Family counseling as decolonization: exploring an indigenous social-constructivist approach in clinical practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, Indigenous peoples’ lives are shaped by relationships with their families. These relationships are defined by traditional Indigenous conceptions of connectedness with the earth,communities, and the many relations that occur within these contexts and are based on what is termed Indigenous ways of knowing. These relationships are also described through a \nconcept of Western social constructivism. Social constructivism is an ideal mate for Indigenous ways of knowing in the practice of \nfamily counseling because it recognizes the importance of culture and context in understanding what occurs in human interactions when constructing knowledge based on this understanding. Indigenous ways of knowing have been of recent and growing \ninterest to family mental health practitioners and policy makers who are seeking to support clients in decolonization processes. Family service providers who work in a Western social service or health care setting have an interest in exploring forms of sociocultural theory and practice, such as Indigenous ways of knowing, in order to address and further the practitioner-family \ninteraction and to benefit both individuals and communities in a responsible and sustainable manner. Using current and \nhistorical literature, this article presents a summary of issues and guidelines for a hybrid approach that brings together Western \nand Indigenous approaches for family service workers (such as counsellors, social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists), \nand a set of guidelines for practical application. Implications of how these practices can positively impact and promote \ncommunity mental health in the current climate of recovery from colonialism and cultural genocide are presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".