Post-docs?

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

I am curious what people think about pursuing accredited versus non-accredited post-docs. Obviously in some fields (Neuro) accredited post-docs are very important... but for clinical post-docs, there aren't a ton of accredited options, and I'm not currently convinced that I need to pursue an accredited post-doc.

Thoughts? Help me see perspectives on this that I may not be aware of?

As in APA-accredited? If so, then I agree that accreditation isn't necessary (or even really the norm, especially compared with grad school and internship). Heck, a good chunk of APPCN neuro postdocs aren't APA-accredited.

Beyond that, it's going to depend on the specialty area as to what specific types of accreditation/certification/training/etc. you should be hoping to get.

I've done practica in University Medical Center and University Research and clinical training sites, and am applying for Internship this year. My focus is mostly on VA's, University Medical Centers, and a few Psych hospitals. I want to practice in integrated care settings (hence my internship app focusing on the 3 settings above). That being said, I am considering maintaining relationships with the places I've done practica, as I've enjoyed these work environments and each of them offers a non-match post-doc position (not accredited meaning not a part of the match, not through APA or through APPIC).

Since I could keep a "foot in the door," making the post-doc application process less stressful, I'm trying to evaluate any down-sides to not participating in the match or by going this route.

APA-acred. doesn't much matter at the post-doc level because there are so few (%-wise). For Neuro you want it to meet the Houston Guidelines, and for Rehab you want it to meet Baltimore Guidelines (new standards).

Originally Posted by Therapist4Chnge

APA-acred. doesn't much matter at the post-doc level because there are so few (%-wise). For Neuro you want it to meet the Houston Guidelines, and for Rehab you want it to meet Baltimore Guidelines (new standards).

All these guidelines mean nothing, think they should replace post-doc with your programs comprehensive exams..

::runs::

Originally Posted by roubs

All these guidelines mean nothing, think they should replace post-doc with your programs comprehensive exams..

::runs::

100% disagree, at least for speciality areas. Given the additional knowledge needed to practice competently in Rehab/Neuro/Forensic (the only 3 specialities I have any sig. knowledge about), it would be completely irresponsible to not have guidelines. Clinicians don't know what they don't know about these areas.

Originally Posted by roubs

All these guidelines mean nothing, think they should replace post-doc with your programs comprehensive exams..

::runs::

I agree with respect to the concept of the generic post-doc year required for licensure, and am fine with the states that have decided to do away with it.

For certain speciality areas, though, I'm strongly in favor of post-doctoral training being a requirement.

For best practices, I would follow the guidelines mentioned above for a given specialty. If you want to work in a major medical center or academic medicine, not doing so may come back to bite you. If you only plan to work in private practice or other smaller settings, it honestly may not matter one bit. As I have said, I know people, even in NYC, that practice neuropsych with little to no formal training. I considered a post-doc in geriatrics/behavioral medicine, but having to move halfway across the country for a lower paying position is just not something I could stomach. Instead, I took a job with similar opportunities as the post-doc in the city I was currently living in. Post-docs are great if you can get them, but the lack of post-docs (especially with the current funding issues) do make them a necessity in my opinion. That said, if you want to work in s certain area, I would look for a job in that area. Some colleagues and mentors (clinicians mind you) stated that they grabbed the first available job, got their license, and then worried about about getting the position they really wanted. While I feel that such advice is a little extreme, it has not seemed to hurt them (they all worked at a VA hospital I trained at).

Originally Posted by Therapist4Chnge

100% disagree, at least for speciality areas. Given the additional knowledge needed to practice competently in Rehab/Neuro/Forensic (the only 3 specialities I have any sig. knowledge about), it would be completely irresponsible to not have guidelines. Clinicians don't know what they don't know about these areas.

Apparently I needed to be more explicit with my 4410 impression.

Originally Posted by roubs

Apparently I needed to be more explicit with my 4410 impression.

that is how I initially took it, and was surprised to see people get so defensive right away...

But for general practitioners, I really wouldn't mind seeing states get rid of required postdoc hours. Specialties obviously need more extensive training, but to mandate that everyone put in another year or two just amounts to additional indentured servitude.

Heck, 2 years feels too long for me even with neuro. But I am much better prepared now and most of why it feels too long is because I am tired of being in training, not because it is a terrible idea to get that training.

Originally Posted by roubs

Apparently I needed to be more explicit with my 4410 impression.

I actually checked the name...

Originally Posted by paramour

I actually checked the name...

Checked what name?

Originally Posted by roubs

Apparently I needed to be more explicit with my 4410 impression.

Oh...I guess I am honored to be imitated. It takes hard work to keep my street cred going; so don't do me wrong by engaging in poor quality imitation. I think it would be easier for thou APA accredited Brethren to stretch their IQ downwards to do a quality imitation and it would be harder for us non APA accredited folks to imitate high IQ APA accredited folks. Let me try----I have read 199 peer reviewed articles in ten minutes and concluded that PhD university based Clinical Psychology students have a signficantly higher percentage of making demeaning arrogant statements in contrast to FSPS PsyD Clinical Psychology students. Therefore, it is unaimous that APA needs to shut down all of the PhD university based Clinical psychology programs or require them to have open admissions and increase their tuitions to $1000 per hour. Maybe social psychologists would return to their heyday years by reviewing this website and studying ingroup and outgroup dynamics of power, prejudice, and bias. Does Philip Zimbardo ever read this website? I bet he would be in favor of FSPS PsyD programs! Could we do a prison study based on having PhD University Based Clinical Psychology students as the wardens and guards and us FSPS PsyD program students are the inmates!! I believe it has come down to this....will it pass the IRB board? :-)

Originally Posted by 4410

Oh...I guess I am honored to be imitated. It takes hard work to keep my street cred going; so don't do me wrong by engaging in poor quality imitation. I think it would be easier for thou APA accredited Brethren to stretch their IQ downwards to do a quality imitation and it would be harder for us non APA accredited folks to imitate high IQ APA accredited folks. Let me try----I have read 199 peer reviewed articles in ten minutes and concluded that PhD university based Clinical Psychology students have a signficantly higher percentage of making demeaning arrogant statements in contrast to FSPS PsyD Clinical Psychology students. Therefore, it is unaimous that APA needs to shut down all of the PhD university based Clinical psychology programs or require them to have open admissions and increase their tuitions to $1000 per hour. Maybe social psychologists would return to their heyday years by reviewing this website and studying ingroup and outgroup dynamics of power, prejudice, and bias. Does Philip Zimbardo ever read this website? I bet he would be in favor of FSPS PsyD programs! Could we do a prison study based on having PhD University Based Clinical Psychology students as the wardens and guards and us FSPS PsyD program students are the inmates!! I believe it has come down to this....will it pass the IRB board? :-)

I'm really confused about what this means.


So, that being said, it sounds like the feedback I'm getting is that post-docs really vary depending on specialization (Neuro, Rehab...) and that as I am not planning on specializing in this manner, I would be fine to pursue whatever post-doc I want, or even none, as some have indicated.

Thanks for the feedback! It is making me more excited about my current prospects.

Originally Posted by ClinPsychEnthus

I'm really confused about what this means.

I think we all are. I wouldn't worry about it. The troubling part is that it was edited awhile after the original post.

Glad you were able to get some advice from this thread!