Continuing from her critique of Western universalism in the “helping professions” laid out in the previous chapter, Berry turns to the person-centered therapy of Carl Rogers. Berry argues that while Rogers may have imagined himself as providing an approach to care that was more humanistic and less authoritative than previous models, his inability to grapple with his own particularity as a white, male citizen of the United States in the mid-twentieth century led him to reinforce the universalistic and authoritarian assumptions Western mental health care was founded on. This has led to a person-centered therapy that is structurally unsuited to address issues of systemic violence and oppression. Berry illustrates this point using a series of research trips she undertook to study organizations in the United Kingdom set up in the 1990s to improve mental health outcomes for Black people. While the intentions were good, these organizations consistently failed to deliver adequate care due to the limitations placed on them by the supposedly neutral and objective funding structures in place at that time, which were unable to address the role systemic violence played in Black experiences of mental distress.