The current racial justice movement, raised by the murder of Black and Brown lives, has pushed us to reflect on anti-racism. As we work toward a more diverse workforce, we should focus on inclusion and belonging in the genetic counseling community. It is important for the genetic counseling community to be self-aware of our biases to grasp our role in perpetuating harm to Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) genetic counselors, students, and patients.
BIPOC students are often burdened with racial stress due to microaggressions, as was the case in my first-year seminar course. An article by Thain et al. was being presented to help facilitate a conversation about consanguinity. The article suggested that because patients made no mention of their white genetic counselor’s race, other factors, such as professionalism, may have a larger impact on culturally competent care than an ethnically similar genetic counselor.
As I read the article my blood boiled, and a million questions raced in my head. Were they suggesting that I did not need to exist? That my perspectives and experiences brought nothing to the table because a white genetic counselor could do the same job if they were “professional” enough? Imposter syndrome flared up and crippled me. In the following months, I spent time processing the damage from this paragraph and proving to myself that ethnically similar genetic counselors are valuable. These are my conclusions:
- Patients were not asked directly about the genetic counselor's race/ethnicity, so it is incorrect to assume that this was not a factor. The opposing argument, that the patient would have had a more positive experience with an ethnically similar genetic counselor, could also be made. In fact, several studies have demonstrated the value of ethnically similar providers for patient care (Cooper et al., 2003; Takeshita et al., 2020).
- This study’s assumption does not demonstrate cultural humility. Quite the contrary—it highlights the white-centric approach of the genetic counseling community, which may harm BIPOC patients (Lowe et al., 2020).
- The exclusion of BIPOC from the genetic counseling field devalues the input from these communities.
Given NSGC’s stance on diversity and inclusion, I am surprised this article made it past review. In my opinion, it should not have been published. Therein lies the importance of including BIPOC in all aspects of NSGC, including the Journal of Genetic Counseling. We must become more aware of our biases and their damaging effects in genetic counselor research, publication, and education. As I develop my professional identity, I want to know I belong. I and other BIPOC cannot feel fully accepted if we are devalued by our own profession.
Joselyn Saenz Díaz, BS (she/her/ella) is a second-year genetic counseling student at the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute of Health Professions who enjoys reading a good book on a hammock by the Charles River. She is excited to enter the field of genetic counseling and is passionate about improving equitable access to care in marginalized and underserved communities.