Gone Joseph P
University of Michigan
Transcult Psychiatry. 2015 Apr;52(2):139-49. doi: 10.1177/1363461514568239.
The calls for evidence-based practice (EBP) and cultural competence (CC) represent two increasingly influential mandates within the mental health professions. Advocates of EBP seek to standardize clinical practice by ensuring that only treatment techniques that have demonstrated therapeutic outcomes under scientifically controlled conditions would be adopted and promoted in mental health services. Advocates of CC seek to diversify clinical practice by ensuring that treatment approaches are designed and refined for a multicultural clientele that reflects a wide variety of psychological orientations and life experiences. As these two powerful mandates collide, the fundamental challenge becomes how to accommodate substantive cultural divergences in psychosocial experience using narrowly prescriptive clinical practices and approaches, without trivializing either professional knowledge or cultural difference. In this Introduction to a special issue of Transcultural Psychiatry, the virtue of an interdisciplinary conversation between and among anthropologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, and social work researchers in addressing these tensions is extolled.
对循证实践（EBP）和文化能力（CC）的呼吁代表了心理健康专业领域内两个日益具有影响力的要求。循证实践的倡导者试图通过确保只有在科学控制条件下已证明具有治疗效果的治疗技术才会在心理健康服务中被采用和推广，来使临床实践标准化。文化能力的倡导者试图通过确保为反映各种心理取向和生活经历的多元文化客户群体设计和完善治疗方法，来使临床实践多样化。由于这两个强有力的要求相互冲突，根本挑战就变成了如何利用狭义规定性的临床实践和方法来适应心理社会经历中的实质性文化差异，同时又不轻视专业知识或文化差异。在这本《跨文化精神病学》特刊的引言中，颂扬了人类学家、心理学家、精神病学家和社会工作研究者之间进行跨学科对话以解决这些紧张关系的优点。
