CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGES AND SOCIAL RELEVANCE OF THE DISCIPLINE OF PSYCHOLOGY
By Dr. Andrés J. Consoli
President, Interamerican Society of Psychology
Esteemed Authorities, Colleagues, Colleagues-in-Training, Comrades:
It is a privilege as well as a major responsibility to briefly address you in this launching of the thirty-second Interamerican Congress on Psychology of the Interamerican Society of Psychology.
As president of SIP and a member of the Congress’ advisory board, I bring you a fraternal greeting of solidarity and interamerican cooperation. I also bring you a message of congratulations on behalf of SIP’s board of directors, celebrating psychology in all of Guatemala, for demonstrating that a national project is possible; that the scientists, academics and professionals of a country and region can work together to plan and organize an event of the magnitude of an interamerican congress.
We have a collective commitment to ensure that the Congress serves to generate and transmit knowledge and practices which allow us to bolster our professional capacity to confront human suffering and pain, hate, discrimination, violence and social injustices. The urgent needs of our peoples thus require it and this is what the scientists, professionals, academics and students who will participate in the Congress seek to obtain and share.
Dr. Andres Consoli together with the Organizing Committee of the XXXII ICP (Inter-american Congress on Psychology)
SIP, which is celebrating 56 years of existence this 17th of December, 2007, boasts a distinguished history: over thirty Interamerican Congresses held, over 40 volumes already published of the prestigious Interamerican Journal of Psychology, four official languages, national representatives in the great majority of countries in the Americas, as well as eight countries of the Americas represented on its board of directors. Guatemala, thanks to the protracted toil of so many professionals, has not only become a part of this history but has also shaped it, having organized SIP’s first Regional Congress in 2004 and having been selected – for the first time in its history – as the venue for an Interamerican Congress on Psychology for 2009, the launching of which convenes us this morning. I will return to this later.
Now, I would like to elaborate on the theme of my presentation, which is titled: Contemporary Challenges and Social Relevance of the Discipline of Psychology. Perhaps my personal and professional viewpoint on the theme can be apparent, quite transparently, in the four presidential initiatives that, together with nearly one hundred SIP members, we are carrying out, namely:
Psychology and Poverty
Psychology and Human Rights
Psychology and Disasters
Psychology and Transnational Collaborations
I consider these four initiatives as an important synthesis of the current challenges and of the social relevance that the discipline of psychology can and must broach. Allow me to briefly go over these initiatives.
1. Psychology and Poverty: As a recent document from the APA indicated on the matter, poverty is a threat to mental health. By means of this initiative we seek to identify the resources, strategies, and interventions from the psychological discipline that prove to be of particular help to persons who live in desperate economic situations, termed variously as poor people, the poor, persons of limited economic means, among others.
2. The second initiative, Psychology and Human Rights, is closely related to the first, particularly when we consider aspects such as significant education, worthy housing, physical as much as mental health, adequately remunerated labor, civil liberties, but also freedom from violence, as much from state-sponsored violence expressed in the illegal deprivation of liberty and as torture, as from terrorism, urban violence, gangs, and domestic violence.
3. With respect to the third initiative, Psychology and Disasters, the countries of the Americas are affected by natural as well as human-caused disasters with alarming regularity. And in the face of disasters what is urgent renders difficult to attend to what is important. The discipline of psychology can and must forward a structural framework that helps not only in responding to emergencies but also in building infrastructure, based on the principle that prevention and preparedness are part of every intervention.
4. Finally, the fourth initiative revolves around Psychology and Transnational Collaborations: In a world beset by globalization which imposes a neo-colonial discourse and courses of action, it is precisely the transnational exchanges and cooperation at all levels – scientific, academic, applied, professional, institutional, etc. – which can help in a relevant manner to overcome the significant inequities that characterize the Americas, insomuch as when these collaborations are marked by empowering cooperation and by mutual respect, and not by opportunism and dependency.
Beyond these four presidential initiatives that elucidate my perspective on the current challenges and social relevance of the psychological discipline, I wish to take this opportunity to share the following considerations. I believe that the major contemporary challenge that the discipline of psychology faces is precisely that of its social relevance. And this is not to say that psychology as a discipline lacks social relevance, but rather that the challenge arises from the need to expedite the responses we give as to the reason-for-being of the psychological discipline, prioritizing those answers which address the pressing, frankly-urgent needs that beset our peoples.
But before elaborating on these reflections, I would like to point out the reason for using discipline of psychology in the title. I think that the term emphasizes the importance of transcending the dualism of theory vs. practice, science vs. profession, and permits us to embrace an integration that affirms the reciprocal need of theory and practice, of science and profession. Justly so, I believe that it is extremely dangerous for a professional practice to neglect its scientific foundations, and an unjustifiable reductionism for Science to keep from collaborating with its professionals in developing the scientific foundations necessary for its praxis. I trust that these words do not perpetuate the schism between science and profession, but instead overcome it in the contemporary expressions that conceptualize the professional as a local scientist, committed with the reality in which all science is embedded. Well, then, I want to direct my following reflections as a clinical psychologist and of counseling, as well as a privileged citizen thanks to the education I received, to two considerations which illustrate my thesis that the current challenge of psychology is its social relevance, a thesis that is by any measure embodied as a moral matter in our discipline of psychology.
The first consideration focuses on the fundamental role that is played by psychosocial factors in health and illness.
The second consideration makes explicit the disparate access which characterizes the experiences had by persons in need of mental health care, and affirms the necessity for responsible action that we must carry out for the good of our societies.
I am certain that the audience already glimpses that my selection of these two final considerations is in accordance with the slogan of the Congress: “Psychology: A Road to Peace and Democracy”. Quite aptly, the discipline of psychology can and must do its share in the myriad ways that our societies can take to ensure peace and affirm life in a democracy.
As I was saying, the first consideration focuses on the fundamental role played by psychosocial factors in health and illness. In order to appreciate these psychosocial factors, we can employ the risk factors framework, that is, the behaviors that make a person vulnerable. It has been estimated that over fifty percent of health problems are directly related to psychosocial factors and lifestyles, and more than fifty percent of deaths can be attributed to psychosocial factors and lifestyles. And today, thanks to health psychology and counseling psychology, we should inquire not only about risk factors but also about protective factors which can improve a person’s health as well as aid recovery in the face of an illness. It is rightly the psychological discipline which can and must boost the development of the protective factors while work proceeds in diminishing the risk factors.
For example, among cardiovascular illnesses we find two behavior-based risk factors: a poor diet and a sedentary lifestyle, and as protective or recovery factors, a healthy diet and physical activity.
Even so, many people don’t know what is harmful to them, while others do know. Among the former, the challenge is one of education, while for the latter, it is one of motivation (among other things), this last being perhaps one of the most important themes in the discipline of psychology.
Then again, when one considers the social relevance of the psychology of health and sickness, the examples are countless. I am thinking in the context of infectious illnesses in which the frequent washing of hands is perhaps the paradigmatic example of people knowing the importance of doing it, but the implementation of which is difficult. Similarly, the use of condoms in sexual relations where cultural factors within interpersonal negotiations come into play. Or in accidents, the role that anger and lack of experience play; or the role that drugs play in violence. Now then, it is particularly dangerous to reduce the unit of analysis in the psychological discipline to the individual. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that this analysis be extended to the person in his or her interpersonal and social context.
Let us take the aspects of psychology, poverty and health disparities. In health psychology, we have ample documentation that life expectancies decrease as we go down the job scale; that persons of scarce resources tend to live in the midst of hazardous environments where they are exposed to toxins, particularly, lead; that healthy behaviors (e.g., exercise) tend to play a very small role among people of limited means but that these conform largely to environmental determinants such as their very limited access to recreational areas; and while in the United States of America 16% of the population (one in every six persons) lacks medical insurance, there exist definite ethnic differences in which the percentage rises to 33% among Hispanics (one in every three) who lack medical insurance. We know also that people of limited socioeconomic means tend to be exposed to higher levels of stress, acute as well as chronic. And thanks to social psychology the concept of meritocracy has been advanced, in which socioeconomic status is inappropriately conceived as something achieved instead of having it granted, that is to say, as something individual rather than structural, while the stigma associated with poverty is exposed and identified.
The second and last consideration that I want to present you with this morning, in the context of the launching of the XXXII ICP-SIP, the same being in accordance with the Congress slogan, centers around mental health care, especially in the disparate access to it, this manifesting a social injustice worthy of our attention and consequent responsible course of action.
In the USA only a third of persons who can be diagnosed as having a mental disorder, problem or illness have access to the necessary care. This number in and of itself is alarming. And it is even more so when other variables are introduced relating to the access to mental health care services. According to the federal report, Healthy People 2010: “In a socially just world, everybody should have potential access to care while realized access should be determined by need, rather than social structure characteristics.” But when we take into account variables such as ethnicity, in the United States we find that we descend from one in every three to one in every five among ethnic minorities, and among migrants one in every ten, and among persons who have not yet settled their migratory status, it is estimated that only one in every 100 persons who can be diagnosed as having a mental disorder access the needed services.
I believe that it is worthwhile to delve deeper into this dimension taking into account an aspect that should engage us all as scientists, academics and professionals who are committed and privileged: the engagement of public funds. In the United States, while the burden for mental illness is at 20%, the actual expenditures for mental health ranges from 5 to 7% of the total expenditure for health. And although this is so in the most affluent countries, in the majority countries that make up Latin America, the cost for mental health oscillate between one and two percent according to PHO and WHO. Both organizations maintain that the base expenditure should not descend below 10%. Clearly, this is an area that requires our sustained labor in order to achieve a significant increase in the resources assigned for the treatment of our patients.
In summary, poverty, human rights, disasters, transnational collaborations, risk and protective factors, and access to mental health care constitute, among other things, important contemporary challenges that confirm the relevance of the psychological discipline. Quite rightly, the slogan of the Congress draws us closer to a time when psychology will be even more socially relevant.
Then again, to return to the launching that has brought us here, the Interamerican Congresses are a national expression that celebrate the plurality of national identities and their meeting with regional and Interamerican identities. It makes for an excellent opportunity for showcasing the local and national accomplishments and for facilitating international exchanges. I invite you to construct a memorable congress, not only as an end-product, but as a process and a transcendence in and of itself. May we all make of this road to the Congress, and of the Congress itself, an event marked by cooperation and learning, dialogue and debate, the development of cultural competencies, and by the strengthening of cultural humility.
May this then be our task towards the XXXII Interamerican Congress of Psychology of the Interamerican Society of Psychology: The complete affirmation of the plurality of identities in all of its expressions, so be our toil a rainbow of huipiles woven by diverse hands. May our labor be, definitively, the vivid expression of a psychological discipline as characterized by its social relevance, allowing us to confront the most urgent needs of our peoples, as we work united towards the commitment of obtaining the social, economic and political resources necessary for the work at hand.
At this moment, I want to make formal handing-over of the SIP banner to Prof. María del Pilar Grazioso representing the executive committee of the XXXII ICP-SIP. May this banner be a symbol of the responsibility and trust deposited in us all. Congratulations to Guatemala and many, many thanks to all for your kind attention.
Dr. Andres Consoli makes delivery of the Venue of the XXXII ICP over to Ma. Del Pilar Grazioso M.A.