How do language differences affect the ability of the interviewer to communicate with the client? Ask: “What language would you prefer to use in counseling? Are you able to understand my ?” Or, if you cannot speak any other languages, ask: “How comfortable are you with my English?” INTERVIEWING CONTEXT AND PROCEDURES Thus far, we have discussed counselor awareness of himself or herself as a cultural being, and the importance of knowing the cultural characteristics of the client-whether those are attributable to group, universal, or individual in?uences. We have also covered the importance of broad contextual elements as they interact with the individual as a unique ethnocultural being. What has been left out until now is how the actual interviewing context and procedures might impact the interviewing process.

For many people raised in many cultures, consulting with a mental health professional comes as a last resort. Seeing an outsider for personal problems goes against traditional problem solving strategies. This means that clients from another culture may experience an enormous amount of stress or anxiety because of the counseling process-in addition to the stress that brought them in. Moreover, they have expectations for counseling that may or may not match the abilities or styles of the interviewer.

Therefore, extra care should be taken to ensure that clients feel welcome, to establish credibility, and to build trust . At the very least, the counselor must ensure that clients feel and believe their interests are being served without threatening their worldview.

Using standardized assessment instruments may produce anxiety, confusion, or anger in ethnoculturally different clients. For all the reasons described, standardized assessment procedures may be inappropriate for the ethnoculturally different client. In the past, testing procedures used to aid in diagnosis and treatment have been misused.

On the other hand, as an interviewer, you do not want to be mechanistic or ingenuine in your approach to clients. A strictly standardized approach probably comes across to clients as ingenuine or distant. Similarly, it’s important to respond not only to each client’s unique individual characteristics, but also to typical differences found in social or cultural groups. For example, the same introductory approach would usually not be equally effective with male adolescents and female senior citizens. Individuals in these two groups usually have signi?cantly different styles of relating to others. To assume you can treat them identically during the introduction phase of an interview is a mistake. Keep in mind that the introductory phase is crucial to establishing rapport with clients.

Excessive standardization may adversely affect rapport. When dealing with different individuals in the introductory phase of an interview, you should follow two general guidelines:

• Go with the base rates.

• Choose the least offensive alternative.

Some beginning interviewers are put off by the fact that standardization and routine are part of the interviewing process. After all, we’re dealing with unique individuals, and shouldn’t we give each one a unique and human response? Our answer to that question is no and yes. No, it is not necessary to give each client a unique or different response just for the sake of avoiding ritual or consistency.

And yes, we should give each client a human response.

For example, we usually begin ?rst sessions with a description of the limits of con?dentiality and a discussion of how an initial interview is sometimes uncomfortable because it involves two strangers getting to know each other. Although this is part of a standardized introduction, we sincerely mean what we’re saying every time; we genuinely want each client to understand the concept of con?dentiality and its limits. Simply because we say virtually the same statement to hundreds of clients does not mean we’re operating on auto pilot.