Despite a continuing need for clinicians to engage in socially-‐just practice that addresses systemic factors impacting the mental health of clients through advocacy, there are often limited formalized opportunities for doctoral counseling psychology students to be exposed to and to engage in community or public arena advocacy. Two counseling psychology faculty members initiated and supervised a Participatory Action Research (PAR) team comprised of six advanced counseling psychology doctoral students and three early career counseling psychologists with experience conducting community and public arena advocacy. The nine PAR team members explored the doctoral students’ experiences conducting advocacy during their doctoral training and the resulting qualitative data was analyzed using a content analysis methodology. The study results highlight the challenges inherent in facilitating and conducting these types of advocacy training activities, discuss essential supports provided by their doctoral programs, and offer recommendations to counseling psychology faculty interested in preparing their students to engage in this work.
The United States permits foreign nationals to apply for asylum if they have experienced persecution or have a fear of future persecution. In order to meet the criteria for persecution, the harm inflicted upon the asylum seeker does not need to be or have been physical and can include psychological sequelae. In an effort to document persecution, lawyers seek the assistance of health professionals when preparing their clients' asylum applications. Mental health professionals work to corroborate psychological evidence of the asylum seeker's report of ill treatment through evaluation and presentation of their findings in the form of legal affidavits. This study gathered the experiences of 15 mental health clinicians who conduct forensic psychological evaluations and document the impact of torture and other human rights violations on asylum seekers. We analyzed the resulting interview transcripts using a consensual qualitative research (CQR) approach. The results of the study highlight challenges associated with this work, suggest recommendations for training, and encourage advocacy endeavors by mental health professionals who provide these services.
Introduction: Every year, thousands of women flee gender-based violence in Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala (sometimes collectively referred to as the Northern Triangle) in an attempt to seek asylum in the United States. Once in the United States, their legal teams may refer them for a psychological evaluation as part of their application for asylum. Licensed clinicians conduct in-depth interviews in order to document the psychological impact of the reported human rights violations. Method: Using archival de-identified data from a human rights program, this study gathered the experiences of gender-based violence reported by 70 asylum-seeking women from Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala who participated in pro bono psychological evaluation. Descriptive data were analyzed using a modified consensual qualitative research (CQR-M) method.Results: These asylum seekers reported exposure to systemic violence, including severe intimate partner violence, as well as physical and sexual assaults, and threats of death by organized criminal groups in their communities. Additionally, over a third of women reported experiences of violence during their migration. The majority of asylum seekers endorsed symptoms associated with anxiety (80%) and depression (91%), as well as trauma-and stressor-related symptoms (80%). Discussion: The results of this study elucidate the manyforms of gender-based violence experienced by women in this region, the physical and psychological sequelae of this persecution, and the systemic forces that prevent them from remaining in their countries of origin. The research results also highlight the potential impact of trauma on the women’s ability to testify effectively during asylum legal hearings, elucidate factors that may contribute to their resilience in light of the human rights violations they survived, and suggest implications for clinical practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.