Editorial comment on normality for counselors

Editorial commenting that perhaps to some extent psychologists also define normality as the absence of anything else. This may in part account for the desire of many counseling psychologists to work with problems of emotional disturbance. It is at least a tangible condition in which a helping relationship has obvious validity. One cannot dismiss the recognition that counselors do get reinforcement in working with disturbed people. But the thesis here is that this feeling of purpose rests partly in a default definition of normality, which defines it as an empty space surrounded by illness. Such a conception yields scant purpose in working with the normal person. A revision of this definition might lead to a revision of purpose and function. The editorial presents two related steps required for such a revision.