Anyone regretting doing a graduate degree in clinical psych?

[nononora]

Are you that out of touch to not realize that most (99 percent) of internships pay only 18K??

NYC is only one place. Only prisons, miltary internships and a few others pay >18750. Some actually pay much less

Taken from the 2011 survey of internship applicants:

26. Please enter the approximate amount of the annual stipend /
salary for your position (e.g., if your stipend is $12,000
for the year, enter "12000"; if unfunded, enter "0"). Please
estimate if you don't know the exact amount.

Mean = $24,218 Median = $23,798
SD = $ 8,973 Mode = $24,000

The mean salary represents a 2.2% increase as compared to 2010.

Please check your facts before making such sweeping generalizations.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[edieb]

What was the response rate? Is there a self-selection bias? These are things you must consider. It is basic research methodology!!

Taken from the 2011 survey of internship applicants:

26. Please enter the approximate amount of the annual stipend /
salary for your position (e.g., if your stipend is $12,000
for the year, enter "12000"; if unfunded, enter "0"). Please
estimate if you don't know the exact amount.

Mean = $24,218 Median = $23,798
SD = $ 8,973 Mode = $24,000

The mean salary represents a 2.2% increase as compared to 2010.

Please check your facts before making such sweeping generalizations.

 

[Psych2011]

I know many lawyers, and they made 165K out of graduate school (they went to a good school)

When was this? I have many friends who graduated from a top 20 law school last year and trust me, that was not their reality. At the time of graduation, very few had a job offer. Many ended up taking a position from the school, earning 20 dollars/hr, 20 hrs a week for eight weeks (and the school is in a very expensive area of the country). After that, they were on their own.

Now, one year later, a good portion of these people are still without a law related job, volunteering for law firms and working their butts off in jobs someone out of high-school is qualified for. These people would take the first chance to get a law related job paying 30 000 dollars a year.

That's the reality of law school right now. From my understanding it's probably the field who have suffered the most from the economy.

 

[Peanut2011]

Yes this is a fact. But when their training [MD] is complete their salaries SKY rocket. That's why when they take out crazy loans it much more realistic for them to pay it off (quicker) than psychologists coming from professional schools.

I worked with MDs in fellowship who were making 45k/yr. They've had a MD for 3-4 years at that point. Salaries tend to suck for them too until training is 100% complete.

 

[Peanut2011]

JD market is totally flooded right now (much like psychology in some way, but actually our job prospects are quite better = for psychologists actually). Job prospects for 3rd tier grad JDs = very poor. Many articles on slate.com about this and/or the internet. Here again, the JD world got into the business of training JDs = it is somewhat where psychologists are headed, but I contend that for many complicated reasons (positive/ good thing actually) our field won't get as bad (at least not anytime soon).

See internships in law school are not mandatory and there is a huge disconnect between law school, JD, taking the bar, and practicing law. EPPP is horrible, but the average graduating grad psych student is trained somewhat better to know what's out there. They -- the professional schools are generally at the places flooding the market (for psychologists = professional schools, but at least if you stay local you will have allot of real world training in psychology and contacts-- not the same for the average JD). Good thing for psychology, yes! we found something positive (sort of).

Are you that out of touch to not realize that most (99 percent) of internships pay only 18K??

 

[busybusybusy]

Thought I'd throw my two cents in here so the whole post isn't doom & gloom...

Just as a disclaimer, this is all based on my personal experience living in a wealthier, yet more expensive, city on the east coast that more or less was not hit hard by the economic crisis.

I have been working in the psych field for a while now and work with a very large network of psychologists. I know the ones that get hired on fresh out of internship are starting in the 75-80,000 range and continue to go up from there. Many that I work with make well over 100 grand a year. These are people who are mainly clinicians and don't work in private practice or sometimes have a small PP on the side or teach as adjuncts. That being said I also know professors (who are tenured) that make over 100 grand a year also. It definitely takes longer and is hard work but i feel that if you have decided you want to become a professor you would check out the pay scale and it's potential prior to committing to a grad program.

I understand the argument that lawyers and doctors, who I'm assuming we use as examples because we feel like we're on the same level as them, may make more money. But frankly I didn't want to be a lawyer or a doctor, I wanted to be a psychologist. Almost anyone who is smart enough to get into a doctoral psych program would have been smart enough to get into law school or med school and chose not to. I agree that we should be compensated for the work we do, but I also think that there are many that are and not everyone in the field is in a monetary crisis. I just don't feel it's fair that some people will read this thread and potentially be scared off because it makes it seem like you will never make any money.

 

[nononora]

What was the response rate? Is there a self-selection bias? These are things you must consider. It is basic research methodology!!

An even more basic research methodology is to refrain from making senseless and harmful claims that only serve to further one's personal agenda. You question survey statistics and yet do not seem to be as strict in your approach regarding your own personal misgivings about the field. Show me data that support your belief that 99% of internships pay 18k or less.

There was a 65% response rate. In order for 99% to earn < 18k (your claim), the 35% of non-responders would have had to have a mean salary of $6452.29. Very unlikely.

684 internship sites total on APPIC directory:
45 internship sites (6.6%) offer < $15,000
639 internship sites (93.4%) offer > $15,000
481 internship sites (70.32%) offer > $20,000
180 internship sites (26.32%) offer > $25,000

Are internship salaries lower than they perhaps "ought" to be? Yes. Are 99% of them 18k or lower? No.

 

[Peanut2011]

This is promising. And it's one of the few posts mentioning something like this. I think the more (the problem being this is the student doctor blog = but the feedback I have got here is so amazing and only after few days of being a member = go SDN).

I'd like to see more posts like this (or expanding on it). I see allot of the positivs posts being canned positive things; but the negatives being very articulate. GOOD NEWS = this post is great. Original poster, this sounds legit to me.

Thought I'd throw my two cents in here so the whole post isn't doom & gloom...

Just as a disclaimer, this is all based on my personal experience living in a wealthier, yet more expensive, city on the east coast that more or less was not hit hard by the economic crisis.

I have been working in the psych field for a while now and work with a very large network of psychologists. I know the ones that get hired on fresh out of internship are starting in the 75-80,000 range and continue to go up from there. Many that I work with make well over 100 grand a year. These are people who are mainly clinicians and don't work in private practice or sometimes have a small PP on the side or teach as adjuncts. That being said I also know professors (who are tenured) that make over 100 grand a year also. It definitely takes longer and is hard work but i feel that if you have decided you want to become a professor you would check out the pay scale and it's potential prior to committing to a grad program.

I understand the argument that lawyers and doctors, who I'm assuming we use as examples because we feel like we're on the same level as them, may make more money. But frankly I didn't want to be a lawyer or a doctor, I wanted to be a psychologist. Almost anyone who is smart enough to get into a doctoral psych program would have been smart enough to get into law school or med school and chose not to. I agree that we should be compensated for the work we do, but I also think that there are many that are and not everyone in the field is in a monetary crisis. I just don't feel it's fair that some people will read this thread and potentially be scared off because it makes it seem like you will never make any money.

 

[busybusybusy]

Here's some more promising news...if you intend to work with the federal govt (VA, BOP, DOE, etc) you are going to be paid based on the GS scale (link: http://www.opm.gov/oca/11tables/indexgs.asp ). As a person with a doctoral degree you start out as an 11-12, once licensed you become a 13-14. That's a pretty substantial amount of money and increases that can be earned within 1-2 years.

Also, if you work as a psychologist for an agency like the BOP or the Marshalls you are considered federal law enforcement and get paid more, there is a whole different scale for them somewhere on the OPM website.

All of that comes with full benefits and a federal retirement. That's not too shabby.

I know it's not the road everyone wants to go down, but there is work out there (the hiring freeze is over) and there is money in that work.

 

[Dream1a]

My original intention was not to be negative about the situation, although I can see why it could be construed in such a way.

The main reason I posted was to confirm my already lingering doubts about an unknown future if I continued with psychology. Does this mean that no one should do a Ph.D in psychology? No, rather what I'd like to make clear to any prospective students including myself is that they may not know all the facts before applying. I REALLY wanted to continue with psychology (I'm about 1 and a half years from graduating) and already had planned on doing so, but I mean thinly veiled regret seems to be a common thread whereever I turn.

I definitely knew there was a "pay" problem even when I first was interested in going to psychology. However, each psychology professor or psychologist I came across seemed to be happy (well, not complain about it - however, retrospectively, it would have been inappropriate), but like many others, it's something i just brushed at the back of mind thinking that it will eventually get better.

No one is saying a psychologist cannot earn a decent salary. But the variability seems to be very high in comparison to a physician, that is, most psychologists don't earn a decent salary (what they should be paid rather than what is reasonable). I mean, if doctors, after they complete their training, are making nearly 2 or 3 times as much, it doesn't make any rational sense, for me, to continue on. There is no doubt in my mind that I will have "MD" envy, if i continue on, and whether you'd like to admit or not I'm sure a lot of psychologists do, too. (Not necessarily about the degree or what they do, but the salary). I've also read somewhere that the feminization of psychology is driving salaries down.

Is every clinical psychologist that expressed their happiness at their job, are they also happy with the amount of compensation they receive? I mean even if you enjoy the job, money is necessarily an element that should be considered.

The way I see it is either it becomes easier to get into clinical psychology and it's not as long or the salary must be increased to an average around 110k which is still pretty low compared to a psychiatrist but is a reasonable salary.

 

[roubs]

My original intention was not to be negative about the situation, although I can see why it could be construed in such a way.

The main reason I posted was to confirm my already lingering doubts about an unknown future if I continued with psychology. Does this mean that no one should do a Ph.D in psychology? No, rather what I'd like to make clear to any prospective students including myself is that they may not know all the facts before applying. I REALLY wanted to continue with psychology (I'm about 1 and a half years from graduating) and already had planned on doing so, but I mean thinly veiled regret seems to be a common thread whereever I turn.

I definitely knew there was a "pay" problem even when I first was interested in going to psychology. However, each psychology professor or psychologist I came across seemed to be happy (well, not complain about it - however, retrospectively, it would have been inappropriate), but like many others, it's something i just brushed at the back of mind thinking that it will eventually get better.

No one is saying a psychologist cannot earn a decent salary. But the variability seems to be very high in comparison to a physician, that is, most psychologists don't earn a decent salary (what they should be paid rather than what is reasonable). I mean, if doctors, after they complete their training, are making nearly 2 or 3 times as much, it doesn't make any rational sense, for me, to continue on. There is no doubt in my mind that I will have "MD" envy, if i continue on, and whether you'd like to admit or not I'm sure a lot of psychologists do, too. (Not necessarily about the degree or what they do, but the salary). I've also read somewhere that the feminization of psychology is driving salaries down.

Is every clinical psychologist that expressed their happiness at their job, are they also happy with the amount of compensation they receive? I mean even if you enjoy the job, money is necessarily an element that should be considered.

The way I see it is either it becomes easier to get into clinical psychology and it's not as long or the salary must be increased to an average around 110k which is still pretty low compared to a psychiatrist but is a reasonable salary.

And yet psychiatrists and psychologists do really different things. Even if you want to do forensics, there is no guarantee a job as a forensic psychiatrist will be handed to you and if you did get one, it would be 10ish years down the road. The funny thing is, if/when you go to medical school you'll have a bunch of people questioning why you'd ever want to do psychiatry because it's such a low paid specialty. Anyway, I'd advise considering how you'd feel doing a mainstream psychiatry job as there is a strong possibility of that outcome. I would also find a way to get a serious look at the downsides of medical school. Working in a hospital for 3 years doing medical research was really great for erasing any MD envy I had. By that point I had gotten advice from really jaded psych Ph.D. students in undergrad and really jaded medical residents/fellows/attendings and felt like I could make the most informed choice possible. Coming on SDN and getting the input you wanted from disaffected students/psychologists may be helpful in some regards but isn't a sufficient level of "doing your homework" for this decision.

An even more basic research methodology is to refrain from making senseless and harmful claims that only serve to further one's personal agenda. You question survey statistics and yet do not seem to be as strict in your approach regarding your own personal misgivings about the field. Show me data that support your belief that 99% of internships pay 18k or less.

 

[PsychPhDone]

I have been tempted to post something for a while because of the numerous posts from the unhappy people here. I don't want everyone reading these boards to think that grad school has to be awful, give you physical illnesses, and take away your social life. I *love* my program and I love what I do. I love statistics, colloquia, writing...and my friends and hobbies. Grad school has been hard work and time consuming, but I have truly enjoyed the vast majority of it so far. I hope it will get even better now that I am mostly done with coursework and can focus even moreso on research

Let me guess you haven't applied for internship, post-doc, licensure, or tried to obtain employment yet. This is when the reality really sets in. You are still shielded from this while in graduate school. I think its important for people to be aware of all the risks and since you haven't even gone through the internship stage yet you may not have a full appreciation for this yet to understand. Most of the people that I know loved the field while in graduate school and then began to slowly lose morale afterwards. Graduate school (aside from internship and dissertation) was the easiest time for me. Everyone is different though.

Yes, I haven't applied to any of those yet. I know getting the type of job I want will not be easy, and I don't even want to think about the complications of relationship considerations and all that. It is entirely possible finding a job will be a craptacular misery. However, I feel pretty good about my qualifications, and that's all I can worry about for now. How many pubs did you have when you applied? Where did you go for grad and what is their history of match/post-doc/job achievements? I definitely have concerns, especially since we can't all be better than average, but when I review how people from my program have typically done, I don't worry. I just bust my butt and get that CV nice and plump.

 

[busybusybusy]

Yes, I haven't applied to any of those yet. I know getting the type of job I want will not be easy, and I don't even want to think about the complications of relationship considerations and all that. It is entirely possible finding a job will be a craptacular misery. However, I feel pretty good about my qualifications, and that's all I can worry about for now. How many pubs did you have when you applied? Where did you go for grad and what is their history of match/post-doc/job achievements? I definitely have concerns, especially since we can't all be better than average, but when I review how people from my program have typically done, I don't worry. I just bust my butt and get that CV nice and plump.

This is what I'm saying! You have to take a certain level of responsibility for the success you do/do not have. Fundamental attribution error anyone?

No one is going to come out of a quality doctoral program and be making less than someone with a BA if they choose not to.

 

[DrGachet]

Hmmm, this is great, confusing as usual. Some say that starting salary is 25-30k, somebody else says it's 75-80k, and a psychologist I worked with told me he hated psychology with a passion and that he was burned out and can't pay his mortgage, cursed himself for not going to med school, while another psychologist told me how she loves her job, loves the $150/hr of her comfy private practice, the flexibility in her part-time academic and research position, and so on. Both psychologists, btw, had been doing this for about 10-12 years.

I wonder if this sort of continuum of job satisfaction and pay is there in other fields as well.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

Hmmm, this is great, confusing as usual. Some say that starting salary is 25-30k, somebody else says it's 75-80k, and a psychologist I worked with told me he hated psychology with a passion and that he was burned out and can't pay his mortgage, cursed himself for not going to med school, while another psychologist told me how she loves her job, loves the $150/hr of her comfy private practice, the flexibility in her part-time academic and research position, and so on. Both psychologists, btw, had been doing this for about 10-12 years.

I wonder if this sort of continuum of job satisfaction and pay is there in other fields as well.

25-30k for a post-doc who is unlicensed and who is essentially still in training is one thing. But no licensed Ph.D. or Psy.D. will be making that kind of salary. I have a master's degree, live in rural Appalachia and work in community mental health- the most lowly paying kind of organization in this field in one of the most low paying regions of the country. I make much much more than that range. BA level case managers who don't do therapy get paid in that range at my agency.

 

[Psy999]

This is my first post here -- had to chime in and provide another voice to the "positive" end of the spectrum.

I am 4 years post-licensure, working full time at a VA, earning over $90K. I specialize, but there are more generalists (read: psychologists doing outpatient psychotherapy) in my hospital than specialists. Based on the GS scale, I'll probably top out around $110K, which is certainly much less than I could make in private practice. However, the job security, flexibility (clinical work, staff education/training, and a bit of research) and fantastic benefits more than make up for the salary difference.

I went to a funded PhD program, had a VA internship and a VA postdoc, which certainly played a role in my ending up with a VA job. I was a strong student but not a superstar -- I think I'm fairly representative of the average PhD student in terms of CV. All the members of my PhD cohort are happily employed, making in the same range as I. The same is true for my internship and post-doc cohorts.

Would I do it again? In a heartbeat.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

You guys just base your salary reports of lawyers and other professionals based on anectodal evidence AND catastrophic media reports. Let's look at the salary surveys for psychologists and lawyers from the same source (BLS.gov). Sure, they may underestimate for big citiies but if they do then they underestimate for psychologists as well. So let's assume its an underestimation for both. Here is the data:

In May 2008, the median annual wages of all wage-and-salaried lawyers were $110,590. The middle half of the occupation earned between $74,980 and $163,320. Median annual wages in the industries employing the largest numbers of lawyers in May 2008 were:

Management of companies and enterprises $145,770 Federal Executive Branch 126,080 Legal services 116,550 Local government 82,590 State government 78,540


FOR CLINICAL, COUNSELING, AND SCHOOL PSYCHOLOGISTS:

Percentile wage estimates for this occupation:
Percentile 10% 25% 50%
(Median) 75% 90% Hourly Wage $18.76 $24.21 $32.12 $41.47 $52.24 Annual Wage (2) $39,010 $50,360 $66,810 $86,250 $108,670

IN 2008, THE MEDIAN FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS IS 66,810 WHILE FOR LAWYERS ITS 110,000. BOTTOM LINE: WE ARE STILL WAY UNDERPAID EVEN COMPARED TO OTHER PROFESSIONS THAT ARE SUFFERING. WHY AREN'T WE MORE OUTRAGED ABOUT THIS?

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

25-30k for a post-doc who is unlicensed and who is essentially still in training is one thing. But no licensed ph.d. Or psy.d. Will be making that kind of salary. I have a master's degree, live in rural appalachia and work in community mental health- the most lowly paying kind of organization in this field in one of the most low paying regions of the country. I make much much more than that range. Ba level case managers who don't do therapy get paid in that range at my agency.

starting salary of 25-35k is for clinical post-docs. I consider this a starting salary because at this point we already have our phd/psyd. Yes, this is an unlicesed salary, but i don't consider us still "in training" because you have the phd already, even though you still need the hours.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

[

This is my first post here -- had to chime in and provide another voice to the "positive" end of the spectrum.

I am 4 years post-licensure, working full time at a VA, earning over $90K. I specialize, but there are more generalists (read: psychologists doing outpatient psychotherapy) in my hospital than specialists. Based on the GS scale, I'll probably top out around $110K, which is certainly much less than I could make in private practice. However, the job security, flexibility (clinical work, staff education/training, and a bit of research) and fantastic benefits more than make up for the salary difference.

I agree that one can do okay as a psychologist. However, most of the people on this board who post that they are successful are working at VA hospitals or in neuropsychology. We know that the federal government pays the most for psychologists in salary surveys.

You guys represent the top 85-90% in income for psychologists. VAs, however, only account for about 10% of psychologists or less. The typical psychologist is not at a VA.

I'd like to hear from people who are in counseling centers or in private practice are are doing this well. I doubt that most are.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

25 k can't be considered starting pay for a psychologist. That's internship. It is disingenuous to compare that to your physician friends that are done with residency. Finish postdoc/licensure. That's your starting salary.

Btw, the average lawyer makes about what the average psychologist does.

Physician friends out of residency are earning 200K plus. You can't even compare this to a psychologist income even with 20 years of experience on average. Yes, 25K is starting salary for some post-docs in clinical psychology, but it does range from 25-45K, which i believe is still really underpaid given 6 years of school.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

The people who graduated 5 years ago and post on this forum are also not representative of the job market sine 2008, the current recession.

Another way to examine the job market is to look at the number of listings for psychologists on popular sites, like the APA psych careers search engine or state psychological associations.

Looking at these search engines, shows a more realistic and bleak picture which is consistent with what many recent graduates are actually experiencing. For example, there are like 5,000 clinical psychology PhD/PsyD graduates each year. However, if you look at job search engines like the APA psych careers, all of New York State only has 24 jobs (includes research, clinical etc.) and all of philadelphia only has 8 positions. In total, there are only about 300 positions posted on the APA career forum, which is a nationally known forum for job postings. This shows the pretty bleak picture that recent graduates are faced with.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Thought I'd throw my two cents in here so the whole post isn't doom & gloom...

Just as a disclaimer, this is all based on my personal experience living in a wealthier, yet more expensive, city on the east coast that more or less was not hit hard by the economic crisis.

I have been working in the psych field for a while now and work with a very large network of psychologists. I know the ones that get hired on fresh out of internship are starting in the 75-80,000 range and continue to go up from there. Many that I work with make well over 100 grand a year. These are people who are mainly clinicians and don't work in private practice or sometimes have a small PP on the side or teach as adjuncts. That being said I also know professors (who are tenured) that make over 100 grand a year also. It definitely takes longer and is hard work but i feel that if you have decided you want to become a professor you would check out the pay scale and it's potential prior to committing to a grad program.

I understand the argument that lawyers and doctors, who I'm assuming we use as examples because we feel like we're on the same level as them, may make more money. But frankly I didn't want to be a lawyer or a doctor, I wanted to be a psychologist. Almost anyone who is smart enough to get into a doctoral psych program would have been smart enough to get into law school or med school and chose not to. I agree that we should be compensated for the work we do, but I also think that there are many that are and not everyone in the field is in a monetary crisis. I just don't feel it's fair that some people will read this thread and potentially be scared off because it makes it seem like you will never make any money.

You are posting about a wealthy city on the east coast that was not hit by the economic crisis---this is like 1% of US cities. In 95%+ of US cities/counties, people cannot pay even $80 for therapy. Its not realistic for psychologists to get $150 in 99% of the country. The top 1% of psychologists catering to the top 1% is not realistic for most therapists.

Again, people are posting many anomalies on this board that don't represent 99% of psychologists.

 

[Peanut2011]

good stuff = thanks for providing this to the original poster

Here's some more promising news...if you intend to work with the federal govt (VA, BOP, DOE, etc) you are going to be paid based on the GS scale (link: http://www.opm.gov/oca/11tables/indexgs.asp ). As a person with a doctoral degree you start out as an 11-12, once licensed you become a 13-14. That's a pretty substantial amount of money and increases that can be earned within 1-2 years.

Also, if you work as a psychologist for an agency like the BOP or the Marshalls you are considered federal law enforcement and get paid more, there is a whole different scale for them somewhere on the OPM website.

All of that comes with full benefits and a federal retirement. That's not too shabby.

I know it's not the road everyone wants to go down, but there is work out there (the hiring freeze is over) and there is money in that work.

 

[Dream1a]

I think a lot of people are missing the point of my original post.

There IS variability in psychologist's salaries. SOME psychologists earn a decent salary.

Like I mentioned before, doing a degree doesn't entitle you to have a job. But this isn't just any degree, it's a Ph.D and technically is still a professional degree (in comparison to other degrees such as chemistry etc).

The fact that anyone has to try hard to make a decent salary in psychology after all the work seems absolutely ridiculous as it's pretty much a given if you finish your residency in med. And even law is probably more profitable because of its versatility in the job market.

We shouldn't even be having such a conversation because I think the point is moot. I'm surprised that people are still happy with the 100k they earn given that we should be on par with what psychiatrists earn. The fact that many people on here are trying to defend themselves by saying they earn a decent salary is pretty sad considering that it is creating a status quo. You may be earning a decent salary compared to most psychologists, but you sure as hell should be earning a lot more. It's easy to say a salary is decent if most people are making less than you.

I don't know why any of you are justifying what you make, as someone on this post said, you should be outraged at the fact that you're being screwed.

 

[Peanut2011]

yes this is true... I am with you. I am hoping to add posts to SDN like building a better psychology clinic or psychology = the good, the bad, and the ugly (I think there is allot that can be done to make the field better = but is it or should it be on people like us to make it better = that's allot of work). Just come and join me in med school and lets call it a day...

I think a lot of people are missing the point of my original post.

There IS variability in psychologist's salaries. SOME psychologists earn a decent salary.

Like I mentioned before, doing a degree doesn't entitle you to have a job. But this isn't just any degree, it's a Ph.D and technically is still a professional degree (in comparison to other degrees such as chemistry etc).

The fact that anyone has to try hard to make a decent salary in psychology after all the work seems absolutely ridiculous as it's pretty much a given if you finish your residency in med. And even law is probably more profitable because of its versatility in the job market.

We shouldn't even be having such a conversation because I think the point is mute. I'm surprised that people are still happy with the 100k they earn given that we should be on par with what psychiatrists earn. The fact that many people on here are trying to defend themselves by saying they earn a decent salary is pretty sad considering that it is creating a status quo. You may be earning a decent salary compared to most psychologists, but you sure as hell should be earning a lot more. It's easy to say a salary is decent if most people are making less than you.

I don't know why any of you are justifying what you make, as someone on this post said, you should be outraged at the fact that you're being screwed.

 

[Peanut2011]

ref. complacency example of typical psychologist -- see below:

There is no free market in healthcare. It's completely arbitrary. In other countries, eg Italy, all physicians regardless of specialty pull the equivalent of like 60k a year. Young professors in Poland are rating in at a paltry 12 k a year. I understand that in terms of training time and knowledge requirements that I am on par with psychiatrists and other physicians but that is not what determines income. Think about it. In medicine, the most in demand services are primary care, but they don't make the most money. Why? Theres many reasons, but I think a big one is there isn't enough money around for that to be the case.


Also, realize for some of the things we do, there are other fields that many in the public and insurance industries use instead. Cheaper. Lowest common denominator. We also have a quality control problem in our field. Quite frankly, the intellectual and labor exertion to get the minimum bar of entry in psychology is much lower than it is for our physician brethren. We have also flooded the market with folks from lower level training institutions. Why should they make huge money?

The people that I know that are psychologists AND very smart/competent all make nice money. As I don't see it as a free market situation, I find arguing over the compensation especially comparing to some other fields to be a bit arbitrary.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

You guys represent the top 85-90% in income for psychologists. VAs, however, only account for about 10% of psychologists or less. The typical psychologist is not at a VA.

The VA is not the panacea for clinical psychology, it just happens to be one of the largest training opportunities for graduate students and then employment for psychologists.

The problem with the "typical psychologist" coming out now is that more and more do NOT complete APA-acred internships, which handcuffs them when it comes to employment.

 

[psychmama]

I'm not in accord with the doom and gloom group that see psychology as going down the tubes. At the same time, Jon Snow's experience -- that all competent, smart psychologists from good programs are earning a nice living -- is not fully consistent with what I've observed from colleagues a few years ahead of me.

Yes, I know plenty of psychologists making 80-100k a year, but I know many more (from excellent programs and internships) making 50-60k. While I wouldn't say that's poverty level, it's not easy raising a family on 50k/yr in many places in the United States. Where I live, the property taxes alone comprise a good chunk of what an average psychologist makes in a year. And we can't exactly just tell all psychologists to move to outlying areas for a lower cost of living, especially when there's so much need for psychologists in major metropolitan areas.

And while I'm all for thorough training before licensure, I don't think it's fair to expect adults who've given something like 5-6 years of their lives to unpaid/low paid clinical work to continue working for peanuts and justify this by calling it a "postdoc." Yes, I realize there are specializations where a postdoc makes sense (neuro, forensic, e.g.) but these are not the norm, and the specialized postdocs seem to pay better anyway. For the average psychologist coming off internship, I think jurisdictions like MD have the right idea -- do away with the postdoctoral hours (assuming enough hrs were accrued on internship and other predoctoral training) and get on with licensure. At least when licensed, new psychologists can compete in the job market.

I know not everyone will agree with me, but this is my opinion.

 

[Dream1a]

There is no free market in healthcare. It's completely arbitrary. In other countries, eg Italy, all physicians regardless of specialty pull the equivalent of like 60k a year. Young professors in Poland are rating in at a paltry 12 k a year. I understand that in terms of training time and knowledge requirements that I am on par with psychiatrists and other physicians but that is not what determines income. Think about it. In medicine, the most in demand services are primary care, but they don't make the most money. Why? Theres many reasons, but I think a big one is there isn't enough money around for that to be the case.


Also, realize for some of the things we do, there are other fields that many in the public and insurance industries use instead. Cheaper. Lowest common denominator. We also have a quality control problem in our field. Quite frankly, the intellectual and labor exertion to get the minimum bar of entry in psychology is much lower than it is for our physician brethren. We have also flooded the market with folks from lower level training institutions. Why should they make huge money?

The people that I know that are psychologists AND very smart/competent all make nice money. As I don't see it as a free market situation, I find arguing over the compensation especially comparing to some other fields to be a bit arbitrary.

We can't really compare salaries for doctors in Europe and the US, because one is a graduate entry program which is outrageously expensive whereas the other depending on the country can be free and starts from the undergraduate level.

I find it extremely hard to believe that any specialty in italy makes only 60k. A) because italy depending on where you are is expensive and B) if an anesthesiologist is making 60k in italy then s/he is doing something wrong.

The point is NOT that doctors never make lower salaries, but rather, that they have more opportunity to increase their salaries, if they chose to do so.

There will always be a need for doctors, and whether that means a lot more people have to do specialities with lower interest, then so be it. This is the difference with a MD and a JD or Ph.D.

The fact that there are things that people can basically do without having a Ph.D in psychology is disconcerting to say the least. Imagine if someone with a masters degree in health science attempted to do what a doctor does? Why is it not protected like this in psychology?

I think it is fair to compare it to other fields. These fields are not exactly completely opposite, and demand basically the same amount of knowledge and time, as you say. Besides if we do not compare salaries to other fields than what do we compare it to ? This is the problem that people have. They think their salary is decent because a psychologist could be making more than other psychologists, but compared to a psychiatrist it is nothing. A status quo develops when people decide that this is a decent salary.

Why shouldn't we compare a psychologist's salary to a psychiatrist's one? It's even harder to become a clinical psychologist than a psychiatrist. Med school and psych residency are easier (to be admitted) than entry to clinical psychology.

People from lower level institutions shouldn't be making huge money. This is where the salary difference between MDs from harvard or a third tier medical school show. They may not mean anything in terms of what they know, but the MD in harvard definitely have better chances to better residencies and opportunities. So, too, should this work in psychology.

I propose that a clinical psychologist's salary be :
25% lower quartile - 65 - 120k
Mean = 120 - 180k
25% higher quartile = 180k-250k+

I am arguing that you should be commanding a much greater salary, why would someone be aversive to that is beyond me?

If you argue that it's not realistic, then i'd counterargue that this status quo has been created from the start, and won't be broken until we command a change.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Yes, I haven't applied to any of those yet. I know getting the type of job I want will not be easy, and I don't even want to think about the complications of relationship considerations and all that. It is entirely possible finding a job will be a craptacular misery. However, I feel pretty good about my qualifications, and that's all I can worry about for now. How many pubs did you have when you applied? Where did you go for grad and what is their history of match/post-doc/job achievements? I definitely have concerns, especially since we can't all be better than average, but when I review how people from my program have typically done, I don't worry. I just bust my butt and get that CV nice and plump.

i went to a reputable PhD program that has about a 2% acceptance rate and completed a very solid APA internship. My CV is above average compared to people in my program even so i landed lots of interviews for internship etc. Match rates are about 95% for APA internships from my program. PhD programs don't keep data about job placements, but I know that many of my collegues who are really competent and also have business skills are underpaid and are not earning a comfortable living after graduating. Many are very disappointed with the salary. These are people who are more interested in clinical work though. Its easy to say that people who are competent will be successful financially, but like Psychmamma i'm not seeing this from the majority of people that I've been networking with who are early career psychologists. I don't know many people in the neuropsychology world, but i'm assuming that they do better.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Hmm. I went the neuro route, but I see postdoc as a pretty good analogy for residency/fellowships. Many physicians I know do 4 years of residency plus 1 - 2 year fellowships to further specialize. That's why a lot of physicians say not to do medicine for the money. The mindset is different than the JD/MBA crowd. 4 years medical school, 4 years residency, 2 years fellowship, that's 10 years post undergrad training. . . and there are specialties that require more than that (e.g., neurosurgery). These residencies often start in the 30-50K range. We're complaining about 1 - 2 year postdocs (on average). We've essentially got 2-3 "residency" years (internship +1 - 2 years of postdoc). The pay for these varies substantially. In any case, the money has to be factored into the educational choice. A license, early, might help with those years, but we'd also have to prevent people from running off and just practicing without finishing their training, which means a fairly complicated restructuring of how our field works.

Jon Snow, I still don't get the comparison with physicians as struggling as much. Psychologists are not even in a close salary range at all. Residents I know were paid 50-60K during residency, plus they got subsidized housing, free transportation to the hospital. Many moonlight during their residency and make $60-100 per hour doing so, so they can pull in 6 figures during residency as well. Plus, once they specialize starting salaries are 200K and many are making 500K as specialists in big cities so if they stick it out at least there is the financial reward. If you include time to complete a clinical Phd plus internship and post-doc, we also complete 8 years of training. However, our internship only pays 25,000, post-doc can be as low as 25K, and then once we are licensed many clinical psychologists are still making 50K. Plus, we didn't even include the fact that it is way more competitive to land an internship and post-doc than a psychiatry residency program.

The fact is You can be a mediocre to bad psychiatrist (physician) who went to a ****ty school and still make an excellent salary and have job stability. You can even work part-time or spend half your time doing therapy and still make more than clinical psychologists. As a clinical psychologist, you can be really competent and land an APA internship, and still not make a comfortable salary (I don't consider 50K a comfortable salary for a licensed psychologist just graduating nor 25-30K a reasonable salary for a clinical post-doc).

While i don't regret getting a degree in this field, i certainly cannot reasonably recommend that anyone get a PhD or PsyD in clinical psychology. In every field there is some risk, but i think in our field there is such a high chance that a) you will not land an APA internship after completing 5-6 years of school (more than 25% of people don't in our field even from excellent programs, the pathetic match rate includes people who land APA and non-apa internships); b) Many will face significant licensure barriers or need several years to get licensed due to lack of post-docs that allow one to accrue hours or ridiculous state laws that require like 4 hours of supervision per week or extra classes etc. c) Many clinical psychologists will not earn a comfortable living.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

I'm so tired of seeing these doom and gloom threads. From what I've been reading, it seems like many of the people posting about dissatisfaction want to do clinical work and nothing else. For example, this Peanut person wants to do only therapy with depressed and anxious individuals. If this is all you want to do, then you were better off getting a Master's, given that you have no interest in utilizing most of the training that getting a Ph.D. affords you. It seems that the people who are interested in keeping their hands in research, administration, and other clinical activities that are not strictly patient care have higher salaries and higher job satisfaction (likely because the master's level providers are providing the same services for less money, hence driving down salaries for clinical work in general). It's no coincidence that these people are also utilizing a greater percentage of their doctoral training.

For what it's worth to the OP, I don't regret it. Grad school was certainly stressful at times, but that is par for the course. I'm doing an NRSA postdoc, so the stipend isn't fabulous since the NIH sets it, but for me the value of being trained by renowned researchers makes up for it. I also wouldn't call the stipend completely unlivable, given that I went to a funded Ph.D. program and didn't take out ridiculous amounts of loans. After I'm finished with postdoc, I'm really not worried about job prospects or making a good salary. Most of the people that come out of my program seem to do just fine as well.

Getting defensive and accepting the status quo like this is the reason why we are still the most underpaid professionals with graduate degrees. If people don't think there is a problem are are okay with living on a 30K salary, then we are not going to do anything to protect psychotherapy and assessment from master's level providers etc. We shouldn't have to go into research and administrative work because we gave up on making a living doing psychotherapy! Physicians were able to protect their practices by limiting what NP/PA degrees can do, which is why many NP/PA's cannot practice independently. We should have worked towards regulating psychotherapy and limiting what MSW/MA/NP/MFT providers can do and maybe require that they be supervised by licensed psychologists if they want to practice psychotherapy since they don't have the same level of training. Why shouldn't psychotherapy and assessment be restricted to doctoral level clinicians or master's providers who are under supervision by psychologists? MSW/MFT therapists can do supportive psychotherapy and case management, and can be supervised by licensed psychologists if they want to practice in private practice.

 

[cara susanna]

But what exactly can we do about it?

It's possible to push for change but still be okay with one's own situation. It means that you are thinking of things beyond just yourself. A lot of the people who are being accused of complacency on this thread are highly involved with advocacy for our field. It's just that APA is not really getting the job done and talking about it on message boards isn't really going to accomplish anything other than scaring prospective students away from the field.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

But what exactly can we do about it?

It's possible to push for change but still be okay with one's own situation. It means that you are thinking of things beyond just yourself. A lot of the people who are being accused of complacency on this thread are highly involved with advocacy for our field. It's just that APA is not really getting the job done and talking about it on message boards isn't really going to accomplish anything other than scaring prospective students away from the field.

Well, i think the first barrier towards change is that as a profession we can't agree on things or be united. That's why its difficult for us to get prescription rights or get rid of the post-doc year to reduce barriers for early career psychologists. The AMA is powerful because doctors can all agree that they don't want other professions prescribing drugs. Many psychologists are against supporting things that would increase our value and compensation or reduce restrictions for early career psychologists. Most psychologists would probably be uncomfortable restricting many types of psychotherapy to doctoral level training like psychscientist and many others on this board. Its sad to me that we can't even advocate for our well-being. The only thing that we seem to be able to agree on is that we need to do something about the internship crisis, but can't seem to agree on how to do this as well.

 

[psypipe]

But what exactly can we do about it?

It's possible to push for change but still be okay with one's own situation. It means that you are thinking of things beyond just yourself. A lot of the people who are being accused of complacency on this thread are highly involved with advocacy for our field. It's just that APA is not really getting the job done and talking about it on message boards isn't really going to accomplish anything other than scaring prospective students away from the field.

well It definetly scares THE HELL out of people(like me).

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Just because my perspective differs from yours, doesn't make me defensive (or complacent). Frankly, in the interests of access to care, I don't think it's particularly right to take a position that Master's level providers should be prohibited from practicing therapy. I agree that they are not trained to provide assessment, however Master's level providers CAN be trained to proficiently deliver evidence-based interventions, and because their cost is lower, this increases access to care. I think that Master's level practice should be more regulated, as there are definitely types of cases that are probably outside of their proficiency scope. However, requiring supervision then raises the cost of care because you are then paying for both the Master's level person in psychotherapy and the doctoral level person for supervision. Given the state of access to mental healthcare in this country already, I don't think this would be a good move.

Sorry for using the word defensive. I don't think that is an accurate portrayal of your post. Yes, i think that some master's level providers can be trained to deliver evidenced based practices, but should be trained and supervised by licensed psychologists nonetheless since we are really the experts on EBTs. I don't think they should be practicing psychotherapy in private practices independently. I think that private practice is what needs to be regulated more on the master's level in particular by either requiring ongoing supervision by a licensed psychologist or completing post-doctoral training programs that are on par with doctoral training. I don't think this would increase the cost of psychotherapy or access. There are too many psychotherapists in private practice as is so this may lower the number of master's level providers and even out the supply-demand problem. Access to mental health care is a problem primarily because insurance companies and hospitals don't want to pay for it even though they do have the money to do so and would rather prescribe drugs since they are cheaper in the short-term (plus there is the whole drug lobby issue). Its cheaper for them to hire one psychiatrist who can see 50-60 patients per day then provide psychotherapy.

 

[Ollie123]

I think it's an oversimplification to suggest that people taking a position opposite yours on these issues don't care to advocate for the field. I see my opposition to RxP as advocating for our unique training in assessment and behavioral interventions

This.

I don't know the intentions of the folks involved in this particular discussion, but all too often the folks calling for "unity in advocacy" neglect that they have an opinion as well and if they believe that strongly in unity they are welcome to drop their own views and come to the oppositions side. I don't see too many posts saying we shouldn't advocate for anything - rather I see people emphasizing different areas of focus for advocacy. RE: RxP, the reality is that we do not have unlimited resources and time. My belief is that if APA had put in half the effort into advocating for better reimbursement for behavioral interventions, further work on the cost-effectiveness of behavioral interventions, better defining scope of practice, training requirements, mandates of evidence-bases, etc. as it did into the largely unsuccessful (thus far) RxP movement, we would be in a better position overall, and far more psychologists would benefit than the relative minority that are likely to pursue the additional training to prescribe.

Don't think that's directed at you in particular, ClinicalPHD5, its just something that sprang to mind since it seems to be pervasive among certain posters here. Its one thing to call for unity, but the folks calling for it have often been the most unwilling to bend on their views of how we should be advocating. Some seem to use it as an easy out when they have extremely poor arguments for their viewpoints, not realizing that they are also perfectly free to "unite" with the other side (again, that isn't at you in particular).

 

[cara susanna]

My belief is that if APA had put in half the effort into advocating for better reimbursement for behavioral interventions, further work on the cost-effectiveness of behavioral interventions, better defining scope of practice, training requirements, mandates of evidence-bases, etc. as it did into the largely unsuccessful (thus far) RxP movement, we would be in a better position overall, and far more psychologists would benefit than the relative minority that are likely to pursue the additional training to prescribe.

I've heard this view from other professionals in the field as well, and I personally agree with it.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Which is what seems to underlie the RxP movement for a lot of people. Psychologists aren't getting reimbursed for what they do, so they're willing to play the 15 minute med check game in order to make money. If you want to talk about advocacy, how about advocating for healthcare and insurance legislation with regard to mental health? Insurance reimbursement isn't the only thing limiting access to care, given the large percentage of people with mental health issues who have no insurance to begin with.

moving towards a universal health care system won't rectify anything. What i'm seeing is that even if people have health insurance there is no parity with medical care. Many insurance companies require prior authorizations only for mental health visits not physiicans visits, restrict sessions to a certain number, only cover for certain mental health diagnoses, require one to fill out assessment forms periodically, and do not pay providers on time or give them their full fee.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

I think it's an oversimplification to suggest that people taking a position opposite yours on these issues don't care to advocate for the field. I see my opposition to RxP as advocating for our unique training in assessment and behavioral interventions and taking an ethical position against saying that we are qualified to prescribe medications with the current suggested training approaches the RxP movement is pushing when I don't believe that to be the case. I think the difference here is between those who are motivated by financial gain and those who are not. I have little incentive to support things that I don't feel would be right just to increase my salary.

I also think its an oversimplifiation to suggest that people who are advocating for restricting our scope of practice or R x P are motivated by financial gain only. I am not advocating for R x P personally nor am i against it. My position is that we should have more equal pay with physicians, and i'm puzzled why psychologists are not fighting for these issues. I also think that we should be uniting to defend our scope of expertise (psychotherapy and assessment) from other providers.

My position stems from the ongoing injustice and unfairness that psychology graduate students and early career psychologists are constantly subjected to from the whole internship crisis, licensure barriers, many years of unpaid clinical practicums, and poor compensation. Why aren't we fighting to preserve our scope of practice from other providers? Why have psychologists themselves made it more difficult for other psychologists to get licensed (in some states the laws are draconian) instead of advocating against poorly trained professionals from practicing? In another field, these restrictions would have already gone to the supreme court in the form of a lawsuit.

I personally think that the fight for R x P is misguided and inefficient since the AMA lobby is so much more powerful, but i think we should be using our energy to protect our areas of expertise from master's level providers and demand equal pay with other professionals that have similar training requirements.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

It's still a pretty atrocious percentage of people that have any kind of mental health coverage. Ignoring that often the people with the most need are the ones without insurance is convenient to your argument because to increase access to care for those individuals requires cheaper services, regardless of who is doling them out. In any case, I don't see RxP being the answer to the situation you describe above either, and I did not say that you should advocate for universal coverage, but merely that perhaps advocacy in other areas might be a better use of time and resources as Ollie suggested earlier.

I never advocated for R x P on this thread. I'm advocating for equality with other professions and that we restrict other providers from practicing within our areas of expertise (psychotherapy and assessment). If you are concerned about fairness, you would also be concerned about all the people who are providing psychotherapy without adequate training or coursework in private practice with master's degrees or no degrees. Yes, advocacy would be a better use of our time. but again, i don't think that psychologists are comfortable advocating for restricting master level providers from practicing within our area of expertise without appropriate supervision. Maybe psychologists are uncomfortable with being assertive or taking care of themselves? I don't know why we are not outraged about these issues.

It seems like psychologists are comfortable creating barriers towards internship and licensure against other psychologists (who created the AAPI application and requires insane additional requirements in some states to get licensed?), but won't fight other fields?

 

[Ollie123]

and demand equal pay with other professionals that have similar training requirements.

Fair enough, but the question is how do we get there? Protecting certain areas is one path that I think has some merit, though I think we need some better quality control on our front as well (and actually think doing so would also help differentiate us while simultaneously reducing the over-supply in certain areas). We definitely have a few posters (again, not necessarily you) who seem to believe advocacy is simply a matter of yelling "Pay me more" loudly enough, and picking an arbitrary value for our salaries that is bigger than it is currently. That's now how economics works. Defending our scope is one area, but much of the discussion seems to center on completely arbitrary definitions of what our training is "worth". There are all kinds of jobs where years in training is out of whack with the salary, we are not at all alone in that nor are we anywhere near the worst off.

That doesn't mean I don't think we have a right to complain or that we shouldn't....we absolutely should be. However, a focused approach is necessary and one that is driven by legitimate, believable arguments and a realistic approach to improvement rather than anger and tears over how "unfair" life is, which seems to be the more common case on the board.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

My belief is that if APA had put in half the effort into advocating for better reimbursement for behavioral interventions, further work on the cost-effectiveness of behavioral interventions, better defining scope of practice, training requirements, mandates of evidence-bases, etc. as it did into the largely unsuccessful (thus far) RxP movement, we would be in a better position overall, and far more psychologists would benefit than the relative minority that are likely to pursue the additional training to prescribe.

Yes, I agree with this statement above and believe our efforts so far are misdirected. My argument is that in order to really define our scope of practice we are going to have to restrict what other professionals with master's degrees can/cannot do. Defining our scope of practice isn't going to do anything if someone with any M.A. degree can become licensed and there is no regulation regarding what type of psychotherapy he/she can provide and what assessments they are able to do. it seems like psychologists are uncomfortable with this idea and that is what i feel really puzzled and sad about.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Fair enough, but the question is how do we get there? Protecting certain areas is one path that I think has some merit, though I think we need some better quality control on our front as well (and actually think doing so would also help differentiate us while simultaneously reducing the over-supply in certain areas).

yes, protecting our scope from m.a. level encroachment and quality control on our front are both good starts, but these areas don't seem widely popular. For example, the APA continues to consistently accredit schools with ridiculously poor outcomes (e.g. have you seen the argosy stats in some states?). If this was so widely unpopular among psychologists, then why does it continue? Why are we supporting the APA then?

 

[Huxwell]

A few things:

-Yes, psychologists are underpaid. However, being paid on par with physicians would take a fundamental change in how Americans view (and value) psychologists vs. doctors. Physicians are put on a pedestal, psychologists aren't. You have to consider how the health care system is structured. Bottom line: if you want to make huge money, don't become a psychologist.

-A lot of this debate comes down to your program. If you have to pay to go to school, no I do not think it's worth it. If you can go to school for free and receive a stipend, I definitely think it's worth it.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

A few things:


-A lot of this debate comes down to your program. If you have to pay to go to school, no I do not think it's worth it. If you can go to school for free and receive a stipend, I definitely think it's worth it.

Sure, but that would eliminate most clinical psychology programs these days. The average debt load at the time of internship applications has increased to $85,000 (this is even before graduating, so its really like 100,000 as mean). About half of people in our field take out more than 100,000 in loans (44%, according to the match survey). This means that the average clinical psychologist is going to be struggling financially and not saving for retirement.

 

[cara susanna]

Well, that would open up jobs, wouldn't it?

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Well, that would open up jobs, wouldn't it?

I'm not sure if i'm following, do you mean the job of debt collector? Debt collectors certainly have lots more demand these days

 

[Ollie123]

Sure, but that would eliminate most clinical psychology programs these days. The average debt load at the time of internship applications has increased to $85,000 (this is even before graduating, so its really like 100,000 as mean). About half of people in our field take out more than 100,000 in loans (44%, according to the match survey). This means that the average clinical psychologist is going to be struggling financially and not saving for retirement.

Perhaps a fine point, but that is actually a minority of schools, they just graduate an obscene number of students. These are typically the schools you mentioned that also have obscenely poor outcomes. The vast majority of schools still provide (relatively) full tuition and a stipend. Many people still need to take out some loans, but there is definitely a dichotomy.

We can argue what that means for access to care, but I actually think a large portion of folks at these schools would likely be pursuing clinical master's instead - something I think would be far more appropriate in many cases.

I think Cara was just making the point that we have some issues with the job market being flooded right now. Its pretty tough to argue for higher pay when we simultaneously have 1) 100+ people applying for every job opening and 2) An educational system that basically implies anyone is capable of learning to do what we do. There's a variety of reasons for our low pay, but I think many of the commonplace ones are just temporary band-aids until these issues are corrected. Protecting our scope of practice from mid-levels is a temporary fix if we are going to continue trying to turn psychology into a mid-level profession.

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

Perhaps a fine point, but that is actually a minority of schools, they just graduate an obscene number of students. These are typically the schools you mentioned that also have obscenely poor outcomes. The vast majority of schools still provide (relatively) full tuition and a stipend. Many people still need to take out some loans, but there is definitely a dichotomy.

We can argue what that means for access to care, but I actually think a large portion of folks at these schools would likely be pursuing clinical master's instead - something I think would be far more appropriate in many cases.

we can't argue that this is a minority issue if half the graduates these days are taking out more than 100K in loans. Plus, 80K is the median, mean is higher. This is the new reality of clinical psychology graduates and is not just a professional school issue. I doubt that professional schools account for 50% of new graduates (that would surprise me). Most of the new graduates are in a pretty bad place financially--very scary and sad. I would be so anxious if i graduated with anything near 100,000 in debt.