ABSTRACT
The subject of cross-cultural counselling seems to buckle the very institutions that western counselling psychology methods are based upon. For this reason it is approached with caution and trepidation by those of the ‘more conforming’ schools of thought. What I will attempt to do in this chapter is to open doors and show that the fears are due to misconceptions. Leading through this train of thought is that the banner of ‘political correctness’ should not be upheld by those who do not embrace the concept of differences within counselling formats and to accept that they have been caught short in this area. Freud, Maslow, Jung, Rogers, Millinowski, Fechner, Bell, Binet, etc. all had a good understanding of the psychology of their worlds and are to be credited in every sense for the schools of thought they left behind. In no manner or form are these figures and their institutions denied any due recognition. At the same time, there needs to be the acceptance that the world is now a smaller place, people travel faster, information is more readily available and communication takes place at the touch of a button. In our present age one wonders why more counsellors have not been taught the psychological perspectives of the likes of Soyinka, Ogot, Mboya, Akuti, Obeyeaekere, Marambi Ani, Nkruma and Saro Wiwa. There are many more who can be mentioned who are not of the eurocentric mode. It should also be mentioned that long before the European cultures ‘discovered’ ‘counselling psychology’ to the rest of the world, it was a functional practice within non-European models. At the same time it should also be appreciated that the process of counselling also existed in European cultures before the schools of thought made it into a formalised text, to enable the eurocentric existence to become a formal labelling method.
