A Local Approach Toward Multicultural Counseling in Malaysia

Malaysia is a multicultural and multi-religious country. The importance of multicultural counseling has been widely recognized and discussed. Counselors need to be multiculturally-knowledgeable when dealing with multicultural clients. The effectiveness of counseling may likely be improved by integrating Malaysian approaches that are tailored to this country’s traditions and insights, into the current conventional counseling practices. Most of these counseling and psychotherapy theories are based on, and biased towards, the Euro-American culture. Novice counselors in particular frequently reported a lack of skills in dealing with culturally-diverse clients. Multicultural counseling competency is an evolutionary progress that is meant to achieve an effective treatment, and greater inclusion of minorities in mainstream society. Therefore, this paper highlights multicultural counseling competencies and the evolution of counseling in Malaysia. Using narrative method literature review, this paper presents local approaches toward counseling in Malaysia, based on various religions, which are specifically focused on an Islamic approach. This paper then compares and contrasts the local approaches with those of the conventional Western based counseling methods. Some recommendations that merit further investigation are highlighted for future studies.

A Counselor’s Cultural Identity: Implications from A Multicultural Counseling Perspective in Malaysia

Malaysia is a country with a diversified cultural background, ethnicities, and religions. Islam is the most widely practiced religion, followed by Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, other traditional Chinese religions, as well as other indigenous religions. Despite the richness of the cultural landscape, the counseling services in Malaysia seem to be very limited in terms of diversification of multiculturalism. Cultural relevance of counselling theories, adaptation of Western-trained counseling services to suit a Malaysian culture, and multicultural counseling competencies, are among the concerns in the profession. This paper focuses on factors that shape a counselor’s identity based on their cultural background, and its implications on multicultural counseling in Malaysia. Among the important factors highlighted in this paper are religious beliefs and values, locus of control, gender, and personality. This paper encapsulates the importance of understanding a counselor’s cultural identity for the effectiveness of multicultural counseling in Malaysia.

A Case Using the Process Model of Multicultural Counseling Competence

This article presents a hypothetical counseling case that demonstrates the use of the process model of multicultural counseling competence. The counselor is an African American woman at a university counseling service, and the client is a young Chinese American woman and a sophomore at the university. First, we present an introduction to the case, giving a profile description of the client and counselor. Second, we unveil the counseling process through the model’s three phases, with demonstrations of the various features of the model. The unfolding format of the case captures the process nature of the model and dynamic interactions in the facilitation of therapeutic change. Selected excerpts illustrate counselor and client dialogue during the course of counseling, and examples of counselor multicultural counseling competencies highlight the prescriptive use of the process model. Third, we provide a reflection of the case, adding commentary on the application of the model.

Is Multicultural Counseling Competence Outdated or Underdeveloped, or in Need of Refinement? A Response to Ridley et al.

This paper provides a response to Ridley et al.’s Major Contribution on the state of multicultural counseling competence (MCC) and their proposed refinement and extension of this construct. They pose the following multiprong question: “Is multicultural counseling competence becoming outdated and supplanted, or is it underdeveloped and in need of refinement?” We use this question to examine the MCC model that Ridley et al. have proposed in this Major Contribution. We summarize and critique each paper, and close with our own conclusions about the above question. We are concerned that the characteristics of the clinicians seem to be secondary to MCC. We also question the lack of focus on the sociopolitical context and the limited inclusion of diverse scholarship in creating a universal MCC model.

Multicultural Counseling Competence: A Construct in Search of Operationalization

The work of many great scholars has proliferated a sizable body of knowledge on the construct of multicultural counseling competence. However, the construct’s operationalization remains obscured, perplexing, and frustrating to practitioners who attempt to translate the scholarship into practice. We identify ten definitional problems that prevent the construct from evolving into a cohesive form that can inform practitioners’ work. These include: an indistinct purpose, culturally general/culturally specific divide, terminological interchange, confusing competency with competence, lack of integration, no definition, ambiguity, equivocation, circular reasoning, and divergence. Furthermore, the three major models of the construct—skills-based, adaptation, and process-oriented—share six limitations. They lack interdependence, prescriptive methods, deep incorporation of culture, coherent designs, conclusive research support, and they are oversimplifications. We call on the community of our fellow scholars to collaborate in reconceptualizing this complex construct into a sound, applicable guide for practitioners’ work with diverse clients.

A Call to the Profession: Rejuvenating the Multicultural Conversation

In this rejoinder, the authors respond to the feedback and suggestions offered by Vandiver et al. (2021). We clarify that the intent of our Major Contribution is to rejuvenate the conversation regarding multicultural counseling competence, continue the quest to operationalize the construct, and propose the process model of multicultural counseling competence. In response to our colleagues’ reaction article, we organized this rejoinder into three sections: major points of agreement, major points of disagreement, and mixed points of view, before concluding again with our intention and remembering the importance of continuing the work.

The Process Model of Multicultural Counseling Competence

The mental health professions need to reconceptualize multicultural counseling competence and innovate their models in order to provide better guidance to their professionals. To this end, we first redefine multicultural counseling competence with the goal of overcoming its pervasive definitional problems. We then propose the process model of multicultural counseling competence, which aims to rectify the limitations of the existing models. Our model integrates strengths of the three major models—skills-based, adaptation, and process-oriented—while also adding new components. Seven foundational principles undergird our complex and dynamic model. The model consists of three distinct phases: preparation, intake and in-sessions, and termination. In addition, the model consists of five clinical operations. The superordinate operation is deep-structure incorporation of culture. Subordinating to and rotating around this superordinate operation are: infusing preparation, developing a therapeutic alliance, adapting interventions, and evaluating process and outcome. Although these clinical operations interact dynamically at multiple levels within the model, the ultimate purpose is still the attainment of positive therapeutic outcomes.

Rethinking Multicultural Counseling Competence: An Introduction to the Major Contribution

In this introductory article of the Major Contribution, we explore the construct of multicultural counseling competence, particularly its inception and the early social movements from which it evolved. We posit that although the intentions of early pioneers and professional organizations were admirable and the subsequent body of work impressive, progress has stalled. A conceptual and operational impasse now impedes advancement of the discourse and ultimately hinders our ability to adequately serve clients, supervisees, and consultees who are the beneficiaries of our efforts. In this article, we lay the foundation for an analysis of the impasse, a proposal for an alternative model of the construct, and a case conceptualization that demonstrates usage of the model. We conclude by providing an overview of the Major Contribution, including a synopsis of the subsequent three articles and our intention to rejuvenate this dialogue with our colleagues and students.