Volume 21 Number 1
May 1982

IN A 1971 study on counseling and the American Indian student, Bryde identified seven qualities which a group of Indian college students perceived would compromise an ideal counselor for working with American Indian students. The first quality these students identified was that the counselor would be Indian. They continued by stating that the counselor would be a friend and available, open-minded, patient, would have a thorough knowledge of Indian culture and values, would be professionally competent and a good listener (see Note 1).

Not many professional counselors would disagree with most of these characteristics of an ideal counselor identified in Bryde's study. However, much discussion continues today on whether an ideal counselor working with American Indians must be Indian. Strong and Dixon believed that the ethnicity of the counselor was not as important as the counselor's expertise, attractiveness and trustworthiness (see Note 1). Lockhart agreed, stating that trustworthiness was of particular significance to American Indian students (see Note 2). Trustworthiness was described as relating to the degree of confidence the client could assume concerning the counselor's sincere interest in the client's well-being and the likelihood that the counselor would maintain confidentiality relative to the information disclosed in the counseling session. Trimble said that trustworthiness and understanding were valued by American Indian students over any other counselor attribute (see Note 3). La Fromboise, Dauphinais and Lujan agreed, but in a later study (see Note 5). Dauphinais, Dauphinais and Rowe concluded that counselors are perceived by Indians as more effective if the counselor happens to be Indian. A similar conclusion was reached in a study conducted by Gordon and Grantham in 1979. The authors stated that "other things being equal, a helper of similar race and social background is likely to be more effective as a counselor (see Note 6). The ethnicity of the counselor may not be important, provided that the non-Indian counselor is trained to use culturally appropriate communicative and trustworthy behaviors, is the conclusion reached by Teresa La Fromboise (see Note 7). Dr. Helen Red Bird spoke often of the fact that the Indian would respond to anyone of any race or culture whom he perceived as really accepting him (see Note 1).

Even though the controversy continues today relative to the importance of American Indian student counselor ethnicity, the whole issue may be moot. The fact is, very few of those counselors working with Indian students are Indian. The relative numbers have not changed significantly in the past and there is very little likelihood that there will be an increase in number, given the substantial cutbacks in educational training programs across the United States.

More important is the fact that most counseling programs at the elementary, high school, college and agency levels are reporting that Indians are not utilizing existing counseling programs. Twice as many Indians as non-Indians do not return to counseling situations after the first visit (see Note 8).

A number of studies have noted that Indian students and others are staying away from counseling programs and related services, in part because there are too few professional counselors from ethnic minority groups. This tends to reinforce feelings of personal powerlessness at having to ask for help from non-minority counselors. Many students feel that the counseling or psychotherapy programs are designed for white middle-class students. The counseling centers are identified as "establishment" organizations, and students voice concern that preservation of the status quo will assume priority over the student's need to develop identity and self-pride. Professional counselors, even those of ethnic minority groups, are perceived to be limited in their fluency of the language of their clients. Also, there are perceived differences in culture or class values between counselor and clients which retard communication. Finally, institution or agency policies are seen as discouraging self-referrals because of different factors, which include inflexible in-take procedures, long waiting lists and inaccessible locations of centers relative to the target populations.

Other studies indicated that some programs place the responsibility for counseling ethnic, and especially bilingual students, on individuals who have the ability to communicate verbally with the clients but who lack the training to provide directional assistance (see Note 9).

School counselors and counseling methods have been cited for failing to consider the American Indian world view and as a result, practice approaches that clients cannot relate to (see Note 10). The Indian holistic approach to past, present and future is said to be in conflict with the Western approach of placing emphasis on past happenings as causes for one's problems. These differences in attitudes, beliefs, etc., if not considered, undermine the entire counseling situation (see Note 11). Lockhart traces the whole problem of non-returning clients to the general distrust by Indians of the non-Indian (see Note 2).

Whatever the case, many problems exist among American Indian populations for which counseling is required (see Note 12). Attempts at generalizing relative to the character or behavioral traits of American Indians as a group can be quite harmful and lead to serious error among counselors, contributing to failure in counseling programs. In addition to looking at each client as a unique individual, it is important to understand that there are vast differences among minority individuals generally and American Indian students specifically, regarding the extent of ethnic identification. American Indians may fall anywhere in a continuum of ethnic identification and commitment. An individual may have a very strong commitment to the majority Anglo-dominant group and weak commitment to the Indian culture, or a strong commitment to the traditional value system of the Indian culture and a weak commitment to the majority group. Finally, the individual may have surrendered his or her commitment to the traditional ethnic group and culture with no success in entering the newly selected group.

Language skills, in many cases, serve as an index to group membership and preferred group identification. Others include adherence to certain customs, traditions, laws, religions, costumes, or dietary preferences.

The individual who has abandoned his native culture before being accepted into the majority culture would probably exhibit the more obvious symptoms of serious problems. Those individuals who have chosen to retain a commitment to their native cultures may or may not have any serious personal problems, but they do place a heavy responsibility on counseling programs staffed by nonIndian counselors. These counselors must be aware that, in order for them to be effective, they must be culturally sensitive and aware of Indian culture. They should be able to interpret specific behaviors in terms of cultural meaningfulness and understand both similarities and differences in attitudes, beliefs, etc. among individual Indian students (see Note 13).

Counselors must also be aware that American Indian clients rely heavily on "significant others," mainly friends or members of the nuclear family, in problem resolution. In April of 1981, Teresa La Fromboise reported that American Indian students were more likely not to talk to anybody about their personal problems than was true of their Anglo counterparts. She reported that when Indian students discussed their problems, they were more likely to talk to counselors about problems related to school and their futures. More personal problems were discussed with a "significant other" (see Note 14).

Counselors, especially those working in rural areas or boarding schools where students are physically separated from their families, should understand that in many cases the family plans an important supportive role in addressing individual student problems. This is true in spite of the physical separation.

It is clear that no one counseling approach, style, program, etc. can be relied on to adequately address the myriad of problems confronting the diverse American Indian population. There are several statements that can be made relative to counseling and the Indian students that the author feels can be justified.

One is that the overriding counselor trait-the one characteristic that counselors must exhibit if they are to be successful to any extent with Indian clientss' trustworthiness. The other is that the counselor must be able to select appropriate counseling techniques and that the behavioristic model, rather than any psychoanalytic, humanistic, or existential model, is a model preferred by many American Indian students. Their orientation is to the "here and now" and emphasizes specificity and accountability. It is based on the belief that the client possesses the potential for change and will decide whether he or she wants to act on that potential and on the information he or she has received from the counseling sessions.

Without these understandings it is likely that the needs of the American Indian population will go largely unmet and that any attempts at designing counseling programs, regardless of staffing patterns, will end in failure and frustration.

1. Brunie, John F. Indian Students and Guidance. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1971.

2. Lockhart, Barbetta. "Historic Distrust and the Counseling of American Indian and Alaska Natives." White Cloud Journal of American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health. 2(3) 1981, 31-34.

3. Trimble, J.E. et al. "Value Differences Among American Indians: Concerns for the Concerned Counselor." Counseling Across Cultures. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii, 1976.

4. La Fromboise, T., P. Dauphinais and P. Lujan. "Verbal Indications of Insincerity as Perceived by American Indians." Journal of Non-White Concerns in Personnel and Guidance. 9(2) July 1981, 87-93.

5. Dauphinais, P., L. Dauphinais and W. Rowe. "Effects of Race and Communication Styles on Indian Perceptions of Counselor Effectiveness. "Counselor Education and Supervision. 21(l), September 1981.

6. Gordon, M. and R. J. Grantham. "Helper Preference in Disadvantaged Students." Journal of Counseling Psychology. 26(l), 1979, 337-343.

7. La Fromboise, Teresa. "American Indian Perceptions of Trustworthiness in Counseling Interviews." Journal of Counseling Psychology. 28(2) 1981, 135-159.

8. Sue, S., D. Allen, and L. Conaway. "The Responsiveness and Equality of Mental Health Care to Chicanos and Native Americans." American Journal of Community Psychology. 1(1) 1978.

9. Hernandez, T. and K. Carlquist-Hemandez. "Insights for Counseling Bilingual Students." Bilingual Journal. 3(3), Spring 1979, 14-18.

10. Burton, Charlene T. Counseling Native American High School and College Students. La Crosse, Wisconsin: Institute for Minority Studies, 1980.

11. Paisano-Suzo, Aleta. Suggested Perspectives in Counseling the American Indian Client. Albuquerque: United States Government Press, 1979.

12. Dauphinais, P. and W. Rowe. "Counseling with American Indians: Improving the Quality of Non-Indian Assistance." Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles: April 1981.

13. Dauphinais, P., T. La Fromboise and W. Rowe. "Perceived Problems and Sources of Help for American Indian Students." Counselor Education and Supervision. 20(l), September 1980, 37-44.

14. La Fromboise, Teresa. "Counseling with American Indians: Issues in Training Assertiveness and Coping Skills." Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles: April 1981.

Jim Bransford is currently the Associate Director of the Bueno Center for Multicultural Education at the University of Colorado at Boulder. The Bueno Center serves Hispanic and American Indian bilingual programs in an eight-state Rocky Mountain/Plains region.