SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
Article 1 Arbona, C., Olvera, N., Rodriguez, N., Hagan, J., Linares, A., & Wiesner, M. (2010). Acculturative stress among documented and undocumented Latino immigrants in the US. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 32(3), 362–384.
The purpose of the study was to examine differences between documented and undocumented Latino immigrants in the prevalence of three immigration-related challenges (separation from family, traditionality, and language difficulties), which were made more severe after the passage of restrictive immigration legislation in 1996. Specifically, the study sought to determine the combined and unique associations of legal status, the three immigration-related challenges listed above, and fear of deportation to acculturative stress related to family and other social contexts.
Questions to consider:
1. Why is there limited research on acculturative stress for documented and undocumented immigrants living in the U.S.?
2. What stressors or challenges do Latinos experience throughout their immigration experience? Do documented Latinos share the same stressors as undocumented Latinos?
3. Summarize the psychosocial strains that produce acculturative stress among Latino immigrants. Is there a relationship between such stress and psychological distress? Are there culture specific assessments that apply to measuring stress levels for Latinos?
4. Why should social workers engage in culturally competent research and practice for populations that are different from her or him?
Article 2 Choi, J. L., Rogers, J., & Werth Jr., J. L. (2009). Suicide risk assessment with Asian American college students. A culturally informed perspective. The Counseling Psychologist, 37(2), 186-218. doi: 10.1177/0011000012471823
Scholars have based their understanding of college-student suicide in the United States largely on the study of European Americans, and therefore, its relevance to making culturally informed decisions with suicidal Asian American college students is unclear. This article explores aspects of suicide assessment potentially unique to Asian American college students and discusses possible ways to handle the process of breaking confidentiality that are more sensitive to Asian American needs. First, the authors briefly review issues of confidentiality, informed consent, and standards of care. Second, they examine several aspects of Asian American college students' experiences in the United States and of Asian cultural values. Specifically, the authors review acculturation and the experience of immigration, intergenerational relationships, collectivistic cultural values, the myth of the “model minority,” and perfectionism. Third, they offer culturally informed considerations for assessing suicidal risk and ways to manage breaking confidentiality. Finally, they suggest the Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality model and the Suicide Intervention Response Inventory−2 as potentially useful tools for culturally sensitive work with Asian American college students.
Questions to Consider:
Why are attempted and completed suicides a leading cause of death for Asian American male and female students (in high school or attending universities)?
How can culturally relevant assessment and culturally responsive services for Asian American students with suicide ideation be accomplished?
The Collaborative Assessment and Management of Suicidality (CAMS) model may be applicable to Asian American students. What are the strengths and weaknesses of this model as applied to this population?
Do cultural values and the acculturation process contribute to misinterpretations of mental health status or suicidal ideation by an Asian American client? Provide an example with discussion.
How important is addressing informed consent and confidentiality with an Asian American client presenting with suicidal attempts? Should the family system be engaged in preliminary assessments?
Article 3 Janson, G. R. and Steigerwald, F. J. (2002). Family counseling and ethical challenges with Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered (GLBT) clients: More questions than answers. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 10(4), 415-418. DOI: 10.1177/106648002236761
Couples, marriage, and family counselors face unique ethical and practice challenges in their dual commitment to the positive growth and integrity of both the individual and the family system. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered (GLBT) persons and their families present unique ethical challenges. A series of brief case vignettes touch on a range of ethical issues for couples and family counselors, including training, supervision, custody evaluation, ethical decision making, counselor bias, gender, ethnicity, and referral.
Questions to Consider:
Why is it important to maintain a current knowledge base about gender and sexual identity as a family therapist?
What social work values, ethics, or legal issues could be associated with LGBT client systems?
As a social worker or family therapist, what competencies are required for addressing the unique issues and needs of individuals with intersecting race, class, and gender dimensions?