| This integrative literature review concerns pluralism in the field of clinical psychology. I examine three developments in the field of clinical psychology that emerged to respond to pluralism: Multicultural Counseling, Feminist Therapy, and Psychotherapy Integration. Specifically, these movements set out to address the growing diversity in the population receiving mental health services (Multicultural Counseling and Feminist Therapy) as well as the growing diversity in the theories and practices which constitute the field (Psychotherapy Integration). Not only did the three movements set out to address pluralism, but also they inherently value pluralism. As such, they implicitly and explicitly questioned the notion that there is one way of viewing psychological health. Despite their shared values, these developments and the scholars and practitioners identified with them largely remain separate from one another. This dissertation is an attempt to understand this lack of collaboration. Why do such movements, which begin by valuing pluralism and discovering new ways of seeing and working, become narrow, crowding out other perspectives that may have similar values? Because the development of a new perspective toward clinical practice is accompanied by considerable complexity and uncertainty, supporters of a given movement attempt to find firm footing by generating comprehensive frameworks that simultaneously expand and narrow their vision. Specifically, I apply a philosophical hermeneutical approach to each movement to understand how the vision of a given movement is narrowed. I hypothesize that the individuals who began these movements were embedded in a social and cultural context that provided assumptions and preconceptions that shaped their understanding of the world. These preconceptions, although integral for seeing and interpreting the world, became a narrowing force in the movement's agenda. Moreover, a philosophical hermeneutics approach highlights how the heterogeneity within each movement helps explain the lack of collaboration between them. Finally, the analysis yields clinical implications that emphasize the importance of reflexivity, openness, and dialogue. The implications are relevant for clinicians working with diverse populations, clinicians who use a diverse set of theoretical frameworks, and for clinicians who value pluralism and have the goal of staying open to new ways of seeing and working with clients. |
