分散警察的使用:在心理治疗中废除安全计划的方法。

IF 2.6 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1037/pst0000422
David Drustrup, D Martin Kivlighan, Saba Rasheed Ali
{"title":"分散警察的使用:在心理治疗中废除安全计划的方法。","authors":"David Drustrup,&nbsp;D Martin Kivlighan,&nbsp;Saba Rasheed Ali","doi":"10.1037/pst0000422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The dominant narrative in much of the world, but especially the West, is that public safety and security are provided by policing. Psychotherapy invests in this dominant narrative via its reliance on emergency services provided by the state, such as 911 and police, to pursue the safety of clients and the larger society. However, the long-documented history of oppressive systems of policing suggest that these dominant narratives operate to protect powerful groups while surveilling and policing marginalized people, but particularly Black and Brown communities. As such, critical and abolitionist movements have rejected the idea that policing provides safety and have sought out alternative methods for ensuring community wellness and safety. Although the field of psychology has broadly expressed interest in growing its critical lens and interrupting systems of power, very little has directly addressed how carceral logics influence psychotherapy practice, and how this influences the client's sense of safety in therapy. This manuscript argues for an abolitionist approach to informed consent and safety planning in psychotherapy to address the disparate ways that clients, and especially marginalized clients such as Black and Brown people, experience psychotherapy's traditional use of systems of policing and state authority. Clinical illustrations are provided and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20910,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decentering the use of police: An abolitionist approach to safety planning in psychotherapy.\",\"authors\":\"David Drustrup,&nbsp;D Martin Kivlighan,&nbsp;Saba Rasheed Ali\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pst0000422\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The dominant narrative in much of the world, but especially the West, is that public safety and security are provided by policing. Psychotherapy invests in this dominant narrative via its reliance on emergency services provided by the state, such as 911 and police, to pursue the safety of clients and the larger society. However, the long-documented history of oppressive systems of policing suggest that these dominant narratives operate to protect powerful groups while surveilling and policing marginalized people, but particularly Black and Brown communities. As such, critical and abolitionist movements have rejected the idea that policing provides safety and have sought out alternative methods for ensuring community wellness and safety. Although the field of psychology has broadly expressed interest in growing its critical lens and interrupting systems of power, very little has directly addressed how carceral logics influence psychotherapy practice, and how this influences the client's sense of safety in therapy. This manuscript argues for an abolitionist approach to informed consent and safety planning in psychotherapy to address the disparate ways that clients, and especially marginalized clients such as Black and Brown people, experience psychotherapy's traditional use of systems of policing and state authority. Clinical illustrations are provided and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000422\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000422","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在世界大部分地区,尤其是西方,主流的说法是公共安全和治安是由警察提供的。心理治疗通过依赖国家提供的紧急服务,如911和警察,来追求客户和更大社会的安全,从而投资于这种主导叙事。然而,长期记录的压迫性警务系统的历史表明,这些主导叙事在保护强大群体的同时,也在监视和监管边缘化人群,尤其是黑人和棕色人种社区。因此,批评和废除主义运动拒绝了警察提供安全的想法,并寻求其他方法来确保社区健康和安全。尽管心理学领域广泛表达了对发展其关键透镜和打断权力系统的兴趣,但很少有人直接讨论心理逻辑如何影响心理治疗实践,以及这如何影响来访者在治疗中的安全感。这篇论文主张在心理治疗中废除知情同意和安全规划的方法,以解决不同的方式,特别是边缘化的客户,如黑人和棕色人种,体验心理治疗传统使用的警察和国家权威系统。提供了临床实例,并讨论了未来的发展方向。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2023 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Decentering the use of police: An abolitionist approach to safety planning in psychotherapy.

The dominant narrative in much of the world, but especially the West, is that public safety and security are provided by policing. Psychotherapy invests in this dominant narrative via its reliance on emergency services provided by the state, such as 911 and police, to pursue the safety of clients and the larger society. However, the long-documented history of oppressive systems of policing suggest that these dominant narratives operate to protect powerful groups while surveilling and policing marginalized people, but particularly Black and Brown communities. As such, critical and abolitionist movements have rejected the idea that policing provides safety and have sought out alternative methods for ensuring community wellness and safety. Although the field of psychology has broadly expressed interest in growing its critical lens and interrupting systems of power, very little has directly addressed how carceral logics influence psychotherapy practice, and how this influences the client's sense of safety in therapy. This manuscript argues for an abolitionist approach to informed consent and safety planning in psychotherapy to address the disparate ways that clients, and especially marginalized clients such as Black and Brown people, experience psychotherapy's traditional use of systems of policing and state authority. Clinical illustrations are provided and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychotherapy
Psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training publishes a wide variety of articles relevant to the field of psychotherapy. The journal strives to foster interactions among individuals involved with training, practice theory, and research since all areas are essential to psychotherapy. This journal is an invaluable resource for practicing clinical and counseling psychologists, social workers, and mental health professionals.
期刊最新文献
Increasing outcome measurement precision: Network analysis of items on the Outcome Questionnaire-45. Physiological regulation processes differentiate the experience of ruptures between patient and therapist. Questioning the status quo: Latino community members as researchers in the study of health equity. Identification of cultural conversations in therapy using natural language processing models. Should psychotherapists conduct visual assessments of nonsuicidal self-injury wounds?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1