Ken Oliver

What does the term “counselor” mean to you? I don’t mean the technical or conceptual definition, but rather the connotation evoked when you hear the term. For some of you, hearing the term produces visions of helpers. For some, you may remember a guidance counselor from school or a mental health therapist that worked with you or someone you know. Now, for all of you social constructivists and phenomenologists who believe that connotative meaning ultimately overrules that which is demonstrative, you may want to stop reading here…

No, this entry is for you pragmatists who see the need for a concrete definition for counseling. The profession needs more uniformity in how it defines counseling. Instead, as a profession we are more akin to Bubba’s description of the varieties of shrimp in the movie Forrest Gump. “Well, let’s see, we got school counselin, career counselin, clinical mental health counselin which used to be community counselin, and then there’s different counselin rules for different states.” Sorry for the obscure movie reference, but I needed a real “attention-grabber” to help reel you in. What better than Bubba from Forrest Gump?

Let me be clear. I am NOT proposing one definition of counseling to encompass all of these different types of counseling. Instead, I’m proposing that we need more clarity in the delineations between the various types. For a point of reference, let’s look at state licensure and certification laws in the states for which I am most familiar, Illinois and Missouri. In both states it is smarter for counseling students to choose the school counseling track over community counseling. This is due to the fact that the way the laws are written in both states, nothing prohibits a person with a school counseling degree from getting their licensure as a professional counselor. They may need to take a psychopathology course to fulfill the state licensure requirements, but no additional internships or practicum are necessary prior to them practicing as a professional counselor in a non-school setting. This practice must occur under the supervision of a master’s or doctoral level mental health clinician, but Illinois allows Licensed Social Workers to provide supervision to counselors as well. Now, I personally wouldn’t have a problem with LCSW’s providing supervision if LPC’s were allowed to do the same with their supervisees. But we are not!

Some of you might be saying, “c’mon Ken, why does that make it wiser to get a school counseling degree over focusing solely on your LPC?” Well, the reason is that school counselor certification boards in both states specify that an individual must complete a certain amount of hours of practicum and internship within a school setting. This means that a person who chooses the community route will need to take additional coursework and complete additional internships in school settings in order to be certified. In other words, school counseling certification boards have made a clear distinction between school counseling and other non-school counseling modalities. They are suggesting that a counselor needs to have the experience in a school setting before becoming certified. Professional counseling licensure boards in both states, on the other hand, seem to be content with allowing trainees to bypass this training in a community mental health setting.

I have a wealth of clinical experience as a community mental health counselor. However, if I were asked to go into a school to do “school counseling,” I doubt that I would be very effective. Maybe though, just maybe, I’d get the hang of it like the Governor of California in Kindergarten Cop. My bad, I couldn’t resist.

Kenneth Oliver is a counselor in Missouri and an assistant professor at Quincy University in Illinois.

Ken Oliver

I’ve questioned whether or not to write about this topic for some time now. It’s not that the topic is particularly controversial in itself, but rather that the issue is not often discussed by a…gasp…man! I suppose I’ll start the discussion in the same manner as I do in my Human Growth and Development course; with a question. How old were you when you learned that women were inferior?

Now, as you (i.e., well, some of you) feel your stomach tightening or fists clinching, realize that I pose this question to my classes with a “matter of fact” tone and a tremendously sober expression on my face. Sometimes I have to follow with, “Not a rhetorical question; I actually expect a response.” Then I usually proceed to do a “round” until all students have uttered something aloud.

My reason for phrasing the question this way is based on a fairly simple premise. Both women and men are conditioned at a disturbingly early age to recognize women as inferior. In other words, society views women as being “less than”, therefore when little girls learn that they are destined to become women, there is an automatic association with being “less than” their male counterparts. Don’t blame me…I’m just the messenger. We can’t blame Freud or Erikson either for concocting their developmental theories. They were just explaining social norms that were already in place. No, if anyone is to blame, it’s you. Well, I guess you can blame me too! I’m as much a part of the problem as you are.

Most lifespan development theories suggest that somewhere around toddlerhood, girls and boys begin to understand differences in gender role expectations. Developmentally, it is typically not a big deal in families for little girls to be envious of boy-related gender roles (i.e., tomboy), particularly since they make the realization that boys are thought of more positively by the world. However, a little boy better not be envious of girl-related gender roles (i.e., playing with dolls or preferring pink to blue). One inference that can be drawn from this discrepancy is that society sees little boys acting “feminine” and asks, “Why would you throw away all that privilege?”

Some of my students respond to my initial inquiry by saying that they were never taught that women were inferior. I then try to get them to look at things through the lens of society at large rather than their own personal story. In other words, even if their parents told them that boys and girls were equal, at some point society told them that they are not.

How then does a counselor, knowing this, not perpetuate society’s view? For it is the view of society which dictates our understanding of normality or appropriateness regarding behavior. Are counselors simply to accept little girls’ belief in their inferiority as a normal part of development? Or maybe we should just tell them right then to get their time management skills and patience levels up. Get prepared now, little girl, you’ll be expected to do all the same things men do then clean up the mess after everyone. Any accomplishments you have will always come along with the lingering question about how YOU were able to achieve them. Do all of this with a smile, little girl, because you don’t want to be looked at as being too aggressive or direct. You know what we call those. Do all of this while being sure to have a few children and keep your husband happy, little girl, for that is the truest measure of your worth as a woman.

I’ll leave it there, as I tend to in class. This is where my female students usually sit with their eyes averted in disgust with the continued state of things. My male students usually sit with a partial grin as if to say, “Whose side are you on anyway?”

It’s okay if I’m breaking “man code” today. My daughter said so!

Kenneth Oliver is a counselor in Missouri and an assistant professor at Quincy University in Illinois.

Ken Oliver

I currently live in small, rural town in Missouri. Phewww, typing that was cathartic! The town is predominately made up of White, working class Protestants who, until the last presidential election, were tried and true democrats. The town recently renovated the local playhouse and currently shows a movie a few Saturdays a month. You know, one of those movies stuck in the “purgatory” between the theater and DVD release. But, I digress! Much to my delight, the leaders of the playhouse produced a comedy show this past weekend. They brought in a few comics from the St. Louis area and put on a very funny show. The comedy, as typical, was laced with misogynistic and racially insensitive humor that brought the audience to one belly laugh after another. It wasn’t until one comedian started to discuss the Obama presidency, however, that the air of discomfort and tension settled over the room. The comedian jokingly asked how many in the room voted for Obama. Not a peep!

This got me thinking about my own reaction to politics over the years. I used to claim to be apolitical when asked about a particular red/blue affiliation. It did me no good because I would still have to explain that no one group accurately reflects my ideas or positions. But in truth, I believe I just wanted to avoid the topic all together. Now, what does this have to do with counseling, you may ask? Well, counselors often attempt to portray a position of non-politics in their counseling. I’ll hear things from students like, “my beliefs on politics don’t matter; it’s all about what’s best for the client.” Such a dignified position to take! Erroneous, but dignified! Your socio-political views shape your beliefs about what is best for the client.

I take the position that one’s socio-political worldview shapes how they view human nature, the human condition, and the counseling perspective with which one will most closely align. Now, socio-political worldview encompasses much more than just liberal or conservative belief systems. However, let’s use this dichotomy to make the point. Let’s explore the concept of appropriate or normal behavior; something our profession examines on a consistent basis.

I’ll start with the premise that conservative thinkers tend to have more concrete positions on what constitutes moral behavior. Therefore concepts like right and wrong, good and evil, or normal and pathological take on a common meaning and may seem more obvious to a conservative thinker. Liberal thinkers, on the other hand, tend to have more abstraction in their beliefs about what constitutes right, good, and normality. If this holds true, then a conservative-thinking counselor would be more likely to see pathology when thoughts or behaviors do not match up with the counselor’s concrete views of normality. The liberal thinker, on the other hand, would be more inclined to let many things that might be viewed by many in society to be abnormal to pass as a quirk or idiosyncratic tendency. Therefore, even with “clear” diagnostic criteria, one’s politic will undoubtedly influence her or his view of normal human tendency.

But, it’s not all that simple to distinguish between the two. I mean this town has voted democrat in every election since I’ve been here by over a 70% margin except in the last presidential race. Maybe socio-political worldview doesn’t have as much to do with counseling as I previously thought. It obviously has nothing to do with elections!

Kenneth Oliver is a counselor in Missouri and an assistant professor at Quincy University in Illinois.

Ken Oliver

I learned a long time ago not to offer information about what I do for a living. In fact, nowadays I find myself giving as little information as possible when asked. To paint the picture, I’ve been a Licensed Professional Counselor since the ripe old age of 22. Now that you’re done gasping, I’ll continue. You could only imagine the puzzled looks I received when I would proudly respond to that inevitable question, “So, what do you do?” The nonverbal reaction usually spoke much louder than the words that would follow. YOU? A COUNSELOR? Hmm!

I would, and still do, often walk away questioning the reason for the response. As I’ve aged, I’ve found myself more inclined to ask outright or make comments about the reaction. “You seem surprised by that,” I’ll sometimes say. But then I question if I’m being arrogant or vindictive.

This societal appraisal of what a counselor is supposed to look like has led me to question what I can do to look more like the “quintessential” counselor. Maybe I should wear more cardigans. I’m not really a fan of loafers. Don’t smoke, so a pipe is out of the question!

Maybe nothing I do will help….you know, fit the mold. Instead, maybe the mold needs to change to include more people who look like me. Maybe that will help prevent situations from occurring such as my experience at one agency early on in my career. The short version is that I found my caseload full of Black clients, many of whom had been referred from other clinicians upon hearing of my employment with the agency. “Are these clients requesting me,” I asked the caseworker. “No, I just thought you would work better with them,” she explained. After explaining to my supervisor that I was not trained to just work with Black clients-in fact, just the opposite can be stated-I noticed my caseload starting to even out a bit. Maybe she was just helping me find my niche.

This, however, isn’t the only reason I’m inclined to downplay my profession though. Some people find it awkward to continue a conversation with me after my profession is disclosed. Others wish to garner my diagnostic impressions on the spot, but usually for a “friend” of course. Others seem so surprised by the revelation that they inquire about the obviously profound journey that got me to this field and out of a path toward drugs, crime, and whatever else they think young Black men do. But let me stop being vindictive.

Nowadays, I find myself trying to answer in a jovial fashion most of the time. When asked what I do, I might respond, “Oh, as little as I can.”

Kenneth Oliver is a counselor in Missouri and an assistant professor at Quincy University in Illinois.

Ken Oliver

As many of you may be well aware, a prominent counselor educator at a prestigious institution was recently accused of having sexual relationships with several current and former counseling students. Just “process” that sentence for a couple of seconds.

Now, unfortunately my first response was not of outrage or disgust, but rather of wonder about how much this actually occurs within academia and, more specifically, within the field of counselor education. The ACA code of ethics clearly states that within counselor education, “Sexual or romantic interactions or relationships with current students are prohibited.” But then, being my annoyingly inquisitive self, I wondered, “what in the world does ‘current’ mean?” Does it mean currently enrolled in a course that semester, or does it mean currently a student in the program, or does it mean students who have been enrolled but may be on hiatus? Well, maybe “clearly” isn’t the right word…maybe we need to polish this up a bit.

I remember in my undergraduate psychology program there was a professor who married a student whom I had been in several classes with. I also remember my discomfort with him snapping photos, waving, and displaying a prideful grin when she sat in the row in front of me a graduation. Even then, I remember questioning the power dynamics associated with their relationship. It was kind of creepy, and I have since questioned if that professor had interest or similar interactions with other students as well. Now, I’m not saying that two consenting adults cannot find love when one occupies the role of evaluator over the other. I am aware that this happens quite often in a variety of contexts. What I do wonder is should universities and, more specifically, counseling programs even prohibit such relationships? Or, better yet, should universities and counseling programs take a firm stand in prohibition of these relationships or should they simply follow the status quo?

I believe that counselor educators need to be held to a higher standard in this matter. We have, similar to counselors, a significant amount more access to those we serve than other professionals. Supervision can be a very intimate process that can potentially uncover a wealth of insecurities in the counselor-trainee, both personal and professional. Many classroom assignments are designed to have the trainee explore similar vulnerabilities and personal attributes in the attempt to promote self-awareness on one’s journey to become a counselor. It would be easy for counselor educators to use these details or attributes in order to manipulate the students we serve. This vulnerability is further compounded by the fact that counselor educators also serve as evaluators of student performance. This power, along with student vulnerability, in the hands of a counselor educator or counselor who is opportunistic is a dangerous tool.

Lastly, when discussing these types of power dynamics one must not come away with the impression that such abuses of power only occur regarding sexual relationships. Counselor education programs need to do a better job at discussing, and dealing with, various types of potential abuses by counselor educators. It says a great deal about our profession that these issues are not discussed more and with greater transparency. Also, if such abuses go under the radar in counselor education programs, it only makes sense that they also go unveiled with counselors in the fields as well. But shhh, hopefully I haven’t said too much…

Ken Oliver is a counselor in Missouri and an assistant professor at Quincy University in Illinois.em>

Ken Oliver

The Professor Gates story brings to mind the wise edict that was ingrained in me during my training to become a counselor. “Focus on the process, not the content.” It seems, however, that many of us are enthralled by the content, which may lead us to be oblivious to the underlying processes at work. Machiavelli would be smiling from ear to ear to see that even the highly educated (i.e., us counseling folk) could be so entertained by this story that we are caught focusing on which party was “wrong” rather than using this incident as an opportunity to focus on oppression both within our profession and in society in general.

I don’t mean to diminish the experiences of the individuals involved in this case. However, when I look at the story through an oppression paradigm I see Dr. Gates experience as an unfortunate reality faced by many individuals from oppressed groups. It is difficult to think about life with the realization that no matter what you do in life, no matter what you accomplish, no matter who you become, you will still be viewed by many in the dominant group (and minority group members who emulate dominant group beliefs) as being “less than”.

My hope is that the story of Dr. Gates’ arrest brings attention to racial profiling, if that is how we will ultimately define this case, as a symptom of oppression in general. By oppression, what I mean is the use of power associated with dominant group status to commit or benefit from acts of discrimination against members who hold minority group status within a particular identity. Therefore all of the different types of oppression (i.e., racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, classism, faithism, and so on) are simply variations of the same oppression theme, all possessing the ability to be equally dehumanizing. As most of us have one or more identifications as dominant social group members, the majority of us have the power to oppress on an individual level. The significance of this phenomenon is compounded even further as our individual acts of oppression are generally supported (i.e., as long as they are not too overt) by the dominant group and dominant group institutions and values. If we break down this definition, it is easy to see that Gates, in his black identity, could be oppressed while Crowley, in his white identity and his identity as a cop was in a position where he held the power to oppress.

As an example, I know that in my status as a male (dominant group) I am not typically judged by society by my tidiness, as evidenced by my office and car! My wife (minority group) is judged by these things by society at large. Therefore, if someone stops by our home, I typically won’t be looked down upon if my socks are scattered about. They will more likely to look at it as being her responsibility to keep a clean home. To not acknowledge the added pressure she feels only serves to add insult to injury and to further perpetuate sexism as a form of oppression. Yet, awareness of my privilege alone does not preclude me from being sexist. I receive tons of privileges from being a man in our society and, although I speak up quite frequently about oppression in its various forms, I still benefit from the inherent privileges of being a heterosexual male.

My self-disclosure is intended simply to illustrate that through our multiple identities, we may experience multiple oppressions, from both the experience as the oppressor and the oppressed. Dr. Gates hangs out with the President which, in terms of class, I would identify as dominant group status, but he’s still looked at as a caricature of the “all blacks steal” stereotype or the quintessential “angry black guy” by others.

This story, in my opinion, exemplifies the need for counselors and counselor educators alike to examine their own power in their professional relationships to assess if they are being oppressive to those they serve. Not just in their policies or codes of practice, but in how they engage and interact with those they serve. It is easy to slap a label of “resistant” or “difficult” on a client whom we have trouble engaging or to identify characteristics as “inappropriate” or “unprofessional” in students when they do not match our own worldviews. Instead, I look at the Gates story and ACA’s interest as an opportunity to move beyond the profession’s historical adherence to the status quo.

If the Gates story challenges us to think about our own power, our own privileges based on dominant group identities, then I think it has the potential to assist in the evolution of the counseling profession. If not, I’m afraid it too will be soon forgotten as the next entertaining story catches our eye!

Remember the case of the Houston Texans football player who stood outside the hospital pleading and arguing with the young white police officer while his mother-in-law took her last breaths because he ran through a stop light to get to the hospital before she died. Forgot about that one, didn’t you? There I go entertaining again!