Embracing diversity in our profession.

353 This is a reflective article that carries the discussion of cultural diversity from more typically considered arenas of clinical practice and education to a less-considered context: the occupational therapy community. The occupational therapy literature offers fine work that targets constructs related to diversity (American Occupational Therapy Association [AOTA], 1995, 1996; Black, 2002; Cena, McGruder, & Tomlin, 2002; Fitzgerald, Mullavey-O’Bryne, & Clemson, 1997; Grady, 1995; Hocking & Whiteford, 1995; Krefting, 1991; PopeDavis, Prieto, Whitaker, & Pope-Davis, 1993; Whiteford, 1998; Whiteford & Wilcock, 2000). Our reflection extends this literature in its consideration of select and provocative ideas about diversity and harmony as they relate to occupational therapy. In this article we aim to (1) discuss the construction of exclusionary views of others (otherisms) as problematic and (2) offer as a more promising alternative a valuation of uniqueness that supports diversity. Throughout this reflection, we intersperse personal experiences and professional observations that illustrate our thinking. Our central aim is to propose an appreciation of difference and an embrace of the profession’s identity, which is fundamentally linked to human occupation, as also diverse. This article is not about prejudice, per se. A common definition of the term prejudice found in Allport’s classic work is also present in most dictionaries. It includes an element of hostility: “An avertive or hostile attitude toward a person who belongs to a group, simply because he belongs to that group, and is therefore presumed to have the objectionable qualities ascribed to the group” (Allport, 1979, p. 5). In this article, we discuss more benign overgeneralizations that could lead to hostility in the absence of vigilance. We believe that reflection about the value of diversity is a proactive move against developing prejudice. As authors, we have each shared unique views of practice in the occupational therapy literature, and our partnering for this and prior articles illustrates a collaborative good that comes from valuing difference. Comments from each of us will explain our first step in this particular undertaking: Beatriz (Betty): I first reflected on minority issues when the Brain Injury Association Conference (BIAC) invited me to address professionals and individuals with brain injury on the topic of diversity. I initiated contact with Suzanne because I thought her work on empathy and communication was inspiring and her strategies helpful. I had never written or presented on diversity. My specialty has been in physical and cognitive disabilities. When pressed with this task, I reflected not on my personal experience as a minority, but on my practice with many individuals who were rich, famous, smart and white, and who, in a short period of time after acquired brain injury had gained automatic and unsolicited membership in a minority group of individuals with disabilities. (Abreu & Peloquin, 2002) Suzanne: When Beatriz asked if I might join her in a presentation on minority issues at the BIAC conference, I initially thought I had little to offer. I saw Betty as a perfect fit Beatriz C. Abreu, Suzanne M. Peloquin