Liberation Psychology: Application in Clinical Practice

As a counselor, one's theoretical orientation is what situates us in a place to meet the client and also informs the way we practice clinically. Personally, my theoretical orientation has a psychodynamic foundation, but this is not culturally nuanced enough to be used in a vacuum. Since graduate school, I have been combining the psychodynamic framework with Liberation Psychology, and I have found that these two theories create a potent mix.

History, Model, and Assumptions of Liberation Psychology

When considering where Liberation Psychology came from, we must appropriately examine the cultural implications, beginning with Latin America’s multiple emancipation movements (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). In the early 1970s, there is evidence of scholar Paulo Freire engaging in the idea of concientización or consciousness, via his development of the “pedagogical process”, which allows teacher and student to combat oppression by joining forces (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). One ideology that Freire held is that people who are oppressed possess an “internalized oppressor,” which in turn, “is also in need of liberation” (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). I have been grappling with this idea lately, especially when trying to determine where I have developed such ideas about my body and existence. Why am I so timid to take up space? This is just one example of the internalized oppression Freire was referring to (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020).

            In discussing the beginnings of Liberation Psychology, Ignacio Martín-Baró is often described as the “architect” of this theory, as he stressed the importance of stepping away from the ethnocentrism of Eurocentric psychology that we are often encouraged to study as upcoming clinicians (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). I was immediately drawn to this idea, as decolonizing psychology and counseling psychology as we know it (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020) was the topic of many discussions within my Clinical Mental Health Counseling graduate program. Recently, I have been sitting with the idea of upholding this responsibility as a part of the next generation of counselors.

Ignacio Martín-Baró once said, “To do liberation psychology requires first, to liberate psychology”, and other than this quote being ingenious, I feel that it is a defining moment for the new the era of Freire’s “consciousness” that we are in regarding this field (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020).

            To fully grasp the models associated with Liberation Psychology, it is necessary to first eliminate the models and ideations that are incompatible with this theory. In his publication, “Writings for a Liberation Psychology”, Ignacio Martín-Baró was clear about his distaste for the medical model’s incompetence when it comes to assessing the root of trauma (racial, sexual, gender, socioeconomic, generational, etc.) in oppressed individuals (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). What I appreciate about Liberation Psychology is that the main assumption is that the adverse effects of capitalism and discrimination are always held in the foreground of thought. More specifically, there is a lot of focus on power and how that power is embedded within “traditional counseling theories” such as individualistic norms, morals, and values (Singh et al., 2020). I resonated with Ignacio Martín-Baró’s argument that for clinicians and psychologists to actually create any progress in society, “we have to redesign our theoretical and practical tools [...]” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Though he was referring to Latin America in this quote, this idea is the entire basis of Liberation Psychology, and its mission is to edit the exact ethnocentric lens we have been educated with (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Martín-Baró’s point that the aforementioned “tools” should be reimagined by “our own people: from their sufferings, their aspirations, and their struggles” speaks to me greatly (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). This is why I am a large advocate of focusing on the cultural backgrounds of clients, and beginning with what they already know to be true about themselves, rather than throwing a DSM-5 at them in the spirit of pathology (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). This is specifically relevant in my work where I promote collective healing methods for racial trauma through a pan-African lens, rather than healing through a Western, individualistic lens (Martín-Baró et al., 1996).

            I also want to bring up Liberation Psychology’s “four tenets,” which were developed by Ignacio Martín-Baró (Singh et al., 2020). One of these tenets is “recovering historical memory,” which refers to the act of the oppressed racking their memory of “solutions” to issues they have faced in the past (Singh et al., 2020). This action allows for the next tenet, “Realismo-crítico”, which embodies thinking about solutions rather than fixating on the issue  (Singh et al., 2020). The next tenet is “Concientizacíon” which refers to the consciousness that develops once oppressed populations become aware of this history; then, the counselor and client team up to explore “the sociohistorical context that influences the client’s presenting concern (Singh et al., 2020). Consequently, the last tenet, “Deideologized Reality,” follows as a result of the aforementioned ones, as it represents becoming aware that mental health declines due to oppressive systems and institutions (Singh et al., 2020). “Deideolized Reality” emphasizes the importance of oppressed people getting to debunk the “dominant ideologies” through sharing their own narratives and experiences  (Singh et al., 2020).

           Another model I find essential to Liberation Psychology is Martín-Baró’s model of comprehending “the reality of psychic trauma”, which consists of the “social origins” of trauma, “the cause of its chronicity”, and “its dialectical character” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996).

In describing the “social origins of trauma,” he asserts that trauma is "social in nature", extends past the individual, and therefore the systemic processes and “traumatogenetic structures” must be addressed; one does not just “treat the individual” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996).

Martín-Baró argues that trauma becomes chronic when the systems that caused it in the first place continue to thrive (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Lastly, he describes trauma as possessing a “dialectical character” because of the way trauma is situated in the “relationship between the individual and society” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Woven into most of Ignacio Martín-Baró’s writing is his strong feelings towards moving towards collective psychological healing rather than pathologizing the individual (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Throughout my research of this theory, I had been completely on board with these ideas, and I felt as if there was finally verbiage out there to match my feelings. However, I came across the following quote, which completely flipped my entire understanding of the counseling profession upside down. Ignacio Martín-Baró said, “Traumas are assumed to be individual, not only in a sense [...] I fear this 'medical model” still holds sway in the American Psychiatric Association’s (1980) definition of “Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder” in the DSM-III.” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Martín-Baró believed that “traumas of war and violence cannot be fully understood by a theory rooted in the individual psyche” in reference to PTSD which he claims to be a “medical model” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996).

My identity crisis incited the following: how can  I reverse the tendency to pathologize the client when I have a “fight the power” fist in one hand, and a DSM in the other?

 Though this was said years ago, I find it still applicable to my copy of the DSM-5-TR, where this diagnosis still sits prim and proper (American Psychiatric Association, 2022). I think about my father, who served in the Gulf War, and how he has PTSD; that’s his diagnosis. I think about how loud unexpected noises cause him anxiety and whether it’s from living in the south side of Chicago, or from fighting in Saudi Arabia… My dad is a multidimensional being who has been affected by systemic oppression... but why does that not speak as loudly as the diagnosis? To be clear, I do not feel that the DSM is pushing a “PTSD is your fault” agenda, but I do ponder Ignacio Martín-Baró’s comments often. On that same note, Martín-Baró often spoke out against the “locus of control” model because it hints that oppressed individuals have a “choice” in their depression (Martín-Baró et al., 1996).

The role of the counselor in Liberation psychology is that of a clinician who works in conjunction with those facing oppression in a synergistic effort (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). It is the responsibility of the counselor to take into account the entirety of the client including the intersection of their racial identity, sexual orientation, religion, gender, socioeconomic status, etc., and acknowledge how the “social location” mixed with historical context affects them mentally (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). Additionally, Liberation Psychology combats psychopathology’s historical tendency to view people through a “deficit lens” by providing counseling through a “strength-based lens” (Heitz, 2022). The counselor takes the opportunity to recognize how “resilient” the client is, without glamourizing the trauma that caused it to begin with (Heitz, 2022). An example of how Liberation Psychology might be applied with a client is demonstrated in the technique of “testimonio”, which is narrative in nature; it allows the client to externalize “their” problems, by simply sharing their experiences with racism, sexism, rape-culture, discrimination, etc.  (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020).

Personal Summary of Position Towards Theory

I find it beautiful that Liberation psychology places more emphasis on society dealing with its own illness, rather than the individual “fixing” theirs (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Just knowing that the symptomology someone is experiencing is not “their fault” would create some relief within itself, while also destigmatizing mental illness. My appreciation for Liberation Psychology is rooted in the push to allow marginalized to live the most culturally authentic and non-restricted version of their lives (Carroll & Jamison, 2011). What I value about the overlap between Black Psychology and Liberation Psychology in particular, is the recognition that the Eurocentric ideation of mental illness is deeply pathologizing to people of color (Carroll & Jamison, 2011), but also that it promotes the “reclamation and revitalization of an African epistemology that situates African people within their own cultural reality and allows them to stand firmly grounded in their truth” (Carroll & Jamison, 2011). To be aware of the ethnocentrism that plagued the founding of European psychology would be wise at best—or as Carroll and Jamison put it, “Africana Liberation Psychologists must be aware of the assumed Universality of Eurocentric Psychology” (Carroll & Jamison, 2011). This is where Black Psychology comes in; many, such as Maulana Karenga, feel as though Liberation Psychology will ultimately lead to “Afrocentricity”, in which Black people can reconstruct African culture and reap the benefits as a means of liberation (Clark, 2013). I chose Liberation Psychology because when I first learned about it, it felt like a tangible method of sitting with clients in their experiences while still acknowledging that their experiences are different. This theoretical orientation feels like where our counseling field is headed, given the growing acceptance of the Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies (Ratts et al., 2016).

Strengths and Limitations

One of Liberation Psychology’s many strengths is its applicability to different populations which is rooted in the fact that most people endure both some level of privilege and some level of oppression, allowing us to recognize how becoming liberated from meritocratic ideals and pathologizing the oppressed will always cause distress (Comas-Díaz & Torres Rivera, 2020). Another strength of Liberation Psychology is that its call to action for counselors to see clients as multidimensional people possessing intersecting intricacies and complexities that color their experiences in a corrupt society (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). This makes Liberation Psychology compatible with the Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies model (Singh et al., 2020), which is the current model that counselors use to remain grounded in their understanding of how their own privilege and oppression shows up in their acknowledgement of their client’s experiences (Ratts et al., 2016). In my research, the biggest "limitation" I came across for this theory was its inability to mesh completely with the individualistic implications of the DSM, as the theory emphasizes the vitality of not pathologizing individuals, but instead holding systems accountable and “treating the community” (Martín-Baró et al., 1996). Using a theoretical framework that opposes the diagnostic nature of the DSM can pose some obvious issues when it comes to fulfilling ethical and legal obligations of being a counselor in a capitalist society. Another developing limitation consists of the fact that social justice and multicultural education are often treated as a “topical” educational enrichment, as opposed to the actual foundation of our learning of psychology and counseling (Singh et al., 2020).

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders. In Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.).

Carroll, K. K., & Jamison, D. F. (2011). African-Centered Psychology, Education and the Liberation of African Minds: Notes on the Psycho-Cultural Justification for Reparations. Race, Gender & Class, 18(1/2), 52–72. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23884867

Clark, A. (2013). Honoring the Ancestors: Toward an Afrocentric Theology of Liberation. Journal of Black Studies, 44(4), 376–394. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24572935

Comas-Díaz, L., & Torres Rivera, E. (2020). Liberation psychology: Theory, method, practice, and social justice (L. Comas-Díaz & E. Torres Rivera (Eds.)). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000198-000[1]

Heitz, Hannah K. (2022) "Liberation Psychology: Drawing on history to work toward resistance and collective healing in the United States," Psychology from the Margins: Vol. 4, Article 4. Available at:

https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/psychologyfromthemargins/vol4/iss1/4 T

Martín-Baró, Ignacio. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology. Cambridge, Mass. :Harvard University Press,

Martín-Baró, I. (1994). Writings for a liberation psychology. (A. Aron & S. Corne, Eds.). Harvard University Press.

Martín-Baró, I., Aron, A., & Corne, S. (2019c). Writings for a Liberation Psychology. In Choice Reviews Online (p. 76). Association of College and Research Libraries. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520949454-027

Ratts, M. J., Singh, A. A., Nassar‐McMillan, S., Butler, S. K., & McCullough, J. R. (2016). Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies: Guidelines for the counseling profession. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 44(1), 28–48. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmcd.12035

Singh, A. A., Appling, B., & Trepal, H. (2020). Using the Multicultural and Social Justice Counseling Competencies to Decolonize Counseling Practice: The Important Roles of Theory, Power, and Action. Journal of Counseling & Development, 98(3), 261–271.