Journal of Counseling & Development  ■  Summer 2008  ■  Volume 86 279 © 2008 by the American Counseling Association. All rights reserved.

Relational-cultural  theory  (RCT)  was  conceived  after  the  publication  of  Jean  Baker  Miller’s  (1976)  Toward a New Psychology of Women, a groundbreaking book that has been  translated into more than 20 languages. The ideas in Miller’s  book emerged from her clinical practice with women in which  she noted that the centrality of relationships in her clients’ lives  was inconsistent with the traditional theories of counseling and  human development she had been taught in medical school.  According to Miller and other feminist theorists of the time,  these traditional theoretical models emphasize individuation,  separation, and autonomy as markers of emotional maturity  and psychological health. 

Miller (1976), like other multicultural and feminist theo- rists, suggested that a lack of understanding of the contextual  and  relational  experiences  of  women,  people  of  color,  and  marginalized  men  led  many  mental  health  professionals  to  pathologize these individuals by misunderstanding and devalu- ing how these important factors contribute to the psychologi- cal well-being of all people (Robb, 2006). Consequently, RCT  complements  the  multicultural/social  justice  movement  by  (a) identifying how contextual and sociocultural challenges  impede individuals’ ability to create, sustain, and participate  in growth-fostering relationships in therapy and life and (b)  illuminating the complexities of human development by offer- ing an expansive examination of the development of relational  competencies  over  the  life  span.  Challenges  to  developing  such relational competencies in today’s socially stratified and  oppressive culture are highlighted throughout this article. 

Over the past 3.5 decades, Miller (1976) and other multi- cultural, feminist, and social justice advocates and theorists  (Daniels, 2007; Ivey, D’Andrea, Ivey, & Simek-Morgan, 2007)  have noted how traditional theories of counseling and develop- ment are built on the ideology of Western individualism that  includes “hyper-competitiveness and deterministic control” 

(Walker, 2003, p. 1). Such an ideology is based, in part, on  the myths of “mastery,” “self-sufficiency,” and the idea “that  people assume their places in the existing societal hierarchy  by virtue of merit” (Jordan, 1999, p. 3). 

RCT further complements the multicultural/social justice  movement by serving as an alternative theoretical framework  from  which  mental  health  professionals  can  explore  how  issues  related  to  sex  role  socialization,  power,  dominance,  marginalization, and subordination affect the mental health  and  relational  development  of  all  people.  The  goal  of  this  article is to demonstrate how RCT complements the process  of multicultural/social justice counseling competency devel- opment by providing an additional theoretical framework that  supports the fourth force in counseling and psychology. 

Core Tenets and Assumptions of RCT RCT is a comprehensive theory of counseling and develop- ment  that  emerged  from  the  notion  that  traditional  models  of human development and psychotherapy do not accurately  address the relational experiences of women and persons in  other devalued cultural groups. To fill this gap, RCT provides  an alternative and inclusive model of relational development  across the life span. The RCT approach to helping and heal- ing  is  grounded  in  the  idea  that  healing  takes  place  in  the  context of mutually empathic, growth-fostering relationships.  In an effort to create such relationships, the RCT approach to  counseling involves identifying and deconstructing obstacles  to mutuality that individuals encounter in diverse relational  contexts and networks (Comstock, 2005; Comstock, Daniels,  & D’Andrea, 2006). 

Core RCT tenets that explicate the process of psychological  growth and relational development, as summarized by Jordan  (2000), include the following notions:

Dana L. Comstock, Tonya R. Hammer, Julie Strentzsch, Kristi Cannon, Jacqueline Parsons, and Gustavo Salazar II, Depart- ment of Counseling and Human Services, St. Mary’s University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dana L. Comstock, St. Mary’s University, Department of Counseling and Human Services, One Camino Santa Maria, San Antonio, TX 78228-8527 (e-mail: [email protected]).

Relational-Cultural Theory: A Framework for Bridging Relational, Multicultural, and Social Justice Competencies Dana L. Comstock, Tonya R. Hammer, Julie Strentzsch,   Kristi Cannon, Jacqueline Parsons, and Gustavo Salazar II 

Relational-cultural theory (RCT) theorists advocate expanding the multicultural/social justice counseling competencies beyond the domains of self-awareness, cultural knowledge, and culturally responsive helping skills. This article pro- vides an overview of RCT and discusses how creating and participating in growth-fostering relationships are essential dimensions of human development and psychological well-being. Implications of this theoretical model for counseling practice are also addressed.

Journal of Counseling & Development  ■  Summer 2008  ■  Volume 86280

Comstock et al.

 1.  People grow through and toward relationship through- out the life span. 

 2.  Movement  toward  mutuality  rather  than  separation  characterizes mature functioning.

 3.  The ability to participate in increasingly complex and  diversified relational networks characterizes psycho- logical growth. 

 4.  Mutual empathy and mutual empowerment are at the  core of growth-fostering relationships. 

 5.  Authenticity  is  necessary  for  real  engagement  in  growth-fostering relationships. 

 6.  When people contribute to the development of growth- fostering relationships, they grow as a result of their  participation in such relationships. 

 7.  The goal of development is the realization of increased  relational competence over the life span. 

Consistent  with  feminist  and  multicultural/social  justice  theorists, RCT scholar Walker (2002) made the point that move- ment toward connection over the course of individuals’ lives is  made in relational contexts that have been “raced, engendered,  sexualized,  and  situated  along  dimensions  of  class,  physical  ability,  religion  or  whatever  constructions  carry  ontological  significance in the culture” (p. 2). Walker also pointed out that  the way individuals respond to “disconnections in relationship  is in large measure a function of the multiple social identities  operating in that particular relationship and in the relational sur- round at any given moment” (p. 2). In other words, the context  of relational development across the life span is inextricably  linked to individuals’ racial/cultural/social identities. As such,  examining culture-based relational disconnections is one way to  promote counselors’ relational, multicultural, and social justice  counseling competencies. These competencies are grounded in  an awareness and knowledge of the ways in which cultural op- pression, marginalization, and various forms of social injustice  lead  to  feelings  of  isolation,  shame,  and  humiliation  among  persons from devalued groups.

RCT  is  based  on  the  assumption  that  the  experiences  of  isolation,  shame,  humiliation,  oppression,  marginalization,  and microaggressions are relational violations and traumas that  are at the core of human suffering and threaten the survival of  humankind (Birrell & Freyd, 2006; Gilligan, 2001; Hartling,  Rosen, Walker, & Jordan, 2000; Miller & Stiver, 1997). Cultural  oppression, social exclusion, and other forms of social injustices  underlie the pain and trauma that individuals in marginalized  and devalued groups routinely experience in their lives (Birrell  & Freyd, 2006). It is important to point out that this theoretical  assumption has been supported by numerous empirically based  neurobiological studies that examine the antecedents and nega- tive psychological and physical outcomes of such experiences  (Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003; Genero, Miller, &  Surrey, 1992; Hartling & Ly, 2000; Liang et al., 1998; Schore,  2003; Spencer, 2000; Taylor, 2002).

RCT supports the multicultural/social justice movement by  asserting that (a) “although oppression is often institutional-

ized at societal levels, it is necessarily enacted in the context  of interpersonal relationships” (Birrell & Freyd, 2006, p. 52),  and (b) “the fragmentation caused by the violation of human  bonds can only be healed by new and healing human bonds”  (p. 57). In essence, counseling relationships that are not guided  by relational, multicultural, or social justice ideology purport- edly have the potential to further perpetuate the silencing and  oppression  that  marginalized  individuals  experience  in  the  larger culture (Day-Vines et al., 2007; Walker, 2003). 

Many persons in the fields of counseling and psychology  have  resisted  mainstreaming  RCT  in  professional  training  programs and clinical practices. This resistance is similar to  that encountered by the multicultural/social justice counseling  advocates. Birrell and Freyd (2006) discussed the underpin- nings of such resistance by stating, 

It is unfashionable, in this age of managed care and risk man- agement, to advocate for a treatment that not only takes time,  but also involves the possibility, on the part of the therapist,  of coming to new understandings of that forgotten realm of  what Buber (1975) calls the “interhuman.” A treatment that  does not address this level of experiencing risks objectifying  the already wounded and creating a superficial adjustment to  society which involves the risk of further abuse. (p. 54)

RCT’s  further  support  of  the  multicultural/social  justice  movement is reflected in the manner in which it encourages  counselors to think beyond symptom reduction and remedial  helping interventions (Birrell & Freyd, 2006). RCT theorists  emphasize  that  a  more  contextual  approach  to  the  helping  process aimed at ameliorating the adverse impact of various  forms of cultural oppression, marginalization, and social in- justice has many positive implications for individual clients  and “the wider context of community and the social world”  (Birrell & Freyd, 2006, p. 50). These positive implications are  tied to the important role RCT counselors place on helping  clients examine new ways to develop and maintain growth- producing connections in their lives. 

RCT Complements Contemporary and Traditional Approaches to Counseling and Development

The notion of “connectedness,” an essential consideration in  RCT, is embedded in traditional and contemporary counsel- ing  scholarship  (Coy  &  Kovacs-Long,  2005;  Townsend  &  McWhirter, 2005). Historically speaking, the importance of  connectedness  in  fostering  psychological  development  and  emotional  well-being  is  reflected  in  the  writings  of Alfred  Adler and other individual psychology theorists. These theo- rists  described  the  need  for  mental  health  professionals  to  foster a sense of community and belonging to social groups in  their work with clients. Adler took particular time to illuminate  the importance of love and belonging as central to a person’s  mental health (Ivey et al., 2007). 

Journal of Counseling & Development  ■  Summer 2008  ■  Volume 86 281

Relational-Cultural Theory: A Framework

Erik Erikson is another widely respected theorist who discussed  a related concept referred to as “homonomy” (Coy & Kovacs-Long,  2005, p. 139). According to Erikson, the term homonomy refers to  children’s ability to rearrange and expand their relational circles  based on their individual and developmental needs. This Eriksonian  construct represents another indicator of the ways that traditional  theorists  acknowledged  the  importance  of  relational  factors  in  fostering people’s sense of psychological well-being. 

RCT provides a theoretical basis from which mental health  professionals can reconsider the importance of the aforemen- tioned relational concepts for the practice of counseling. Over  time,  such  concepts  have  consistently  been  muted  by  many  other counseling theorists who overemphasized therapeutic and  developmental goals that are culturally and gender biased. This  includes efforts to promote clients’ “autonomy,” “self-realization,”  “self-actualization,” and “personal mastery” in counseling (Coy  & Kovacs-Long, 2005; Ivey et al., 2007). Despite this trend, Coy  and Kovacs-Long advocated for the use of RCT concepts by  recognizing that mental health professionals should include the  ability to affiliate and connect with others in mutually empathic  and empowering ways as an indicator of emotional maturity  and psychological well-being. 

Expanding the Rogerian Notion of Empathy

Carl  Rogers  is  another  prominent  counseling  theorist  whose  advocacy for relational concepts received sharp criticism by his  psychoanalytic peers. Similar to criticisms that were directed at  Adler and others, the criticism Rogers received was for focusing  on the client–therapist relationship as a primary source of heal- ing in counseling. Such criticism targeted the emphasis Rogers  consistently  placed  on  the  counselor’s  ability  to  communicate  a  genuine  sense  of  empathy  with  clients  as  a  key  component  in  promoting  positive  counseling  outcomes  (Comstock  et  al.,  2006; Ivey et al., 2007). Although Rogers’s theoretical contri- butions extended counselors’ thinking about the important role  empathy plays in the healing process, RCT expands Rogerian  theory even further by

 1.  extending the one-way concept of empathy espoused  in  Rogers’s  counseling  theory  to  a  two-way  process  referred to as mutual empathy; 

 2.  describing  relational  movement  that  occurs  in  all  relationships,  including  the  counseling  relationship,  which involves inevitable periods of connection and  disconnection; 

 3.  resisting  and  eradicating  sociopolitical  factors  that  operate  as  the  source  of  relational  disconnections  among  many  individuals  in  diverse  and  marginal- ized racial/cultural groups who are discouraged from  naming their own reality and authentically expressing  many of their thoughts and feelings; 

 4.  serving as a theoretical framework from which to pro- mote the concept of mutual empathy as key to healing 

and  relational  transformation  in  therapy,  as  well  as  in  other relational/professional contexts, including the work  counselors do as multicultural/social justice advocates,  consultants, and organizational development agents. 

Unlike Rogers’s one-way notion of empathy (e.g., empathy  communicated by the counselor to the client), the RCT concept  of mutual empathy is cocreated in counseling relationships  and is viewed as an important source of healing and transfor- mation in the counseling process (Jordan, 2001). This occurs  not only when the counselor effectively expresses her or his  connection with clients’ expressed thoughts and feelings, but  also when clients acknowledge being affected by the impact  they have had in generating this sort of empathic response in  the counselor. 

In a mutually empathic encounter, everyone’s experience is  broadened and deepened because people are “empathically at- tuned, emotionally responsive, authentically present, and open  to change” (Miller, Jordan, Kaplan, Stiver, & Surrey, 1991,  p. 11). It is important to point out that this sort of empathy  requires a degree of vulnerability on the part of counselors  that results from an ability to be authentically present with the  client during times of connections and disconnections. 

Mutually  empathic  encounters  provide  opportunities  for  counselors  to  become  more  culturally  competent.  This  is  possible  because  counselors  engaged  in  mutually  empathic  exchanges  with  their  clients  can  learn  about  their  own  and  their  clients’  worldviews  and  beliefs  in  new  and  different  ways. This can be accomplished by exploring the relational  confluence of the similarities and differences between their  respective life experiences. Such self and cultural learnings  enable counselors and clients to more freely and respectfully  come to a mutual agreement about the intervention strategies  that are likely to promote the sort of counseling outcomes that  are  consonant  with  culturally  different  clients’  worldviews,  beliefs, and values (Day-Vines et al., 2007; Ivey et al., 2007).  Developing mutual empathy in multicultural counseling situa- tions also results in a deepened understanding of and compas- sion for all people, which the Dalai Lama has&#x200