Dei, G. S. (1996). Anti-racism education: Theory and practice. Hallifax, Nova Scotia: Fernwood.Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: New York University Press.Fernandez, L. (2002). Telling stories about school: Using critical race and Latino critical theories to document Latina/Latino

education and resistance. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 45–46.**Friedlander, M. (1999). Ethnic identity development of internationally adopted children and adolescents: Implications for

family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 25, 43–60.Giroux, H. (1983). Theories of reproduction and resistance in the new sociology of education: A critical analysis. Harvard

Educational Review, 53, 257–293.Green, P. (1999). Separate and still unequal: Legal challenges to school tracking and ability grouping in America’s public

schools. In L. Parker, D. Deyhle & S. Vilenas (Eds.), Race is race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies ineducation (pp. 231–250). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Haraway, D. (1996), Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. In E. F.Keller & H. E. Longino (Eds.), Feminism and science (pp. 249–263). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hardy, K., & Lazloffy, T. (1992). Training racially sensitive family therapists: Context, content and contact. Families in Society:The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 73, 364–370.

Hardy, K., & Lazloffy, T. (1994). Deconstructing race in family therapy. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy, 5, 5–33.Harris, C. (1993). Whiteness as property. Harvard Law Review, 106, 1709.Helms, J. (1990). Toward a model of White racial identity development. In J.E. Helms (Ed.), Black and White racial identity:

Theory, research and practice (pp. 49–66). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Hermes, M. (1999). Research methods as a situated response: Toward a first nations’ methodology. In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, &

S. Vilenas (Eds.), Race is race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education (pp. 83-100). Boulder, CO:Westview Press.

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 92


Jeris, L., & Armacost, L. (2002). Doing good or doing well? A counter-story of continuing professional education. Learning inHealth and Social Care, 1, 94–104.

Johnson, A. (2001). Privilege, power, and difference. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. **Killian, K. (2001). Reconstituting racial histories and identities: The narratives of interracial couples. Journal of Marital and

Family Therapy, 27, 27–42.Killian, K., & Hardy, K. (1998). Commitment to minority inclusion: A study of AAMFT conference program content and

members’ perceptions. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 24, 207–223.Knox, A. (1992). Comparative perspectives on professional ways of knowing, In H.K.M. Baskett & V. J. Marsick (Eds.),

Professional ways of knowing: Implications for continuing education (pp. 97–108). New Directions for Adult andContinuing Education, No. 55. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ladson-Billing, G., & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97, 47–68.Lazloffy, T., & Hardy, K. (2000). Uncommon strategies for a common problem: Addressing racism in family therapy. Family

Process, 39, 35–50. McDowell, T., Fang, S., Gomez Young, C., Khanna, A., Sherman, B., & Brownlee, K. (2003). Making space for racial dialogue:

Our experience in a marriage and family therapy training program. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 29, 179–194. McDowell, T., Fang, S., Brownlee, K., Gomez Young, C., & Khanna, A. (2002). Transforming an MFT program: A model for

enhancing diversity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 28, 179–191.McDowell, T. (2003). Professional education and critical race theory: Exploring the experiences of graduate trainees.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois University, 2003, DeKalb, Il. McGoldrick, M. (2001). Response to “Family therapy saves the planet.” Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27, 17–18.McGoldrick, M., Almeida, R., Preto, N.G., Bibb, A., Sutton, C., Hudak, J., & Hines, P.M. (1999). Efforts to incorporate social

justice perspectives into a family training program. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 25, 191–209.McIntosh, P. (1998). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. In M. McGoldrick (Ed.) Re-visioning family therapy

(pp. 147–152). New York: Guilford Press. **Milan, S. & Keiley, M. (2000). Biracial youth and families in therapy: Issues and interventions. Journal of Marital and Family

Therapy, 26, 305–315.Minnich, E. K. (1990). Transforming knowledge. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.**Negy, C., & Snyder, D. (2000). Relationship satisfaction of Mexican-American and non-Hispanic White American interethnic

couples: Issues of acculturation and clinical intervention. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 26, 293–304.**Nelson, K., Brendel, J., & Mize, L. (2001). Therapist perceptions of ethnicity issues in family therapy: A qualitative inquiry.

Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27, 363–373.Parker, L., & Lynn, M. (2002). What’s race got to do with it? Critical race theory’s conflicts with and connections to qualitative

research methodology and epistemology. Qualitative Inquiry, 8, 7–22.Soloranzo, D., & Yosso, T. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for educational

research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8, 23–44.Taylor, E. (1999). Critical race theory and interest convergence in the desegregation of higher education. In L. Parker, D. Deyhle,

& S. Vilenas (Eds.), Race is race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education (pp. 181–204). Boulder,CO: Westview Press.

Tisdell, E., Hanley, M., & Taylor, E. (2000). Different perspectives on teaching for critical consciousness. In A. Wilson & E.Hayes (Eds.) Handbook of adult and continuing education (pp. 132–146). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Waldman, F. (1999). Violence or discipline? Working with multicultural court-ordered clients. Journal of Marital and FamilyTherapy, 25, 503–15.

Wilson, L. L., & Stith, S. M. (1993) The voices of African American MFT students: Suggestions for improving recruitment andretention. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 19, 17–30.

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 93


APPENDIX

Article Title:Rater:Please rate the article with respect to how evident you perceive each of the following areas to be.Please include any comments or questions you may have.

Very Somewhat Not No opinion/Evident Evident Evident Explain

2 1 0

I. Racial perspectiveFocus on race 2 1 0Focus on culture 2 1 0 Inclusion of intersecting influence of other social signifiers,e.g. gender, class, sexual orientation or abilities? 2 1 0Consideration of acculturation and immigration (if relevant) 2 1 0

Please add any comments, including areas we may have missed, ideas that don’t make sense, etc.

II. Consideration of racism and white, dominant ideologyRecognition of Ethnocentrism (when relevant) 2 1 0 Individual racism acknowledged 2 1 0Systemic racism acknowledged 2 1 0


III. Commitment to social justiceSocial justice advocated 2 1 0Ways to advocate for social justice 2 1 0


IV. VoiceAuthor’s race identified 2 1 0Inclusion of direct experience from members of marginalized groups 2 1 0


V. Integration of interdisciplinary discourseIntegration of interdisciplinary knowledge about racial

relationships 2 1 0

Please add any comments, including areas we may have missed, ideas that don’t make sense, etc.Additional Comments:

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________

Jan.04.12/8 1/20/04 9:58 AM Page 94

TALKING ABOUT RACE USING CRITICAL RACE THEORY: RECENT TRENDS IN THE JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY...

Documents

Transcript of TALKING ABOUT RACE USING CRITICAL RACE THEORY: RECENT TRENDS IN THE JOURNAL OF MARITAL AND FAMILY...