1/ Are you suggesting we do away with secondary positioned approaches like cultural competence, the study of identity, antidiscrimination, power, or difference and diversity?
A. No. We will always have a multitude of disciplines, theories, specialisms, and additional topics. The WS is asking for essential inclusion across mainstream foundational body of knowledge (as well as additional topics and disciplines like supervision, research) in self-development, theory, relationships, skills, and practice within mainstream helping. This best practice helping model and curricula in the book A New Introduction to Counselling & Psychotherapy. This includes embedding access and accessibility, self-context, and lived context (called WICKET), as these areas represent reality and so help attune relationship, understanding as well as in exploring experiences.
2/ I use antioppressive / diversity / cultural and trauma informed models already. Where does this sit amongst that? Why do i need it?
WS is about avoiding fragmentation and keeping together a view of self and relationships, and therefore of topics and conceptualisation, that is considerate of the whole (holistic). For example, in the model you will see coverage under embodiment, of relational patterns and attention and executive function, as well as identity, which can further be characterised as normative and/or different depending on context. The difference between this model and others is that it is whole and complete, encapsulating all aspects which influence experience rather than solely focusing on identity, marginalisation, or diversity or anti-oppressive practice lens. Therefore diversity, culture, and anti discrimination as well as many other considerations are natively embedded within the whole and relationship rather than treated as add-on without which they would also perpetuate fragmentation because they (e.g., cultural models) are perceived as separate models to the mainstream core. Therefore, WS framing is mandatory for stronger and more equitable practice that begins with what we embed within ourselves from day one, rather than embedding a generalised, decontextualised view of the human self or a separate model of culture, diversity, embodiment etc. This does not away with need for models that are specific lens focus but they also need to be represented in the core model to avoid fragmentation.
Further the model can be used as an explicit enhancement to existing models. For example, TA concepts of Parent, Adult, Child are in context of WICKET or another example Supervision models view of relationships also includes WICKET as being part of client, therapist and supervisor self. Similarly then for diversity models, antioppressive models and cultural models they can use the WICKET explicitly as appropriate.
3/ is there a risk that therapists will have an agenda if embedding contextual awareness?
I often hear people say that by accounting for clients’ context or having a socio-political viewpoint (e.g., environment, social position, normativity/difference, material conditions, discrimination, culture, beliefs, political policies), therapists might have an agenda and/or take away clients’ autonomy.
Yes, it is true that overidentification with any matter, whether one’s own trauma, lived experience, particular expertise, social issues, or personal (e.g., political) beliefs, can take away from autonomy. But this is baked into ethical practices.
We always stay client-directed, but empathically attuning to context which can often be a missing part of conceptualisation, relationship building, and exploration.
4/ Surely the individual person-to-person matters the most?
Yes, and client-directed. But we also recognise inner experience, interpersonal AND contextual interplay in forming experience. Context gives a more complete scope of understanding and exporation. For example, material and environmental conditions are important lenses of understanding.
5/ I work more humanistically and phenomenologically but your asking me to work out of that frame?
I don’t believe any theory disallows shifts and flow of experience outside of the here-and-now frame including prompts and questions. If it did, then how would that help with blinkered areas impacting client experiences and ultimately reducing client harm (for both normative and different parts)?
6/ I am a psychoanalyst which doesnt emphasis the relationship but the material, blank slate and interpretation?
The WICKET frame is part of the Analyst–Analysand relationship and form the material (called societal transference), including contextual dynamics. The book articulates this in the section on transference and counter transference. How the material is interpreted needs to recognise the broader contextual picture and the realities of societal suffering and discrimination, rather than focusing solely on intrapsychic dynamics.
7/ How do politics apply to the model?
Fundamentally it is modelled in three ways 1/ How the organisation structure (resources/policies) influences the relationship and therapy process 2/ How politics and socioculture in the world impacts client experience and mental health (e.g. healthcare / resource policies / access to therapy) 3/ How the client-therapist relationship might mirror societal arrangements e.g. marginalisation and dynamics of societal power which impacting helping.
The Wholeness Solution for Training, Curricula & Practice 