Chapter 26 TRENDS AND CHALLENGES OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY R. DONNA PETRIE We are born in families, whether small or large, with one or more parenting figures. These families are embedded in a web of other families, all of which are part of a particular society or culture. In the United States families share a common culture because they all live in one country, but they also share a family culture that may or may not be like the culture of the nation. It is virtually impossible to overemphasize the influence an individual’s family culture has on the day-to-day activities of any given person’s life. In this country it is also nearly impossible to overestimate the points of difference within cultures and between cultures. Diversity itself has historically represented a core component of the democratic fabric of that which defines American life. This position and role is as viable today in 2003 as it was during the past two centuries. The purpose of this chapter is to broadly introduce the challenges of multicultural human service work. These challenges are threefold. First, human service professionals need to have an understanding of specific value areas wherein misunderstanding between cultures is likely to occur; second, workers need to understand different cultural models of healing and caring; and finally, human service professionals, whether they think of themselves as bicultural or as “American,” need to understand how they are seen as “agents” of mainstream American culture. FUTURE POPULATION TRENDS A decade ago the New York Times reported that the United States Census Bureau has had to recalculate population growth (Pear, 1992). The population of the United States, it appears, will continue to grow through 2050 rather than decline after the year 2038. To summarize, for the years 1990 to 2025 there will be more babies born, particularly to new immigrants, and the proportion of men to women is likely to even out, as the life expectancy of men appears to be rising faster than that of women. Despite this overall increase in the number of people in the United States, whites will account for a declining share in the population. The numbers of black Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans will grow appreciably. Using the 1990 census, the Bureau predicts a 412.5 percent population growth for Asian and Pacific Islanders; a 237.5 percent growth in numbers for Hispanic Americans; a 109.1 percent increase in the number of Native American Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts; and a 93.8 percent increase for black Americans. These figures contrast significantly with the 29.4 percent projected growth of white Americans from 1992 to 2050. The Census Bureau makes the future trends somewhat more complex by noting that immigration by itself will account for the expected growth in the Asian American population and not the number of births. Birth rates are increasing among the black and Hispanic populations. The birth rate of whites, however, is not expecte ...

1. Chapter 26 TRENDS AND CHALLENGES OF CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
R. DONNA PETRIE
We are born in families, whether small or large, with one or
more parenting figures. These families are embedded in a web
of other families, all of which are part of a particular society or
culture. In the United States families share a common culture
because they all live in one country, but they also share a family
culture that may or may not be like the culture of the nation. It
is virtually impossible to overemphasize the influence an
individual’s family culture has on the day-to-day activities of
any given person’s life. In this country it is also nearly
impossible to overestimate the points of difference within
cultures and between cultures. Diversity itself has historically
represented a core component of the democratic fabric of that
which defines American life. This position and role is as viable
today in 2003 as it was during the past two centuries.
The purpose of this chapter is to broadly introduce the
challenges of multicultural human service work. These
challenges are threefold. First, human service professionals
need to have an understanding of specific value areas wherein
misunderstanding between cultures is likely to occur; second,
workers need to understand different cultural models of healing
and caring; and finally, human service professionals, whether
they think of themselves as bicultural or as “American,” need to
understand how they are seen as “agents” of mainstream
American culture.
FUTURE POPULATION TRENDS
A decade ago the New York Times reported that the United
States Census Bureau has had to recalculate population growth
(Pear, 1992). The population of the United States, it appears,
will continue to grow through 2050 rather than decline after the
year 2038. To summarize, for the years 1990 to 2025 there will

2. be more babies born, particularly to new immigrants, and the
proportion of men to women is likely to even out, as the life
expectancy of men appears to be rising faster than that of
women.
Despite this overall increase in the number of people in the
United States, whites will account for a declining share in the
population. The numbers of black Americans, Asian Americans,
and Hispanic Americans will grow appreciably. Using the 1990
census, the Bureau predicts a 412.5 percent population growth
for Asian and Pacific Islanders; a 237.5 percent growth in
numbers for Hispanic Americans; a 109.1 percent increase in
the number of Native American Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts;
and a 93.8 percent increase for black Americans. These figures
contrast significantly with the 29.4 percent projected growth of
white Americans from 1992 to 2050.
The Census Bureau makes the future trends somewhat more
complex by noting that immigration by itself will account for
the expected growth in the Asian American population and not
the number of births. Birth rates are increasing among the black
and Hispanic populations. The birth rate of whites, however, is
not expected to increase. In the United States the youngest
population group is Hispanic Americans. In fact, whereas the
median age of all Americans is thirty-three, more than one-third
of the Hispanic population in the United States is under the age
of eighteen.
In addition to shifts in the growth of ethnic populations, other
demographic variables are also changing. For example, in the
age category of 55 years or older, 13 percent are over 65, with
the quickest rate of change observed in the nonwhite
population, especially Latinos and Asian Americans (Gelfand
and Yee, 1991). With this sociocultural picture and the
continuation of “urban sprawl,” jobs traditionally available to
typical city dwellers will be less available. Consequently,
human service workers on the two coasts (namely New York,
northern New Jersey, Long Island, Los Angeles, Anaheim, and
Riverside, California) will likely experience more interpersonal

3. racial and ethnic conflict because of the greater numbers of
immigrants and the greater density mixes of black, white,
yellow, and brown cultures. Other urban areas such as Miami
and Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Houston, Galveston, and Brazoria,
Texas; and San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose, California,
may also experience the effects of polarizing differences
between Hispanics and Asians and between Asians and blacks
(U.S. Department of Commerce, 1991). Color consciousness and
ethnic intolerance, although longstanding and typically a white-
black issue in this country, is no less a problem between and
within other racial and ethnic groupings.
Social characteristics of various cultural groups in this country
add to the complexity of the challenge of working with
culturally diverse client populations. Whereas the percentage of
persons twenty-five years of age and over who have not
completed an elementary school education (zero to eight years)
is lowest for Asian Americans (6.4 percent with five years or
less completed) and highest for Hispanic Americans (34
percent), the percentage of whites is 11 percent and of blacks 17
percent. Level of education, unemployment, and poverty have a
high degree of correspondence for all cultural groups in
America, except for whites. The unemployment rate for whites
is the lowest of all groups, as are their numbers in families
living below the poverty line, and this despite the fact that 11
percent of the white population has only an elementary school
education (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1991).
These population trends can help us create an accurate picture
of current and future clients seeking human services. People of
color will continue to dominate the social welfare client rolls
and will continue to have multiple problems. The clients will be
very young or very old, their formal education will be limited,
and they will have trouble finding work. If they are immigrants
or children of immigrants, they will likely have problems
navigating family and personal cultural issues as well.
Although individuals from this client population profile are well
known to any entry-level human service professional, the human

4. service model of helping does not automatically attribute
deficiency or mental illness to these individuals (Schmolling,
Youkeles, and Burger, 1992; Papa-john and Spiegel, 1975). On
the contrary, many such clients, although wanting economic
security, may not subscribe at all to the American values of
materialism and of being “bigger and better” or more successful
than one’s forebears. Indeed, on many levels, not only their
needs and wants may be different from mainstream cultural
stereotypes presented in the media, but individual clients may
be very different from the culture or family in which they were
raised (Pedersen, 1976).
BASIC AREAS OF DIFFERENCE IN CULTURAL VALUES
We can safely assume that all people in the United States,
regardless of cultural affiliation, want to have an optimal life
(Speight, Myers, Cox, and Highlen, 1991). Given that
definitions of an optimal life differ and that individuals living
in an increasingly multicultural and multilingual society will
often have to interact or negotiate with members of another
culture, on what subjects are they likely to have interpersonal
misunderstandings?
Apart from differences in individual communication style and
language usage (Sarbaugh, 1988; Baruth and Manning, 1991),
cultural anthropologists have categorized differences between
ethnic groups in the following ways: (1) their understanding of
authority, (2) their definitions of success, and (3) their beliefs
about how people should conduct themselves and their
relationships (Carter, 1991; Baruth and Manning, 1991).
Understanding the values of each client group on the previously
stated dimensions can help to clarify how an individual may be
in conflict with his or her own culture or with the larger
multiethnic culture. In the next several paragraphs we will look
at a number of ethnic groups’ general responses to these
questions.
What motivates human beings? Are they basically good or well
meaning, or are they born with evil intentions? The answer to
this question is a basic building block of an individual’s belief

5. structure. Research has shown that blacks and Puerto Ricans
often contrast sharply with Eurocentric Americans in their view
of human nature (Carter, 1991). Although several studies of
white, middle-class Americans provide mixed views of human
nature, none offer evidence that Euro-Americans think human
beings are born malevolent in character; blacks and Puerto
Ricans are more fatalistic, believing some people do evil things
because they are evil.
Similarly, Euro-Americans tend to differ from blacks, Chinese,
Africans, Italians, Cubans, and Native American Indians in their
belief that individuals exert control over life events and that
each person should use willpower for one’s own gain (Carter,
1991; Helms, 1992; Pinderhughes, 1989). While many blacks,
Cubans, and Native Americans believe people live in nature and
are partners with all of nature, other blacks, Italians, and
Chinese believe that people have little control over natural
forces or what happens to people and also what they can do
about what has happened. Clearly, trying to help an individual
who believes that personal effort is futile because “that’s the
way things are” and that one must comply with fate is likely to
“feel” frustrating and futile to Euro-American and Japanese
American intake workers who have put themselves through
college. Euro-American culture believes in action, in
achievement, and in self-expression (Carter, 1991; Helms,
1992). Action is centered in the individual, who not only has the
right but is expected to be autonomous from the group—to, in
effect, place his or her goals ahead of those of the group
(Carter, 1991). This “rugged individualism” is so widespread in
the United States, it has become almost synonymous with
American culture. But not all cultures in America hold
individualistic values. Puerto Ricans, Italians, and Greeks, to
name a few, do not (Carter, 1991), and, interestingly, some
studies of Euro-American college students indicate a movement
away from mastery over nature and action value orientations
(Carter, 1991).
What is success, and what should be emphasized in social

6. relations between people? Typically Euro-Americans believe
success occurs somewhere in the future, that success is usually
gained through individual effort, and that success will be
observable in material gain or achievements (Carter, 1991;
Helms, 1992). Few other cultures put as much emphasis on the
value of delayed gratification or material well-being as white,
middle-class Americans do. For other cultures, either traditional
customs or the activities and events of the present are of central
importance (Carter, 1991). So, again, human service college
graduates who seek to help individuals from a different culture
must be open to other definitions of success and achievement
(Pinderhughes, 1989).
To summarize this section, human service workers who have
graduated from college have learned how to function
successfully within the mainstream value culture of this
country. Specifically, they have been encultured by others who
believe in rugged individualism, delayed gratification, material
success, personal effort and responsibility, and the basic
goodness of human nature. Because human service workers have
negotiated the educational system, they can assist in educating
clients about American culture and work habits so that clients
may also become multicultural. The helper’s self-knowledge can
also prevent possible misunderstandings in interpersonal
communication.
Still and all, there is no way to simplify cross-cultural diversity.
Pinderhughes (1989) lists at least fourteen different sources of
cultural differences between people. When within-group
differences are added, as in immigrant second-and third-
generation groups, gaining a comprehensive knowledge of any
single culture becomes impossible. The best students can do to
meet the challenges inherent in cross-cultural helping is to
know their own culture, to stay open and accepting of other
cultures, and to keep an eye on what “works” in the dominant or
mainstream culture. C. Gilbert Wrenn (1987), a longtime
researcher in cross-culture counseling and therapy, suggests that
students (1) read positive long-range-thinking scholars who talk

7. about the spiritual as well as the beautiful, (2) unlearn
something every day to make way for change, (3) trust that
there is a light at the end of the tunnel, and (4) risk acceptance
and validation of another’s experience. The latter point is
important to the next section, which explores kinds of caring.
KINDS OF CARING
Textbooks in human services usually emphasize one-on-one
talking or group talking as the most frequently used helping
interventions. Sometimes the skills of brokering, advocacy,
outreach, and community organizing are also added
(Schmolling, Youkeles, and Burger, 1992; Okun, 1992;
Shulman, 1982). There are other ways of intervening with
clients. Madeleine M. Leininger (1987) persuasively argues for
transcultural caring as an innovative and essential approach to
helping people “live and survive in diverse and changing
contexts” (p. 107). She believes that helpers must learn what
“cultural-care” behaviors are likely to be accepted by helpees
before “real care” or service can be given. Other researchers
have highlighted culturally specific interventions, too. What
follows are summary findings from Leininger (1987), McGowan
(1988), Vontress (1991), Prince (1980), and Tseng and
McDermott (1981) about kinds of caring in different cultures
(see Table 26.1). The summaries are not meant to be exhaustive
but rather to provide evidence of the diversity of helping
methods.
Leininger (1987), from a study of thirty-five cultures,
determined forty-two different ideas about caring for others.
Those on the list that are usually taught in human service
classes include trust, understanding, empathy, listening, and
respect. But there were others current education does not
suggest as appropriate to American culture: touching, loving,
succoring, protecting, and sharing (Leininger, 1987). Whether
there are universal elements basic to all cultures has not been
determined because the process of helping is complex, and there
is often a very hazy boundary between psychological and
physical problems (Prince, 1980). Methods are made more

8. complicated, too, by the fact that some cultures believe
psychological suffering is a fact of living to be accepted rather
than an idiosyncratic personality outlook that can be changed
(Prince, 1980).
Aside from these qualities and purposes of helping, each culture
has a characteristic stance on who can effectively do the
helping. In many cultures only an expert can be a “healer.” This
point of view is true of mainstream American culture—our
experts are those who have managed to successfully complete a
number of years of post-secondary education. In Africa, as
Vontress (1991) writes, the healing specialists include the
herbalist, the fetish man, the medium (usually a woman who is
able to transmit messages from the dead to the living), the
sorcerer (usually one who can do evil), and the healers (perhaps
an equivalent to our generalists). Although different from our
experts, they are experts nonetheless.
TABLE 26.1 Value Emphases—Four Major Cultural Groups
In other cultures the community, using traditional rituals, acts
in a collateral fashion with individuals to relieve their suffering.
McGowan (1988) described the effectiveness of a community
center providing preventive service programs for Puerto Ricans
in a Brooklyn, New York, neighborhood. In effect, the program
provided sociotherapy in that it maintained over a dozen
programs for at-risk families—programs that included an after-
school drop-in center, a thrift shop, a mothers’ group, an
advocacy clinic, an employment service, and a foster
grandparent program. Clearly for Puerto Ricans, being with
members of their community is important for healing. Another
study (Leininger, 1987) found that family sharing (i.e.
nonrelatives living with a “sponsor” family) was a particularly
important ingredient in helping for the Vietnamese, Philippine
Americans, and Mexican Americans. Ethnotherapy is another
within-group treatment used by various cultural groups to
explore and understand personal identity (Klein, 1976).
A final method of helping or caring, one form of which is

9. currently sweeping the United States through twelve-step
programs, is the use of self-healing methods. Aron (1992)
describes testimonio (testimony) as a therapeutic tool in the
treatment of people who have suffered psychological trauma.
This method is not unlike the “qualification” at a twelve-step
recovery meeting. There are other examples of self-healing
techniques: prolonged sleep or social isolation found in Weir
Mitchell’s “rest cure,” the Japanese Morita treatment (Prince,
1980; Tseng and McDermott, 1981), and autogenic training, a
form of self-hypnosis practiced in Germany (Prince, 1980;
Tseng and McDermott, 1981).
In summary, the challenges of cultural diversity in human
services include not only differences in beliefs, attitudes, and
customs between and within cultures but also varying opinions
about who can help and how that help can be carried out.
Clearly the combinations are so vast in number that any
beginning professional might think working with clients outside
one’s own culture is impossible. It is not impossible, however,
if the helping professional is accepting and open to others and
has the knowledge described in the next section.
HUMAN SERVICE PROFESSIONALS IN THE UNITED
STATES
Service professionals who are immigrants or first-generation
Americans, especially if they are fluent in a language other than
English, clearly have an “edge” in working within the culture in
which they have their origins. The edge is linguistic. This is not
to suggest that anyone who speaks Spanish is going to be a
“better” helper to the Hispanic client population. Indeed, if the
helper is Mexican American, she or he may have no point of
reference, other than Spanish vocabulary, with an Argentinean
or Cuban client.
The question remains: Can an American-trained human service
entry-level professional, regardless of cultural background,
work with diverse cultural groups? Clinicians answer “yes” if
that helper understands he or she is an agent of Euro-American
culture and also a helper who by definition has power

10. (Pinderhughes, 1989; Carter, 1991). Although it is important not
to be “culturally encapsulated” (Pedersen, 1976), it is
imperative to have specific knowledge of dominant American
values (Carter, 1991). For Helms (1992), Carter (1991), and
Pinderhughes (1989), that knowledge involves awareness that
history affects how our institutions operate and that American
history is a history of racial-cultural inequalities. Racism,
sexism, ageism, and heterosexism operate unconsciously, so
helpers must work to stay open, flexible, and empathic. Central
to all “isms” is power and the underlying “better-than” or “less-
than” dynamic between helper and helpee that is implicit or
inherent to American values. Americans believe in power, in
influence, and in the “better-than” ability of the expert.
Although mainstream American culture does not value
authority, we paradoxically give power to our “experts.”
Thus, power exists with powerlessness, dominance with
subservience, control with helplessness, and capability with
incompetence—dangerous autonyms, but ones that those who
seek help often carry within them. In effect, as Pinderhughes
(1989) suggests, those who are without status or power in
American culture often identify with the aggressor and feel
doubly victimized. In other words, the “have-nots” not only
don’t have things but also hate themselves (thereby believing
they deserve what they get) for not having things. Thus helpers,
by recognizing that power is built into a helping experience, can
speak the unspeakable (Ruebens and White, 1992) and clarify
the needs and expectations of those interacting. That, by the
way, includes the helper’s needs and expectations of the client
as well. In short, helpers must diminish their own defensiveness
(Pedersen, 1988) and monitor and manage their feelings,
perceptions, and attitudes (Pinderhughes, 1989). As helpers we
must realize we have power and be willing to acknowledge what
we know and can do and what we don’t know and can’t do.
As Pinderhughes (1989) further suggests, helpers must realize
that all people need to feel positive about their cultural identity
and that it is the responsibility of the helper to demonstrate

11. mutuality, self-respect, and respect for clients in the helping
relationship. Helpers need to allow clients the opportunity to
exercise choice, and to collaborate in treatment goals and in
treatment methods. Given that all people in America live in
culturally diverse communities, it is important that the helper
help all clients become multicultural. Learning to live
harmoniously and with self-expression, both within a culture
and with others of another culture, are the great rewards and
challenges of living in a democratic society.
SUMMARY
Human service workers face the challenges of cross-cultural
social service work. Cultural diversity demands an
understanding of possible value differences in worldview, in
who can be a helper, and how helping is experienced. The
human service worker needs to be fully aware and culturally
sensitive to self, others, and the helping relationship’s
interpersonal variables.
REFERENCES
Aron, A. (1991). “Testimonio: A Bridge between Psychotherapy
and Sociotherapy.” In E. Cole, E. D. Rothblum, and O. M.
Espin, eds., Refugee Women and Their Mental Health, Vol. 2,
Women and Therapy, 173–189. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baruth, L. G., and M. L. Manning (1991). Multicultural
Counseling and Psychotherapy: A Life Span Perspective. New
York: Macmillan.
Carter, R. T. (1991). “Cultural Values: A Review of Empirical
Research and Implications for Counseling.” Journal of
Counseling and Development, 70, 164–173.
Gelfand, D., and B. W. K. Yee (1991). “Trends and Forces:
Influence of Immigration, Migration, and Acculturation on the
Fabric of Aging in America,” Generations, 15 (4), 7–10.
Helms, J. E. (1992). A Race Is a Nice Thing to Have. Topeka,
KS: Content Communications.
Klein, J. (1976). “Ethnotherapy with Jews.” International
Journal of Mental Health, 5 (2), 26–38.
Leininger, M. M. (1987). “Transcultural Caring: A Different

12. Way to Help People.” In P. Pedersen, ed., Handbook of Cross-
Cultural Counseling and Therapy. pp. 107–115. New York:
Praeger.
McGowan, B. G. (1988). “Helping Puerto Rican Families at
Risk: Responsive Use of Time, Space, and Relationships,” In C.
Jacobs and D. D. Bowles, eds., Ethnicity and Race: Critical
Concepts in Social Work. pp. 48–66. Silver Spring, MD:
National Association of Social Workers.
Okun, B. F. (1992). Effective Helping: Interviewing and
Counseling Techniques, 4th ed. Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Papajohn, J., and J. Spiegel (1975). Transactions in Families.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pear, J. (1992). “Population Growth Outstrips Earlier U.S.
Census Estimates.” The New York Times, Dec. 4, 1992, pp. A1,
D18.
Pedersen, P. (1976). “The Field of Intercultural Counseling.” In
P. Pedersen, W. J. Lonner, and J. G. Draguns, eds., Counseling
Across Cultures. pp. 17–42. Honolulu: The University Press of
Hawaii.
Pedersen, P. (1988). A Handbook for Developing Multicultural
Awareness. Alexandria, VA: AACD.
Pinderhughes, E. (1989). Understanding Race, Ethnicity, and
Power. New York: Macmillan.
Prince, R. (1980). “Variations in Psychotherapeutic
Procedures.” In H. Triandis and J. G. Durgens, eds.,
Psychopathology, Vol. 6: Handbook of Cross-Cultural
Psychology. pp. 291–349. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Ruebens, P., and J. White (1992). “Speaking the Unspeakable:
Race, Class, and Ethnicity: Differences within the Treatment
Setting.” Women’s Therapy Centre Institute Workshop, October
24.
Sarbaugh, L. E. (1988). Intercultural Communication. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Schmolling, P. Jr., M. Youkeles, and W. R. Burger (1992).
Human Services in Contemporary America. Monterey, CA:

13. Brooks/Cole.
Shulman, E. D. (1982). Intervention in the Human Services, 3rd
ed. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby.
Speight, S. L., L. J. Myers, C. I. Cox, and P. S. Highlen (1991).
“A Redefinition of Multicultural Counseling.” Journal of
Counseling and Development, 70, 29–36.
Tseng, W., and J. F. McDermott, Jr. (1981). Culture, Mind, and
Therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel.
U.S. Department of Commerce (1991). Statistical Abstract of
United States, 1991. Washington, DC: National Data Book.
Vontress, C. E. (1991). “Traditional Healing in Africa:
Implications for Cross-Cultural Counseling.” Journal of
Counseling and Development, 70, 242–249.
Wrenn, C. G. (1987). “Afterword: The Culturally Encapsulated
Counselor Revisited.” In P. Pedersen, ed., Handbook of Cross-
Cultural Counseling and Therapy. New York: Praeger, pp. 323–
329.
Chapter 26 TRENDS AND CHALLENGES OF CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
R. DONNA PETRIE
We are
born in families, whether small or large, with one or more
parenting figures. These families are
embedded in a web of other families, all of which are part of a
particular society or culture. In the
United States families share a common culture because the
y all live in one country, but they also share a
family culture that may or may not be like the culture of the
nation. It is virtually impossible to
overemphasize the influence an individual’s family culture has
on the day
-

14. to
-
day activities of any given
pe
rson’s life. In this country it is also nearly impossible to
overestimate the points of difference within
cultures and between cultures. Diversity itself has historically
represented a core component of the
democratic fabric of that which defines American
life. This position and role is as viable today in 2003 as
it was during the past two centuries.
The purpose of this chapter is to broadly introduce the
challenges of multicultural human service work.
These challenges are threefold. First, human service pr
ofessionals need to have an understanding of
specific value areas wherein misunderstanding between cultures
is likely to occur; second, workers need
to understand different cultural models of healing and caring;
and finally, human service professionals,
wh
ether they think of themselves as bicultural or as “American,”
need to understand how they are seen
as “agents” of mainstream American culture.
FUTURE POPULATION TRENDS
A decade ago the New York Times reported that the United
States Census Bureau has had t
o recalculate
population growth (Pear, 1992). The population of the United
States, it appears, will continue to grow
through 2050 rather than decline after the year 2038. To
summarize, for the years 1990 to 2025 there
will be more babies born, particularly

15. to new immigrants, and the proportion of men to women is
likely
to even out, as the life expectancy of men appears to be rising
faster than that of women.
Despite this overall increase in the number of people in the
United States, whites will account for
a
declining share in the population. The numbers of black
Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic
Americans will grow appreciably. Using the 1990 census, the
Bureau predicts a 412.5 percent population
growth for Asian and Pacific Islanders; a 237.5 percen
t growth in numbers for Hispanic Americans; a
109.1 percent increase in the number of Native American
Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts; and a 93.8
percent increase for black Americans. These figures contrast
significantly with the 29.4 percent
projected growth
of white Americans from 1992 to 2050.
The Census Bureau makes the future trends somewhat more
complex by noting that immigration by
itself will account for the expected growth in the Asian
American population and not the number of
births. Birth rates are
increasing among the black and Hispanic populations. The birth
rate of whites,
however, is not expected to increase. In the United States the
youngest population group is Hispanic
Americans. In fact, whereas the median age of all Americans is
thirty
-
three,

16. more than one
-
third of the
Hispanic population in the United States is under the age of
eighteen.
In addition to shifts in the growth of ethnic populations, other
demographic variables are also changing.
For example, in the age category of 55 years or old
er, 13 percent are over 65, with the quickest rate of
Chapter 26 TRENDS AND CHALLENGES OF CULTURAL
DIVERSITY
R. DONNA PETRIE
We are born in families, whether small or large, with one or
more parenting figures. These families are
embedded in a web of other families, all of which are part of a
particular society or culture. In the
United States families share a common culture because they all
live in one country, but they also share a
family culture that may or may not be like the culture of the
nation. It is virtually impossible to
overemphasize the influence an individual’s family culture has
on the day-to-day activities of any given
person’s life. In this country it is also nearly impossible to
overestimate the points of difference within
cultures and between cultures. Diversity itself has historically
represented a core component of the
democratic fabric of that which defines American life. This
position and role is as viable today in 2003 as
it was during the past two centuries.
The purpose of this chapter is to broadly introduce the
challenges of multicultural human service work.
These challenges are threefold. First, human service
professionals need to have an understanding of
specific value areas wherein misunderstanding between cultures

17. is likely to occur; second, workers need
to understand different cultural models of healing and caring;
and finally, human service professionals,
whether they think of themselves as bicultural or as
“American,” need to understand how they are seen
as “agents” of mainstream American culture.
FUTURE POPULATION TRENDS
A decade ago the New York Times reported that the United
States Census Bureau has had to recalculate
population growth (Pear, 1992). The population of the United
States, it appears, will continue to grow
through 2050 rather than decline after the year 2038. To
summarize, for the years 1990 to 2025 there
will be more babies born, particularly to new immigrants, and
the proportion of men to women is likely
to even out, as the life expectancy of men appears to be rising
faster than that of women.
Despite this overall increase in the number of people in the
United States, whites will account for a
declining share in the population. The numbers of black
Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic
Americans will grow appreciably. Using the 1990 census, the
Bureau predicts a 412.5 percent population
growth for Asian and Pacific Islanders; a 237.5 percent growth
in numbers for Hispanic Americans; a
109.1 percent increase in the number of Native American
Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts; and a 93.8
percent increase for black Americans. These figures contrast
significantly with the 29.4 percent
projected growth of white Americans from 1992 to 2050.
The Census Bureau makes the future trends somewhat more
complex by noting that immigration by
itself will account for the expected growth in the Asian
American population and not the number of
births. Birth rates are increasing among the black and Hispanic
populations. The birth rate of whites,

18. however, is not expected to increase. In the United States the
youngest population group is Hispanic
Americans. In fact, whereas the median age of all Americans is
thirty-three, more than one-third of the
Hispanic population in the United States is under the age of
eighteen.
In addition to shifts in the growth of ethnic populations, other
demographic variables are also changing.
For example, in the age category of 55 years or older, 13
percent are over 65, with the quickest rate of
1. What is Decision Analysis? When is it most useful? Briefly
outline the Scalable Decision Process. How can a decision
maker clearly communicate the objectives of a decision.
2. Briefly describe two Decision Traps and explain how a
leader can try to avoid being impacted by it.