Intersectional Psychology

Attention. Are you a health care provider? If so, you can earn continuous professional development points accredited by the Health Professions Council of South Africa by watching a different version of this episode. To get your points, click on the link in the show notes below or go to aurorabcounselling.com. That’s aur0rabc0unse,doublel,ing.com, and search for, is it psychology’s place to promote social justice?

If you don’t need points, then welcome, and let’s get on with the show. Hello, you, and welcome to intersectional psychology, the podcast that explores psychology’s role in promoting social justice. I’m your host, Aurora Brown. I’m a registered counsellor in Cape Town, South Africa. Thank you for being here.

How are you doing? I hope that you are well and that you are tapping into the resources around you to take care of your mental health. Today, we are diving head first into a question that is more relevant than ever. Is it even psychology’s place to promote social justice and address intersectionality? Spoiler alert, yes, it is.

But I guess I would have to say that. Otherwise, there’d be no reason for this podcast. So as always, the devil’s in the details. Let’s look at the actual evidence. It’s about unpacking the layers, interrogating our professional obligations, and deciding if we want to be part of the problem or the solution, which is not a trick question.

So as we know by now, intersectionality is not just a buzzword. It’s the recognition that individuals live at the intersections of multiple networks of power and marginalization. Each identity carries its own experiences, privileges, and oppressions. Intersectionality is a Venn diagram where each circle represents a different system of subjugation, be it race, gender, class, sexuality, age, ability, you name it. And social justice is about making those systems more equitable.

Psychology with its claim to understanding human behavior has a critical role to play here. We’re going to use real world examples, professional guidelines from South Africa, The US, and The UK, and the latest research to answer this question. So buckle up. It’s going to be an hopefully enlightening ride. Fasten your seat belts.

It’s going to be a bumpy night. Framing the question. Let’s start by looking at the rule books that define psychology’s remit. Psychology’s scope has historically been defined as the scientific study of human behavior and mental processes. Now, that’s a very broad definition to encompass all the various streams and disciplines of psychology.

It seeks to promote individual and collective well-being through assessment, intervention, and research. In South Africa, the Health Professions Council of South Africa, the HPCSA, provides explicit guidance on the psychologist and registered counselor’s roles in promoting well-being and addressing systemic inequities. The HPCSA is also the body that regulates doctors, psychiatrists, occupational therapists, etcetera. Its standards of ethical conduct emphasize client dignity, informed consent, and the importance of culturally competent care. For example, the following critical cross field outcomes appear in the HBCSA’s minimum standards documents for the training of clinical, counseling, research, and industrial or organizational psychologists.

Firstly, cultural and aesthetic sensitivity is evidenced through providing acceptable and satisfying professional care and acceptance and application of psychological research and practice across social contexts. So we’re looking at how every aspect of a person’s identity impacts their behavior and functioning across different contexts. And secondly, demonstrating an understanding of the world as a set of related systems is indicated in the range of activities of the successful psychologist and how this professional locates themself within the broader psychology system. I just wanna repeat that. Understanding the world as a set of related systems.

If that’s not intersectionality, then what is? Similarly, the HPCSA minimum standards document for the training of registered counselors states the role of the registered counsellor is to extend psychological services and make them accessible to the diverse South African population. We are meant to be serving all people, not just people of a particular demographic. A registered counselor conducts psychological and preventative interventions that focus on the promotion and enhancement of psychosocial well-being for individuals, families, groups, and communities. So our work is meant to be preventative as well as remedial or therapeutic.

And we should be working with communities as well as individuals or couples. A healthy community is made up of healthy individuals. The professional mandate for psychologists is not just ethical, but also legal as outlined in the South African Health Professions Act of 1974 and the National Health Act of 02/2003. Don’t worry. I’m not going to read an entire law to you.

I’m just going to pull out the intersectional and social justice related statements. So these acts establish the framework of ethical conduct, professional standards, and accountability, ensuring that all health professionals, including psychologists, serve the public with integrity and equity. Practitioners are reminded to work within our scope of practice while fostering equitable access to mental health services. Intersectional and social justice related statements and provisions in the National Health Act include from the preamble recognizing the need to heal the divisions of the past, also known as apartheid, and to establish a society based on democratic values, social justice, and fundamental human rights. Wow.

First line, social justice. Then from section two. Protecting, respecting, promoting, and fulfilling the rights of firstly, the people of South Africa to the realization of the constitutional right of access to health care services, including reproductive health care. Our health care is supposed to be progressive. Secondly, the right of the people of South Africa to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being.

Protecting the environment is also part of our national health act. Thirdly, the right of children to basic nutrition and basic health care services. And fourthly, vulnerable groups such as women, children, older persons, and persons with disabilities. Vulnerable groups, marginalized groups are named and protected in our National Health Act. That’s intersectionality, baby.

From section eight. A user has the right to participate in any decision affecting their personal health and treatment. You have a right to be a part of the decision about your own health care. Of course, it sounds like common sense. But how many countries are taking away people’s rights to choose their own health care?

From that same section, if the informed consent is given by a person other than than the user, such person must, if possible, consult the user before giving the required consent. Even if it’s a child or someone with a legal guardian and the guardian is giving the consent, they must consult the child or the person who is receiving the care, if possible. A user who is capable of understanding must be informed even if they lack the legal capacity to give the informed consent. If they are capable of understanding, you have to explain to them what is happening and why it is happening. If a user is unable to participate in a decision affecting their personal health and treatment, they must be informed after the provision of the health service in question unless the disclosure of such information would be contrary to the person’s to the user’s best interest.

So even if they can’t understand at the time, you have to explain it to them afterwards when they are capable of understanding. That is their right. The UK’s Health And Care Professions Council standards of conduct, performance, and ethics echo these sentiments. The HCPC emphasizes the importance of treating service users as individuals, challenging discrimination, and maintaining cultural competence. And across The Atlantic, the American Psychological Association’s ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct sets the gold standard.

Its general principles like beneficence and mal non maleficence, fragility and responsibility, and respect for people’s rights and dignity demand that we safeguard rights and promote equality. But does that include addressing intersectionality? Coined by Kimberle Crenshaw in 1989, the brand new concept intersectionality explains how overlapping identities compound and interact systemic oppression. It forces us to ask, how can psychology address mental health without addressing the social conditions that affect it? The World Health Organization or WHO defines the social determinants of health as the conditions in which we are born, grow, live, work, and age.

All of these contexts are important to our health. But as Barat and colleagues highlighted in 2021, the way we imagine discrimination or disempowerment is more complicated for people who are subjected to multiple forms of exclusion. Social determinants of health may manifest on several levels. Individual, social, and community, and on the general level. This is something our clients live with every day, and it impacts every decision they make.

Considering broader societal contexts such as poverty, racism, and cultural discrimination is inseparable from individual mental health concerns. Intersectionality, therefore, isn’t an optional add on. It’s fundamental to understanding and addressing mental health disparities. Ethical imperatives and professional guidelines. So guidelines from major professional organizations make it clear psychology has an ethical obligation to address systemic inequities.

In South Africa, the HPCSA’s ethical framework aligns with these principles. It mandates that psychologists act to reduce harm, respect clients’ autonomy, and remain mindful of societal inequalities. The Health Professions Act underpins the HPCSA’s ethical standards, emphasizing that practitioners must work to reduce harm, promote well-being, and uphold human rights. These obligations align seamlessly with intersectional approaches because they require psychologists to consider the broader societal forces impacting mental health. Guideline two of the SAISA practice guidelines for working with sexually and gender diverse clients reinforces this by advocating for nondiscrimination and respect for human rights.

Another of their guidelines centers intersectionality. In The US, the APA clearly mandates that psychologists must be aware of cultural, individual, and role differences, and avoid letting biases influence their work. In essence, psychologists cannot ethically sidestep intersectionality because understanding these dynamics is crucial for informed and effective practice. The 2019 APA multicultural guidelines take it a step further, explicitly advocating for an intersectional, ecological approach to identity and context. These guidelines aren’t just suggestions.

They’re a call to action to examine how overlapping identities shape experiences and outcomes. Meanwhile, the UKCP standards of education and training emphasize integrating cultural humility and awareness of privilege and oppression into psychotherapeutic practice. If our governing bodies demand it, isn’t that a clear mandate? Hales and colleagues in 2021 took it further, offering a framework based on three types of justice. Firstly, interactional justice, addressing the power dynamics in relationships.

Secondly, distributive justice, ensuring equitable access to resources. And thirdly, procedural justice, creating fair processes. For a more detailed explanation of these types of justice, check out my last episode on social justice in psychology. The seven guidelines for social justice ethics described by Hales and colleagues include empowering marginalized communities and engaging with social systems. This ethical scaffolding supports the argument that intersectionality is not just relevant, but essential.

Similarly, the SAISA guidelines advocate for nondiscrimination, self determination, and affirmative practices. These guidelines champion intersectionality, acknowledging the profound harm caused by historical and systemic discrimination. They highlight the importance of understanding intersecting oppressions from race to socioeconomic status and applying this understanding in every aspect of professional practice. Whether we’re in Cape Town, New York, or London, the message is consistent. Intersectionality is intrinsic to ethical and effective psychology.

Psychology’s historical missteps. What we can learn from the past. Eaton and colleagues in 2021 affirmed that mental health practitioners have unquestionably contributed to positive social change efforts. For example, psychologists have contributed to socially transformative supreme court cases in The US, South Africa, and further. They’ve advocated for reproductive freedoms and developed paradigms for combating racism.

But let’s not sugarcoat it. Psychology has a problematic history. So let’s drop the needle on the greatest hits of psychology’s epic fails. In 02/2008, Pirlotanski pointed out that mental health practitioners have at various points colluded in structural oppression by providing methods and justification for torture, discrimination, segregation, and violence. As an example, Helms in 2015 cites The UK’s Sir Francis Gelton, who was the founder of differential psychology and the Eugenics Movement.

Sure, he may be dead, but he still holds his knighthood. Galton the Eugenicist also created the framework for comparative intelligence and personality testing. This still forms the basis of psychometrics today. Yakushko in 2019 highlighted how the legacy of this continues to influence psychometrics and research practices today. And here in South Africa, we have the psychologist Hendrik Verwoerd, who is commonly regarded as the architect of apartheid.

In fact, Verwoerd, who served as the sixth prime minister of South Africa from 1958 to 1966, was nicknamed the father of apartheid. He used his training and experience in research and applied psychology to socially engineer the institutional racial segregation, white supremacy, and propaganda that formed the apartheid state. As described by his biographer Joyce in 1999, Verwoerd studied in The United States as a young man in 1927 and 1928. From the Jim Crow system of racial segregation in America, he learned the crucial role that environmental influences could have on physical and psychological development, resilience, and morale of people. In 2011, Marx explained how Verwoerd’s environmental approach differed from the eugenics of Hitler’s Nazis, which believed that the white race was genetically superior to other races.

Verwerth, on the other hand, believed that access or lack of access to education, nutrition, safety, freedom, and community could make all the difference. Durvord used what he learned in The US to create apartheid, which subjugated non white South Africans by separating families and breaking down their support structures, limiting their access to healthy food, providing them with inferior education and housing, limiting their access to health care, and instituting the past laws that confine their freedom of movement. Adams and colleagues asserted in 2019 that psychological knowledge is routinely deployed in the interest of individuating, capitalist, and specifically neoliberal agendas that divert attention away from the role of macro level structural dynamics in the production of human behavior. In the counseling room, we are often so focused on what’s happening within the client and their circle. In other words, what Kaveh in 2022 called the person as a system and the person in a system.

But then we neglect the person or the system in context. Galton and Verwoerd’s application of psychological principles to apartheid policies and eugenics remains a stark reminder of how psychology can be misused to entrench systemic inequality. Hello. This is future Aurora just popping in post edit with a quick content or trigger warning. Please note that the next section of this episode contains a discussion of the ongoing genocide in Gaza.

If you don’t feel up to engaging with that topic right now, you are welcome to skip forward to the thirty five minutes, thirty seconds mark, or come back to this section at another time. And now, let’s get back to this episode. The HPCSA’s emphasis on ethical practice is in part a response to this legacy, aiming to prevent similar abuses in the future. But now this is happening again with an ongoing genocide in Gaza being supported by academics, militaries, and politicians from the most privileged countries. And this genocide was enabled by the systematic oppression, segregation, and unequal rights experienced by Palestinians in the West Bank since 1967.

That’s fifty eight years. And elements of legal discrimination were instituted by Israel as early as 1948. Human rights organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Israeli group B’Tselem have all used the term apartheid to describe Israel’s military administration over millions of Palestinians who are denied citizenship, forced to carry differential passbooks, and face movement restrictions, land confiscations, blockades, forced displacement, and settlement expansion. Sound familiar? Hamas’s massacre of a 139 people at the Israeli festival on the 10/07/2023 was a horrific and inexcusable terror attack.

But Israel’s subsequent killing of over 69,000 Palestinians, including protected categories like women, children, journalists, medical or health workers, and humanitarian workers is a disproportionate response of collective punishment and genocide. Jews have historically faced widespread antisemitic discrimination. I believe that they should have a defensible place where they are safe and have the rights to freedom and self determination. But I also believe that the Israeli government has denied the Palestinian people those same rights for over sixty years. And the state of Israel does not represent all Jewish people.

Not all Jewish people support Israel’s actions in Hazar. And Israel’s actions in Gaza are actually making the world less safe for Jews because it is spurring a rise in anti Israel is now using the blueprint for apartheid designed by psychologist, Verwoerd, and supported by The USA. Why did America vote in Donald Trump again? Why do you think Elon Musk has become so successful and popular in The US? Because The US was primed for their brand of self serving prejudice.

It is a country where the majority of people who voted last year were so racist and misogynistic that they would rather elect a president who is a convicted sex pest and fraudster, a xenophobic alleged insurrectionist and traitor instead of a black woman who is eminently more qualified and skilled for the position. Americans love to call it the oldest democracy in the world. But The USA has never been a democracy. Even after emancipation, most Americans of color were systematically prevented from voting before the Voting Rights Act of 1965, by which time The US had already colonized Puerto Rico. Although it is called a self governing unincorporated territory, Puerto Ricans are subject to The US federal laws, yet they are not allowed to vote in US elections, and they have no voting representatives in the US Congress.

The same applies to The US territories, also known as colonies, in American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and The US Virgin Islands. All of these colonies are severely underdeveloped in comparison with the Mainland USA. And now, the reason I’m giving you this random geopolitical lesson is that Trump wants to colonize Gaza, subjugating yet another non white population that has already been subject to the injustices of apartheid for decades. This system was developed by a South African psychologist, and health workers in Palestine have been specifically targeted by the Israeli Defense Forces or IDF. Yet, most South African health care providers have remained silent on this topic.

Surely learning from the past, taking accountability, making amends for the historical harms caused by our profession, and protecting our colleagues in Palestine means standing in solidarity with them and speaking out against Israel’s atrocities in Gaza because it won’t stay contained in the Middle East. Already, antisemitism and Islamophobia have increased around the world because it is being normalised by those in power. And in my experience, people who hold one type of prejudice are more likely to hold other prejudices too. Look at The US. I recently heard an interview with someone who was fired from the education department along with however many thousands of the other staff in the department.

And the only people who remain in their positions are cisgender white men who hold mostly conservative views. All the people who were fired are women, people of colour, queer people, and those who lean politically to the left. Casey and Buanzajer in 2018 critiqued psychology’s colonial legacy, arguing for a decolonial feminist approach that centers the experiences of the epistemologically disenfranchised. Psychology has historically served dominant groups, but contemporary trends emerged from violent histories like slavery and colonisation, aiming to create just social relationships. The discipline drew from philosophies that categorise people by race, contributing to ideologies of white supremacy that are still alive and kicking.

Intelligence testing reinforced racial stereotypes and justified population control. Neuropsychology perpetuates harmful assumptions about brain differences, while psychology maintains a focus on the experiences of white, heterosexual, middle class males. It also perpetuates binary notions of sex and gender. However, there is a push to prioritise alternative philosophical principles and challenge social oppressions. Social psychologists study prejudice and discrimination, but they focus on individual biases overlooks systemic oppression.

Psychology has pathologized marginalized groups, perpetuating stigma. It is crucial for psychology in Africa and around the world to incorporate diverse perspectives and challenge colonial legacies. Universities play a key role in reproducing oppressive power dynamics, and they must be sites for decolonization efforts. A decolonial feminist approach to psychology can inform new understandings of leadership, activism, and social movements. Psychology must engage with the legacies of colonisation, slavery, and apartheid to address contemporary social and psychological challenges effectively.

To counteract this is history, we must embrace principles of liberation psychology. Neville and colleagues in 2021 proposed a training model for public psychology, which they called liberation psychology. This applies psychological knowledge to promote justice and equity through an anti racist and anti oppression framework, forming partnerships with marginalized communities. Its goal is to offer accessible psychological services and foster a more just society. One branch focuses on mental health services in publicly funded settings like hospitals and clinics.

While another branch of public psychology emerged with the Association of Black Psychologists, addressing the needs of black individuals post the assassination of doctor Martin Luther King Junior. If it’s led to the establishment of APA boards and directorates advocating for social justice, Public psychology training is guided by principles such as social justice, intersectionality, radical healing, and a sense of connection. Hello. It’s me, Aurora. Please excuse me interrupting my own podcast.

I’m just here to say that I will never include third party ads on intersectional psychology, which is great because it means that you can be sure all the mental health information and content shared here is free from corporate influence and bias. However, it also means that this podcast will only be made possible by support from you, the listener. So if you enjoy this podcast or find value in it, please consider joining my Patreon or Patreon rather for as little as 3 US dollars per month. Your contributions will be used to improve this podcast, to cover the production costs to research, write, record, and edit each episode, and to host our guests. In return, you’ll get exclusive matron benefits like bonus episodes, additional guided mindfulness recordings, early access to new episodes, extended episodes and outtakes, group discussions and more.

So just go to patreon.com and search for intersectional psychology. Thanks and back to intersectional psychology. Core liberation psychology principles include reorienting psychology to cater to the most oppressed, recovering historical memory from their perspective, and resisting the normalization of discrimination. Other principles involve critically reflecting on group strengths, awakening awareness of root causes, sharing power with communities, and implementing principles into practice. Why intersectionality is essential to psychological practice?

Hello, this is future Aurora again. Just popping in with another quick content or trigger warning. Please note that the next section of this episode contains brief references to sexual assault and queerphobic hate crimes and hate speech. If you don’t feel up to engaging with our topic right now, you are welcome to skip forward to the fifty two minutes twenty four seconds mark or come back to this section at another time. And now, let’s get back to the episode.

So, guidelines from major professional organisations make it clear psychology has an ethical obligation to address systemic inequities. In South Africa, the HPCSA’s ethical framework aligns with these principles. It mandates that psychologists act to reduce harm, respect clients’ autonomy, and remain mindful of societal inequalities. The Health Professions Act underpins the HPCSA’s ethical standards, emphasizing that practitioners must work to reduce harm, promote well-being, and uphold human rights. These obligations align seamlessly with intersectional approaches because they require psychologists to consider the broader societal forces impacting mental health.

Guideline two of the SAISA practice guidelines for working with sexually and gender diverse clients reinforces this by advocating for nondiscrimination and respect for human rights. Another of their guidelines centers intersectionality. In The US, the APA clearly mandates that psychologists must be aware of cultural, individual, and role differences and avoid letting biases influence their work. In essence, psychologists cannot ethically sidestep intersectionality because understanding these dynamics is crucial for informed and effective practice. The 2019 APA multicultural guidelines take it a step further, explicitly advocating for an intersectional ecological approach to identity and context.

These guidelines aren’t just suggestions. They’re a call to action to examine how overlapping identities shape experiences and outcomes. Meanwhile, the UKCP standards of education and training emphasize integrating cultural humility and awareness of privilege and oppression into psychotherapeutic practice. If our governing bodies demand it, isn’t that a clear mandate? Hales and colleagues in 2021 took it further, offering a framework based on three types of justice.

Firstly, interactional justice, addressing the power dynamics. At this point, I want to mention and remember a marginalized person who was targeted because of the attention they attracted as a vocal activist for the rights of the oppressed. Imam Mohsin Hendricks was known as the world’s first gay imam. He advocated for all queer Muslims in South Africa and around the world, and led an inclusive mosque here in Cape Town. Imam Hendricks was recently brutally murdered in the Eastern Cape, and it was very clearly a targeted assassination.

My heart goes out to his family and community. The APA multicultural guidelines and the SAISA guidelines remind us that effective practice requires acknowledging these complexities. They also challenge us to recognize our biases and address them. Whether you’re a cisgender white man working with a client from a different background or a queer therapist navigating your own intersecting identities, self awareness is critical. Intersectionality doesn’t just improve outcomes.

It’s a form of professional integrity. Case studies and practical applications. Let’s ground this discussion in another real world example. Consider Anthony, a biracial cisgender man recovering from a traumatic brain injury. His psychologist, informed by the APA multicultural guidelines, approaches his care by considering how his race, gender, and disability intersect.

This means addressing not just the injury’s physical and psychological impacts, but also the systemic barriers Anthony faces in accessing support. Is he expected to be the main breadwinner for his family due to the stereotypical gender roles of his culture? Do these gender stereotypes also expect him to be stoic and manage this crisis on his own? Is he navigating public transport with his brain injury to get to his health care providers? Navigating public transport in South Africa is stressful at the best of times.

Imagine trying to do it with a brain injury. Is he encountering racism along the way? Or people who treat him as mentally disabled due to his brain injury? Is he financially constrained by a lower income job because historical inequalities that meant that he and his family could not access basic education or further education. By adopting an intersectional lens, the psychologist moves from treatment to empowerment.

Or take the case of a queer immigrant navigating anxiety. Their counselor uses the SAISA guidelines to explore how homophobia, xenophobia, and cultural displacement contribute to their distress. The counselor also draws on the HCPC principles to challenge biases and ensure that their approach is affirmative and inclusive. These aren’t extraordinary interventions. They’re standard practices for psychologists committed to equity.

The privileging of cisgender and heterosexist norms is pervasive across various contexts like schools, workplaces, and health services, said Brown and colleagues in 2021. Often, these norms disregard individuals’ cultural context and intersectional identities. However, when mental health practitioners collaborate with other professionals in a culturally competent and participatory manner, their work has the potential to improve behavioral, academic, and mental health outcomes at the individual, group, and systems levels. Kanneto in 2019 outlines principles for teaching gender through an intersectional feminist lens, emphasizing the cultural and historical context of psychological theories. Firstly, all theories and research are culture bound.

Secondly, there is variability in gender equality within and across countries. Thirdly, historical perspectives on gender are critical in the psychology of women and gender. Fourthly, an examination of transnational systems and forces is necessary in the psychology of women and gender. And fifthly, women’s experiences are not the same everywhere because of intersectionality and context, but they are similar as related to patriarchy being a transnationally dominant system. Achieving gender equality and empowering all women is one of the twenty thirty United Nations sustainable development goals and is consistent with principles expressed in many psychological bodies’ codes of ethics, including the International Union of Psychological Sciences Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists.

SAIS’ guidelines align with this, urging practitioners to challenge cis heteronormative frameworks and promote affirmative practices. The HPCSA’s training standards stress the importance of cultural competence and ethical sensitivity. The Global Mind Project’s 2023 report highlights how systemic factors like economic inequality and strained family relationships impact mental health. Wealthier nations often perform worse in mental health, illustrating the necessity of addressing broader societal contexts. In South Africa, these determinants intersect with historical injustices.

So when people say apartheid is over. It’s been gone for thirty years, so get over it. I’m just like, girl, honey, sweetie darling boo boo. If you just look at the current demographics of South Africa, the distribution of wealth, The contrasting family structures in different communities? The patterns of intergenerational trauma and emotional dysregulation?

The unequal access to education and health care? It is so obvious that the racialised effects of apartheid are still impacting the majority of South Africans’ lives every day. Every day. And this is true in other countries too, with the effects of colonialism or slavery or segregation or fascism. This emphasizes even more that making an intersectional approach is critical.

Activism and advocacy. Now let’s get to the juicy part. The point where psychology moves from theory to action. If we accept that psychology exists within a social and political context, then we must also accept that psychologists have a duty to engage in activism and advocacy. The South African Health Professions Act provides a foundation for psychologists to engage in advocacy.

While it requires practitioners to maintain professionalism, it does not prohibit efforts to address systemic inequities. It makes room for ethical activism and social justice work within the profession. Intersectional and social justice related guidelines are included in the HBCSA’s twenty twenty one booklet one on general ethical guidelines for the health care professions. It states that the core ethical values and standards required of healthcare practitioners include the following. Beneficence.

Healthcare practitioners must act in the best interests of patients even when the interests of the latter conflict with the professional’s own personal interest. Secondly, non maleficence. Health care practitioners must not harm or act against the best interests of patients even when the interests of the latter conflict with their own self interest. Thirdly, human rights. Health care practitioners must recognize and respect the human rights of all individuals.

That sounds like a no brainer, but believe me, some healthcare practitioners need to hear it. Fourthly, autonomy. Healthcare practitioners must honor the right of patients to self determination which allows them to make their own informed choices and to live their lives by their own beliefs, values, and preferences. Fifthly, integrity. Health practitioners should incorporate these core ethical values and standards as the foundation for their character and practice.

Compassion. Healthcare practitioners should be sensitive to and empathize with the individual and social needs of their patients and seek to create mechanisms for providing comfort and support where appropriate and possible. Tolerance. Healthcare practitioners must respect the rights of people to have different ethical beliefs as these may arrive arise from deeply held personal, religious, or cultural convictions. Justice.

Healthcare practitioners must treat all individuals and groups in an impartial, fair, and just manner. Community. Healthcare practitioners should strive to contribute to the betterment of society in accordance with their professional abilities and standing in the community. Health care policy development. Health care practitioners should include amongst other health related and clinical foci, ethical considerations, legal requirements, and human rights in the development of health care policies.

Conservation of natural resources. Health care practitioners should recognize that they have a responsibility to ensure that in the conduct of their affairs, they do not in any way contribute to environmental degradation. This means that practitioners are not just responsible for individual well-being, but also for systemic change. Are you turning on the air con out of habit when you don’t need it? Are you printing things out unnecessarily?

Are you not recycling? Are you turning on lights that don’t need to be on? Caring for the environment is part of caring for our clients who use the same environment, who live in the same environment. Booklet nine of the HPCSA, annexure 12, rules of conduct pertaining specifically to the profession of psychology, states that a psychologist shall respect the right of a client to hold values, attitudes, beliefs, and opinions that differ from their own. A psychologist shall recognize a client’s inalienable human right to bodily and psychological integrity, including security in and control over their own body and person, and a client’s right not to be subjected to any procedure or experiment without their informed consent.

And such consent shall be sought and given in a language that is easily understood by the client. We need to be using language that the client understands when we seek informed consent. And when the guidelines start talking about bodily and psychological integrity and control over one’s own body, gender affirming healthcare comes immediately to mind. It’s there in black and white that whether gender affirming healthcare aligns with our own personal values or beliefs is irrelevant. A psychologist shall not impose on a client, an employee, a research participant, student, supervisee, trainee, or any other person over whom they have, have or had authority any stereotypes of behaviour, values, or roles relating to age, belief, birth, conscience, color, culture, disability, disease, ethnic or social origin, gender, language, marital status, pregnancy, race, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or any other factor prohibited by law.

That’s pretty comprehensive. A psychologist shall make every effort to ensure that language appropriate and culture appropriate services are made available to a client, and that acceptable standards of language proficiency are met in rendering a service to a client whose primary language differs from that of the psychologist. All of these guidelines align with intersectional psychology. Psychology that doesn’t just stop at the individual level, but engages in second and third order systems or context level change. The HPCSA guidelines are not asking psychologists to passively observe injustice.

They are demanding active engagement. This is made explicit in the board of psychology’s vision and mission statements. The vision of the HPCSA professional board for psychology is to regulate and advocate for responsive, relevant, and equitable psychological health care and well-being for all. To advocate for equitable health care. The mission is to strive to enable regulations that protect the public, guide, and uphold the integrity of the profession through the development of progressive regulations, standards, guidelines, and policies, promoting equitable provision of psychological health care services and well-being for all.

In other words, silence is not an option. If practitioners witness policies or practices that harm marginalized groups, we have a professional responsibility to challenge them. This means calling out discriminatory health policies that limit access to gender affirming care, HIV care, etcetera. Advocating for mental health reforms that take into account poverty, unemployment, and housing insecurity, engaging in public education to dismantle myths and stereotypes about marginalized communities. The Psychological Society of South Africa or SAISA echoes this call, urging psychology professionals to adopt an affirmative stance when working with sexually and gender diverse clients, and to oppose harmful practices such as conversion therapy, which the UN has called torture.

Nevertheless, Buenzeyer and van Niekerk pointed out in 2019 that psychology and psychological knowledge production has not traditionally centered questions of activism. We know this by now. But both decolonial and feminist work has centred social justice and made the point that we must begin by centring the needs and desires of the epistemologically disenfranchised. And, of course, those with more resources, such as access to data and online electronic resources, such as smartphones, are more able to access mental health support. But decolonial feminist psychology disrupts the binarism between scholarly and activist engagements towards transformative praxis, transforming theory into practice that works in the interests of the disenfranchised.

If we zoom out from South Africa, the same themes emerge in international ethical guidelines. The American Psychological Association or APA has included justice as a core ethical principle in its ethical guidelines for social justice in psychology. These guidelines explicitly state that psychology must mitigate relational power dynamics in therapy and research, contribute time and resources to advocacy efforts, and challenge systemic inequalities in mental health policy. Meanwhile, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms that mental health professionals have an obligation to promote and protect human rights, recognizing that health, both mental and physical, exists within a broader political and social landscape. What does this mean for practitioners?

Mental health professionals are not just passive listeners. We are agents for change. And if we refuse to engage in advocacy, then we risk complicity in systemic injustice. A message from the chairperson of the HPCSA professional board for psychology in the December 2024 newsletter confirms this. He wrote, in a country as diverse and dynamic as South Africa, we are faced with unique challenges that require an equally unique approach to psychological practice.

Our profession has the power to transform lives, address inequalities, and foster resilience in communities affected by historical trauma, social injustices, and contemporary struggles. As psychologists, we are called upon to be agents of change, advocates for mental health, and champions of human dignity. Civil disobedience and systemic change. Flynn and colleagues in 2021 argued that civil disobedience, defined as intentional violation of policy or law in service of higher principles, is a legitimate form of psychological advocacy. Whether it’s supporting Black Lives Matter protests or challenging anti LGBTQIA plus legislation, psychologists have a role to play in societal transformation.

Communities who face exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural domination, or violence have used civil disobedience to reorient society’s moral parameters, contest entrenched power structures, and exact concessions in support of social justice against cisheteropatriarchy. Cisheteropatriarchy refers to intersecting normative systems that privilege and reinforce the power of cisgender heterosexual, usually white, men through the exploitation and oppression of women and sexual and gender minorities. In South Africa, activism has been a cornerstone of social change. From the anti apartheid movement to contemporary queer advocacy, civil disobedience has played a crucial role in challenging systemic injustices. The HPCSA’s ethical guidelines support psychologists who engage in such efforts, provided they maintain professional boundaries, prioritize client well-being, and ensure that their interventions are informed by ethical best practices.

These guidelines emphasize that advocacy, research, and policy engagement are integral to ethical psychological practice, particularly when addressing social determinants of mental health and structural inequalities. The South African Constitution, chapter two, the Bill of Rights, section 17 states, everyone has the right peacefully and unarmed to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket, and to present petitions. Defenders of the status quo manufacture popular narratives concerning violence at contemporary protests. These narratives often frame the occasional destruction of property by protesters, for example, smashing windows or graffiti, as unjust violence while excusing or justifying violent and disproportionate state repression against those who dare challenge the status quo. For example, dousing protesters with paper spray, shooting them with impact munitions, or worse, And overlooking the systemic violence that begets protest in the first place.

For example, the police murders of black people like George Floyd that spurred the Black Lives Matter movement. This construction vilifies actions that threaten the status quo as violent while presenting comparatively more severe actions that enact, protect, and embolden systems of oppression as neutral or just. Martin Luther King Junior advocated for study and analysis to avoid mistakes of the past when civil disobedience was employed on too small a scale and sustained too briefly. Modern consensus hails Doctor. King as a paragon of justice and nonviolent civil disobedience and derides violent state responses to the 1960s civil rights movement.

However, during King’s lifetime, the US government and scornful public disapproved of his tactics, maligned him for property damage that sometimes accompanied protests, and levied violent repression against the movement under the guise of restoring law and order. Perhaps most salient in recent South African memory is the wanton rioting and looting of retailers in July 2021 in response to the imprisonment of former president Jacob Zuma. His daughter, MP Duduzile Zuma Sambudla, is currently on trial for terrorism charges on suspicion of inciting violence on social media during those riots. On an international scale, and perhaps a precursor and catalyst for the Zuma riots, is the extreme damage, physical harm, loss of life, and collective trauma of the January sixth US Capitol insurrection allegedly incited by Donald Trump on social media, just six months before the Zoom riots. Perhaps the January sixth insurrection normalized such violence, which led to other riots like the Zuma riots in South Africa.

This perspective draws a sharp distinction between insurrection, particularly violent insurrection, and civil disobedience on the basis of goals. Insurrection aims to overthrow a government, whereas civil disobedience aims to beget, albeit often radical, reforms. The socially constructed boundary between righteous civil disobedience and unjust violence is neither arbitrary nor consistent. In response to these factors, two dimensions that can guide mental health practitioners’ conceptions of civil disobedience are contestation and communication. In other words, under what conditions or when do specific methods contest injustice?

And to what extent or how do these methods communicate a desire or a vision for change? Civil disobedience that contests pathologization and dehumanization of trans identities can shift public consciousness to examine the inherent violence of limiting someone’s ability to make informed decisions while discovering, understanding, and creating gender, thereby communicating a vision for change. That same civil disobedience simultaneously disrupts the commodification of informed decision making and communicates to others that it is possible and necessary to continue disrupting. I encourage mental health practitioners to center these questions when considering civil disobedience. As South Africans, we have the constitutional right to protest no matter what our profession.

We cannot legally face professional penalties for protesting as long as we obey the laws governing activism and do not bring our profession into disrepute. According to the Regulation of Gatherings Act two zero five of 1993, Section eight. Conduct of gatherings and demonstrations. No person at or participating in a gathering or demonstration shall by way of a banner, placard, speech, or singing, or in any other manner, incite hatred of other persons or any group of other persons on account of differences in culture, race, sex, language, or religion. And no person present at or participating in a gathering or demonstration shall perform any act or utter any words which are calculated or likely to cause or encourage violence against any person or group of persons.

No person shall at any gathering or demonstration wear a disguise or a mask or any other apparel or item which obscures their facial features and prevents their identification. So, if you were thinking, oh, I’ll go and protest but I’m gonna cover up my face so that I don’t get into trouble. Firstly, you don’t need to do that because you wouldn’t get into trouble if you are protesting peacefully and unarmed. The constitution applies to everyone, including mental health practitioners. And secondly, it would actually be illegal to hide your face.

So while you wouldn’t be in trouble for protesting, you would be in trouble for covering your face. I’m not going to read you the rest of the regulation of gatherings act. It’s a long law, and there are many important things to be aware of, but only if you are organising or managing a protest. And the link to the act will be in the show notes. Hoomanjuk and colleagues in 2022 emphasise that psychology and human rights are deeply intertwined.

Practitioners have a unique obligation to promote dignity, freedom, and equality. Claude’s two thousand and two five connections between psychology and human rights outline how the field can actively support marginalized populations. Firstly, mental health practitioners possess human rights by virtue of being human as well as specific rights essential to our profession and discipline. Secondly, mental health practitioners apply our knowledge and methods to the greater realization of human rights. Theoretically, are we doing that?

Thirdly, mental health practitioners respect human rights and oppose the misuse of psychological science, practice, and applications and their negative impact on human rights. Fourthly, mental health practitioners ensure access to the benefits of psychological science and practice. And fifthly, mental health practitioners advocate for human rights. The HBCSA’s commitment to nondiscrimination and equity aligns with this global perspective. The challenges and controversies.

Of course, not everyone’s on board. Critics argue that psychology should remain neutral and focus solely on individual pathology. But neutrality is a myth. Theories and research share the same values and biases as the people who wrote them or developed them. Ignoring intersectionality often means upholding the status quo, which is anything but neutral.

It’s complicit. There’s also the argument of scope. Some psychologists worry that focusing on intersectionality drags them into sociopolitical debates. But as the HPCSA standards and the CISA and APA guidelines emphasize, psychology doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Our field has historically been weaponized to justify oppression, from eugenics to conversion therapy to apartheid.

Addressing intersectionality isn’t politics creeping in. It’s correcting the harm that psychology has perpetuated. Even within the profession, resistance can stem from a lack of training or discomfort with confronting privilege. That’s why every regulatory body emphasizes the need for ongoing professional development to address these gaps. It’s not about being perfect.

It’s about being committed to our clients and to our society. As Borgos pointed out in 2019, personal difficulties often have social and cultural origins. And yet, Abraham and colleagues in 2022 reiterated that there is minimal guidance on how to implement social justice in clinical practice. This leads to training gaps, uncertainty, and discomfort among clinicians serving historically oppressed populations. Eaton and colleagues in 2021 added that most psychological research remains ameliorative, failing to address structural power dynamics.

Psychology and counseling programs traditionally focus on individual level problems and pathologies, often overlooking social context. While modern training acknowledges the importance of considering social factors, this aspect is often underemphasized or limited to a single course. Or more likely a single chapter in a single course. In contrast, community psychology critiques this individual focus, arguing that neglecting systemic factors perpetuates structural oppression and leads to victim blaming. Community psychology emphasizes multilevel interventions and social justice advocacy.

Moving away from solely mental health focused approaches. But community psychology is not a recognized registration category in South Africa. In South Africa, the HPCSA’s emphasis on ongoing professional development aims to bridge these gaps. By mandating CPD activities focused on cultural competence and systemic issues, the council encourages practitioners to continuously improve their understanding of intersectionality. Burns and Christensen in 2020 argued that respecting and protecting marginalized individuals is the bare minimum.

To truly address intersectionality, we need to prioritize systemic interventions and adopt training models that integrate advocacy into practice. The HPCSA’s focus on ethical responsibility and community engagement provides a solid foundation for this work. Making intersectionality non negotiable. So where do we go from here? First, education and training are key.

As the UKCP highlights, understanding cultural humility and unconscious bias isn’t optional. It’s foundational. Institutions must prioritize intersectionality in curricular, supervision, and CPD programs. Second, psychologists need to advocate within their spheres of influence. This could mean pushing for policy changes, engaging in community work, or simply calling out bias when we see it.

The ethical standards encourage us to challenge discrimination, not just in counselling rooms, but within our workplaces and professional networks. And let’s remember that intersectionality isn’t a box to check or a one time lesson. It’s a mindset, a commitment to seeing people in their full complexity. As the SAISA guidelines put it, psychology must be both affirmative and transformative. That’s not just good practice.

It’s good ethics. Psychology’s role in the bigger picture. Finally, is it psychology’s place to address intersectionality and promote social justice? Absolutely. Psychology cannot claim to promote well-being while ignoring the systemic inequities that shape it.

The laws, guidelines, and ethical codes aren’t just encouraging us to do so. They’re demanding it. By addressing intersectionality, we honor the discipline’s ethical obligations and unlock its full potential to foster societal transformation. Intersectionality isn’t about making our work harder. It’s about making it meaningful, effective, and just.

And honestly, if we’re not here to do that, then what are we even doing? Thank you again for being here, for listening, and for being part of a profession that has the power to change lives. And if you’re not a mental health professional, thank you for listening to this. I hope it was enriching and that you learnt something. Even if just what to expect and demand of your therapist or your counselor.

They’re there to work for you in all your complexity. Let’s use our power wisely, boldly, and intersectionally. As Burns and Christensen remind us, every individual is worthy of respect and protection. And even more so when a person is vulnerable to marginalization. Let’s make that our guiding principle moving forward.

And now let’s keep the conversation going. I’ll speak to you again soon. Thank you for listening to Intersectional Psychology. Please follow or subscribe to the podcast to get every episode. If you enjoyed this episode, please rate and review intersectional psychology in your preferred app.

It really helps other people find the podcast. This episode of intersectional psychology was researched, written, recorded, and edited by me, Aurora Brown. For a transcript of this episode, please see the link in the show notes on your podcast app, or go to intersectionalpsychology.com. You can also check the website or the show notes for a full list of references for this episode. A video of this episode with closed captions is available on youtube.com/@intersectionalpsychology.

To support this podcast and get access to bonus content, including additional episodes and interviews, as well as more guided mindfulness sessions, please go to patreon.com/intersectionalpsychology. You can also chat with me on blue sky at intersect psych dot b s k y dot social, and Instagram, Facebook, or TikTok at intersectional psychology, but mostly blue sky. Aurora Brown and intersectional psychology are committed to the cite black woman praxis. All episodes of intersectional psychology are for educational purposes only and are not intended to be a substitute for professional mental health advice, diagnosis, or treatment. I or Roarra Brown am not able to answer specific questions about individual situations.

Always seek the advice of your health provider with any questions you may have regarding a mental health condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have heard or seen on this podcast. If you think you need immediate assistance, please call your local emergency number or any mental health crisis hotline. Everyone deserves good mental health.