Traditional mothering continues to receive social sanctioning while women who choose not to have children are oftentimes ignored or criticized. Voluntarily childfree women participated in a qualitative investigation in which semi-structured interviews, journals, and a focus group were utilized to capture their experience of stigmatization. Data source triangulation, member checks, and consultation with a peer debriefer contributed to the authenticity of the results. Two broad themes capturing reasons for the choice not to have children and five categories of stigmatization were delineated from the participants' narratives. Considerations for mental health counselors who work with women who do not want children are offered.

This study explored the connections between adult attachment styles (i.e., secure, preoccupied, fearful-avoidant, dismissing) and communication patterns during conflict (i.e., mutual constructive, demand-withdraw, mutual avoidance, and withholding). Specifically, this study examined how the combination of both partners’ attachment styles, or couple type (i.e., secure-secure, secure-insecure, insecure-insecure), related to self-reported conflict communication patterns. Couples had been together for at least two years (i.e., in a dating, cohabitating, engaged, or marital relationship). Participants included 43 different-sex couples and 10 same-sex couples, who lived primarily in a large metropolitan area in the southwestern US. Secure-secure couples reported the most mutually constructive communication, while the insecure-insecure couples group reported the most demand-withdraw and mutual avoidance and withholding communication. Implications for counseling with couples and families are discussed.

In a preliminary exploration of atheists using a concealable stigmatized identity framework, we investigated outness, identity magnitude, anticipated stigma, and psychological and physical well-being. Atheists (N = 1,024) in the United States, completed measures of outness, atheist identity magnitude, anticipated stigma, and psychological and physical wellbeing online. Consistent with predictions, we found small but significant associations between (a) anticipated stigma and well-being, (b) social components of atheist identity magnitude and outness as well as well-being, and (c) outness and well-being. A significant and moderate association was found between anticipated stigma and outness. There were significant, small indirect effects of ingroup ties, a social component of atheist identity magnitude, on psychological and physical well-being via outness; and of ingroup affect, another social component of magnitude, on psychological well-being via disclosure of atheist identity. Implications for research, practice, and training are offered.

Despite a general shift toward secularity, very few people of color in the United States identify as atheist. Further, atheists of color are underrepresented in studies of atheists, and the experiences of atheists of color specifically have, to date, not been captured in the extant scholarship. Addressing this gap in the literature, we interviewed 17 self-identified adult atheists of color, predominantly from Christian backgrounds, residing in the United States using a critical feminist phenomenological approach. Six broad themes emerged from the data: (a) atheist identity development; (b) experiences of discrimination; (c) isolation; (d) violations of cultural expectations; (e) strategic outness; and (f) benefits of atheist identification. Experiences consistent with previous literature and novel and unique experiences specific to atheists of color are reported. Implications for training, practice, and research are discussed. Public Significance StatementThis study is the 1st to explore the experiences of atheists of color and found their trajectory to atheism to be similar to previously proposed models of identity development. Atheists of color experience antiatheist discrimination, navigate atheism as a violation of cultural expectations, use strategic outness, and benefit from a sense of connection and freedom associated with their atheist identity.

The work of many great scholars has proliferated a sizable body of knowledge on the construct of multicultural counseling competence. However, the construct’s operationalization remains obscured, perplexing, and frustrating to practitioners who attempt to translate the scholarship into practice. We identify ten definitional problems that prevent the construct from evolving into a cohesive form that can inform practitioners’ work. These include: an indistinct purpose, culturally general/culturally specific divide, terminological interchange, confusing competency with competence, lack of integration, no definition, ambiguity, equivocation, circular reasoning, and divergence. Furthermore, the three major models of the construct—skills-based, adaptation, and process-oriented—share six limitations. They lack interdependence, prescriptive methods, deep incorporation of culture, coherent designs, conclusive research support, and they are oversimplifications. We call on the community of our fellow scholars to collaborate in reconceptualizing this complex construct into a sound, applicable guide for practitioners’ work with diverse clients.