Previously, we have highlighted the positive outcomes of our program. These include:
- reduction in child symptomatology as rated by caregivers and children themselves,
- increases in child resiliency as rated by caregivers and children themselves,
- decreases in caregiver symptomatology,
- increases in congruence between ratings of symptomatology between caregivers and children.
This month, we’re highlighting another aspect of congruence. That is, congruence (or match) in gender and race between the child and clinician. Sometimes we have caregivers request certain types of clinicians, asserting that their child will “do better” with a clinician who matches their child’s gender or racial identity.
Whenever we can, we try to accommodate these requests.
However, research does not support these caregivers’ claims. We recently conducted an analysis of our data looking at congruence between clinicians and families in terms of race and gender. We found that there were no significant impacts on reductions in symptomatology based on the congruence between:
- the gender of the child and the clinician
- the racial identity of the child and the clinician
Although we will continue to honor caregiver’s requests when we can regarding choice of clinician, we are pleased to know that children demonstrate reductions in symptomatology regardless of the congruence between them and their clinician.