Anti-oppressive practice

The theoretical pull in psychotherapy has historically been on individual reductionism, with an emphasis on intrapsychic and psychological phenomena to the exclusion of the social. A commonly cited example was Freud's `about turn' between 1886 and 1903 on the question of child sexual abuse. We are also aware that what appears as `interpersonal' may have signi®cant structural, institutional and social processes embedded in the exchange. Indeed, we could view psychotherapeutic activity in general as itself socially and systemically constructed (McNamee and Gergen, 1992; Parker et al., 1995). It has been argued that the language of psychotherapeutic diagnosis and treatment promotes the language of de®ciency and creates scienti®c rationalism as fact rather than as socially derived (Szasz, 1961, 1963; Pilgrim, 1997). Even the idea of the `self ' can be viewed as a culturally speci®c phenomenon (Hoffman, 1992). In the face of the inequalities in our society, and the varied access that different groups have to appropriate psychological help, we need, in our view, constantly to stay in touch with a wider sociological perspective and to retain our humility in what we offer our clients. While we would support the articulation by training and accrediting bodies of anti-oppressive practices in psychotherapy, with relevant measures that can monitor such practices, we also think that this is a moral issue for each individual practitioner. From the perspective of an integrative framework for practice it is inconceivable to us that the contextual and social could be excluded from consideration, a point that we have previously made in articulating the overall framework set out in this book. As is the case with ethical issues, we highlight the question of anti-oppressive practice as a process issue that is present as an ongoing challenge in the complexities of the work that we do.