Beyond the Prompt: How Therapists Navigate Conversations on Race with Each Other

Background /Purpose:

Therapists do not engage in their work in isolation; their discussions, both with clients and colleagues, occur within the broader context of structural and systemic racism. The field of psychotherapy, like other helping professions, can reinforce racial hierarchies unless therapists actively examine their assumptions and biases. Research indicates that BIPOC clients often experience therapy as culturally unresponsive, with race frequently avoided in sessions.

This study examines how therapists navigate conversations about race—what is addressed, what is avoided, and how self-presentation shifts across settings. We analyzed focus groups where therapists were discussing how they raise topics of race and racism in clinical work to observe how they engage with peers in real time about issues of race. We examine group dynamics and the themes that emerged, how therapists respond to one another, shift their engagement, and navigate challenges as discussions unfold. This includes interactions in mixed-race and racial affinity groups, highlighting how group composition shapes the content and dynamics of these conversations.

Methods:

We conducted ten two-hour focus groups with licensed psychotherapists recruited through professional listservs who self-identified as willing to discuss race and racism in clinical work. The same data were used in a prior study focused on how therapists raise issues of race. This analysis probed more deeply into how therapists initiates conversations and how roles shift based on group composition; what topics therapists avoid or confront; how self-presentation changes between full-group and affinity-group settings; and emergent themes, including unspoken norms and barriers that shape clinical awareness and practice. Each session followed a consistent structure: a full-group discussion using a semi-structured guide, followed by racial affinity breakouts (Black/BIPOC and White). Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic coding informed by grounded theory and discourse analysis.

Findings:

Preliminary analysis suggests that therapists often navigate conversations about race with caution, balancing professional norms with personal beliefs. Key findings include:

• Who Speaks First: White participants were more likely to initiate discussions in focus groups, while therapists of color responded with greater depth, often shaping the conversation.
• Unequal emotional labor: White therapists looked to BIPOC colleagues for guidance and education, sometimes asking explicitly.
• Recruitment and Participation: More White therapists initially expressed interest in participating, yet fewer followed through after receiving invitations, revealing a gap between stated willingness and actual engagement.
• Invalidation: Some BIPOC therapists questioned whether allyship by white therapists was performative. Some White therapists felt unfairly judged, particularly when viewing race as part of broader cultural or socioeconomic identity rather than a distinct category.

• Shifts in Self-Presentation: Therapists’ language, tone, and openness varied across settings, with racial affinity groups fostering more candid and emotionally honest discussions.

Conclusion and Implications:

Findings highlight the complexity of race-related discussions among therapists—where privilege, power, and professional identity intersect. By examining these dialogues, this study provides insight into how therapists’ implicit biases and professional norms shape their engagement with race. Understanding these dynamics can inform training programs and professional development, helping therapists move beyond performative engagement and toward anti-racist therapy.