本文回應四篇有關亞洲輔導發展的文章。雖然這四篇文章詳盡地介紹在亞洲不同地區的輔導發展，它們仍忽略了一些問題：樊富珉低估了急促的發展帶來的危機；陳秉華沒有對學校輔導工作面對的困難提出新方向；梁湘明似乎高估了專業輔導員對其他助人專業的幫助；沈文偉忽略了在社會福利系統下發展專業輔導的困難。這四篇文章都指出亞洲輔導工作者面對的三個難題：專業身份不明確、對輔導本土化的渴求，和輔導研究的欠缺。本文亦提出一些亞洲專業輔導員要面對的「困窘」問題。

This paper attempts to critically review the four review papers on the development of counseling in different Asian contexts. While these papers constitute thorough reviews of the development of counseling in four Asian communities, there are some unanswered questions in each of them: Fan appears to be over-optimistic about the development of counseling in the Mainland China and he overlooks the problems related to the rapid development; Chen identifies the problems confronting counseling professionals in the education system in Taiwan, but he does not offer any solutions; Leung overestimates the complementary role of counselors to other helping professionals in Hong Kong; Sim underestimates the problems encountered by counseling professionals within the social welfare system in Singapore. Based on the reviews, three issues common to counseling professionals in these four places are identified: the search for professional identity, the quest for indigenization, and the need for developing counseling research. This paper concludes by arguing that there are several embarrassing questions confronting counseling professionals in these four Asian places.