Incorporating Sexual Orientation Into MFT Training Programs: Infusion and Inclusion

Abstract

Many authors have questioned the preparedness of family therapists to deal with sexual minority clients. Even though the Commission on Accreditation for Marriage and Family Therapy Education (COAMFTE) has called for the integration of sexual orientation into the curriculum of marriage and family therapy training programs, the subject continues to be marginalized. The purpose of this article is to encourage trainers to examine their programs' curricula for evidence of heterosexist bias and introduce ways that they might integrate issues related to same-sex affectional and sexual orientations into their programs via the classroom and the clinic.

A Collaborative-Affirmative Approach to Supervisory Practice

“…LGBs still face societal prejudice and discrimination (Hitchings, 1999) and a heterosexist bias continues to prevail in family therapy training programs (Long & Serovich, 2003). Despite efforts to incorporate topics on sexual orientation into curricula, it continues to be met with resistance.…”

“…In order to foster a supervision environment that is sensitive to sexual orientation and welcoming of LGB and heterosexual supervisees to discuss issues related to sexual orientation in supervision, practical approaches have been identified. Briefly, these strategies for supervisors include taping and reviewing supervision sessions when sexual orientation is discussed (Long, 2002), balancing the significance of sexual orientation in supervision (Hitchings, 1999;Storm et al, 2001), using films and literature in supervision that incorporate LGB characters, using language that is sensitive to sexual orientation (Bruss et al, 1997;Long & Serovich, 2003), attending LGB workshops, and reading LGB journal publications (Godfrey et al, 2006).…”

Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Supervisees’ Experiences of LGB-Affirmative and Non-Affirmative Supervision in COAMFTE-Accredited Training Programs

“…For example, Clark and Serovich (1997) While the accrediting bodies of the major mental health professions have called for the infusion of LGB issues into their curricula (Long & Serovich, 2003), there is a paucity of research about how well graduate programs are integrating LGB issues into their training and supervision. The research that does exist raises question about the effectiveness of training programs to incorporate more LGB issues in their curricula (Allison et al, 1994;Bepko & Johnson, 2000;Buhrke, 1989;Carlson et al, 2012;Glenn & Russell, 1986; Graham et al, 1984;Mackelprang, Ray, & Hernandez-Peck, 1996;Morrow, 1996; Murphy, 1991;Murphy et al, 2002;Phillips & Fischer, 1998;Rock et al, 2010; Whittman, 1995).LGB SUPERVISEES' EXPERIENCES OF LGB-AFFIRMATIVE AND NON-AFFIRMATIVE SUPERVISION (Carlson et al, 2012;Charlés, et al, 2005;Godfrey, Haddock, Fisher, & Lund, 2006;Green, 1996; Hernandez & Rankin, 2008;Long & Serovich, 2003;Rock et al, 2010) have offered suggestions for how to integrate sexual minority information into training, but no comprehensive study has looked specifically at the degree to which this is occurring across theory, research, andLGB Other mental health disciplines, particularly psychology and social work, have better addressed the extent to which graduate training is preparing students for work with theLGB population (Charlés, et al, 2005;Rock et al, 2010). However, based on studies that assessed trainees' experiences with LGB issues and/or their attitudes about working with the LGB population, it appears that graduate training does not adequately prepare students to competently work with LGB individuals, couples, and families (Allison et al, 1994; Croteau, Bieschke, Phillips, & Lark, 1998).…”

“…Even with these challenges and the lack of attention to LGB issues in graduate training, researchers across fields have offered suggestions on how to integrate this knowledge into training curricula (Bahr, Brish, & Croteau, 2000; Biaggio et al, 2003;Buhrke, 1989;Carroll & Gilroy, 2001;Croteau et al, 1998; Dillon et al, 2004; Fletcher & Russell, 2001; Gerdes & Norman, 1998;Green, 1996;Godfrey et al, 2006; Iasenza, 1989;Long & Serovich, 2003; Pearson, 2003;Whitman, 1995).…”

“…These researchers call for faculty and administrators to challenge their own biases and how they influence theory, research, and clinical training within graduate programs. Even with these challenges and the lack of attention to LGB issues in graduate training, researchers across fields have offered suggestions on how to integrate this knowledge into training curricula (Bahr, Brish, & Croteau, 2000; Biaggio et al, 2003;Buhrke, 1989;Carroll & Gilroy, 2001;Croteau et al, 1998; Dillon et al, 2004; Fletcher & Russell, 2001; Gerdes & Norman, 1998;Green, 1996;Godfrey et al, 2006; Iasenza, 1989;Long & Serovich, 2003; Pearson, 2003;Whitman, 1995).Program initiatives. Researchers recommend that training programs actively recruit and attempt to retain LGB faculty and students (Biaggio et al, 2003;Long & Serovich, 2003;Phillips & Fischer, 1998).…”