My Bias, Your Disorder?

Several weeks ago the discussion in my psych class shifted to personality, and the different tests that are used to identify them. We talked about the ways in which these tests are all biased, having been designed by individuals, who of course, have their own values and beliefs, their own concepts of what's what.

We then began discussing intelligence, and the various tests, standardized and non, that are used to measure a person's mental prowess, or lack thereof. Again, we talked about all the different factors that contribute to these tests being biased and flawed. Stop me if this sounds familiar, but these tests have all been designed by humans, who by their very nature are individuals with their own personal thoughts and philosophies, values and beliefs, and therefore, it is extremely difficult to quantify intelligence in any way that would be meaningful to any one group as a whole.

This brings me to the now, in which we are discussing disorders, and the different approaches to therapy. Yet there seems to be something missing. There is no acknowledgment similar to our previous discussions pointing out that therapists are only human, and therefore prone to apply their own values, beliefs, philosophies, biases, so on and so forth, to their patients. Why is that?

Certainly a trained professional does their best to set aside any personal baggage prior to engaging a client/patient, but how realistic is it to assume that this is effectively accomplished as often as would be necessary for the relationship to truly be considered professional? Is it even possible for a human being to enter a blank state of complete neutrality?

In what I can only assume was designed as a means to combat these inherent biases, a method of reflective evaluation was developed, that when used properly, the therapist basically says little more than "mm hmm," "uh huh," "go on," and "why do you think that is?" Theoretically this client-centered therapy enables the patient to work through her/his issues, (albeit supervised) on their own. And yet, I am left with questions regarding even this, the most benign form of psychiatric assistance.

What if the patient reveals something about themselves that causes cognitive dissonance at a personal level within the therapist? Here I am referring to deeply ingrained value judgments, or religious beliefs, things of this nature. What if a patient is Muslim, and the therapist is Jewish? What if the patient believes it is wrong to ever hit a child, but the therapist uses physical punishment as the primary behavioral motivator in his/her own parenting methods? I could go on.

When someone comes to us for advice, most likely we do our best to counsel them in whatever way that we are able, that we feel will most benefit their current line of thinking. However, isn't the advice that we give others irrevocably colored by our own personal experiences in life? I see this as being both promising and destructive. Who are we to decide what is appropriate, or best to share with others in need? What is the nature of our relationship with the person asking us for help? How will they interpret the information we give them?

As an aside, I wonder how many practicing therapists have ever stopped to consider the depth and breadth that a client can be socially stigmatized for the remainder of their life having ever been "diagnosed," or "classified" as having a disorder?? Even the most innocent reference to depression can have catastrophic effects down the road if that person is ever subjected to a background check. I have known several people in my life that I'm quite certain would have benefited from therapy, but were deathly afraid of having something officially declared "wrong" with them. Something to think about.

Image found @ Lines Vindu