PhD/PsyD Ask A Recent Graduate of a Professional School Anything

[jdhessin]

edit: Point already made

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

From what I had seen at my time at the El Paso, Texas V.A, with the exception of the C&P Department which had a neuropsychologist, the job duties of the staff psychologists were identical to LPCs and LCSWs: Assessments, Evidence Based Treaetments, Psychotherapy. Am I missing something about how our skill sets are different?

This wasn't my experience. I interned at a well known midwestern VA and the psychologists were distinctly different than the mid-level providers across service lines and programs. A large % were in leadership positions (e.g. director of the substance abuse program), and their teams made up of counselors, social workers, psych interns, etc. There were other staff psychologists providers 100% clinical services, but their duties included: C&Ps, capacity evals, supervising doctoral trainees, etc. The blurring of lines definitely happens in some settings, which is why psychologists need to be aware of scope of practice concerns and "the same, but different" claims by other providers.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

This wasn't my experience. I interned at a well known midwestern VA and the psychologists were distinctly different than the mid-level providers across service lines and programs. A large % were in leadership positions (e.g. director of the substance abuse program), and their teams made up of counselors, social workers, psych interns, etc. There were other staff psychologists providers 100% clinical services, but their duties included: C&Ps, capacity evals, supervising doctoral trainees, etc. The blurring of lines definitely happens in some settings, which is why psychologists need to be aware of scope of practice concerns and "the same, but different" claims by other providers.

I think it's also going to vary substantially by VA. I've worked in one that was in a less geographically-desirable location, but it was also very near a large and well-respected academic medical center with which it had significant clinical and training relationships, so its setup was very similar to what you've mentioned and what's at my current VA. That being said, there are a lot of very strong VAs in the midwest. Conversely, at a VA that has trouble pulling well-trained psychologists (or providers in general), and/or that is resource-strapped (which may be similar to the one in which edieb worked), I could certainly see significant line-blurring occurring.

As those of us in neuropsych know, it happens more than it should in our specialty (e.g., psychologists purporting to have competence in neuropsychology, which in actuality probably inlcuded one practicum placement and/or an internship rotation). Thus, I could see it happening across non-prescribing MH as a whole as well.

 

[Peacemaker36]

It's surprising how many posters on this list are neuropsychologists who work in the VA system. I appreciate hearing all of your perspectives from that part of the field. It's worth noting, of course, that only about 5% of U.S. psychologists work in the VA system (according to APA). Of that 5%, I am not sure what percentage are neuropsychologists.

 

[erg923]

It's surprising how many posters on this list are neuropsychologists who work in the VA system. I appreciate hearing all of your perspectives from that part of the field. It's worth noting, of course, that only about 5% of U.S. psychologists work in the VA system (according to APA). Of that 5%, I am not sure what percentage are neuropsychologists.

?

There are 2 regular posters on here who are VA neuropsychologists. 4 regular posters from the VA system. There are probably 30 regular posters.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Agreed. There may be more of us that trained within the VA system for internship and/or fellowship….as the VA is one of the largest (or largest, depending on how you classify it) single training option and employer of psychologists. This is particularly of note when talking about APA-acred. internships, as it is a major avenue of training that will be excluded for anyone who doesn't come from an APA-acred. program and APA-acred. internship.

I've worked in one that was in a less geographically-desirable location, but it was also very near a large and well-respected academic medical center with which it had significant clinical and training relationships, so its setup was very similar to what you've mentioned and what's at my current VA. That being said, there are a lot of very strong VAs in the midwest. .

This was also true of the VA where I interned. We had a top-notch AMC in the area and 2 of the top clinical/counseling programs in the country, so the pipeline of trainees and faculty kept the VA stocked with very capable psychologists who brought strong academic underpinnings to clinical practice. And then there was me….not from the area and not from a powerhouse program...representing the underdogs!

 

[Peacemaker36]

Agreed. There may be more of us that trained within the VA system for internship and/or fellowship….as the VA is one of the largest (or largest, depending on how you classify it) single training option and employer of psychologists. This is particularly of note when talking about APA-acred. internships, as it is a major avenue of training that will be excluded for anyone who doesn't come from an APA-acred. program and APA-acred. internship.



This was also true of the VA where I interned. We had a top-notch AMC in the area and 2 of the top clinical/counseling programs in the country, so the pipeline of trainees and faculty kept the VA stocked with very capable psychologists who brought strong academic underpinnings to clinical practice. And then there was me….not from the area and not from a powerhouse program...representing the underdogs!

Interesting. On the East Coast, I don't think that's the case - there are an abundance of teaching hospitals and community mental health centers, and I believe that's where the lion's share of APA-accredited internships are housed. There are VA internship and practicum placements, of course, and they are among the coveted spots for trainees. But I would not say that most East Coast psychologists have a VA background.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

It's difficult in conceptualizing "unbiased" perspectives/ professional opinions on this forum when as erg pointed out, 30 regular posters essentially post within the scope of this profession and a good chunk of them typically hold the same perspectives on many topics. After speaking to a good deal of other forum posters here in private, speaking in private with these people has yielded a more diverse crowd in terms of countering the contended arguments that are inherently anti Psy.D. I think this board would do well/develop into a more well-rounded source of information if in fact people felt safe in posting their opposing or differing arguments to those who oppose the Psy.D, otherwise, we are getting a highly clustered sample of similar perspectives on varying subjects, and that counters the idea of being a true academic. This board in and of itself is not the most representative of our profession, yet the "regulars" typically frame this to be as such, directly or indirectly.

I think it's exciting to start seeing some new members finally getting involved in the discussion process, whether they were apprehensive before or just plain new, this forum would do well to get people in from all facets of our field of study (e.g. FSPS graduates, Psy.D. graduates, Ph.D. programs, non-traditional, ethnically diverse, regionally secluded, etc.). Regardless of whether this profession is "in demand" as deemed by BLS or whomever, there exists a large body of people who want to get into this profession for reasons we may not know or yet understand, I think we owe to everyone (ourselves included) to be open to this and to entertain perspectives that may not be just a conservative perspective.

*That's right, this liberal wants a seat at the table *

 

[MCParent]

I think this board would do well/develop into a more well-rounded source of information if in fact people felt safe in posting their opposing or differing arguments to those who oppose the Psy.D, otherwise, we are getting a highly clustered sample of similar perspectives on varying subjects, and that counters the idea of being a true academic.

People can post anything they want. I continue to not understand how on earth it is possible to "not feel safe" posting to an anonymous internet message board. That feels like irrationality bordering on delusion to me. It is definitely not a healthy professional, or even adult, orientation to the world in general, or this sort of thing in particular.

e.g., If someone comes on the board and says, "I want to get a PsyD because PsyDs get more clinical hours," then they are corrected with the APPIC data, the adult response is to adjust one's position to accommodate the new info (and not to throw a fit about being disagreed with, as happened on my Occupy facebook group once).

Frankly what I hear many people say when they say, "I don't feel safe posting" is "Someone disagreed with me and that made me feel bad and making me feel bad is morally wrong."

 

[psych84]

I was surprised to find out recently that my local hospital (Canada) had an Argosy psychologist lol

 

[erg923]

Cogneuro,

Perhaps you would be willing to share the incorrect information posted by the phd crowd that was corrected by your backchannel discussions. Most of our opinions are shaped by data, as well as demands of our jobs, so perhaps you could enlighten us on the aspects which we have not provided accurate information? If you really think our perspective is so flawed and "not representative of the field," I assume you feel compelled to provide accurate information for would be applicants?

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

People can post anything they want. I continue to not understand how on earth it is possible to "not feel safe" posting to an anonymous internet message board. That feels like irrationality bordering on delusion to me. It is definitely not a healthy professional, or even adult, orientation to the world in general, or this sort of thing in particular.

e.g., If someone comes on the board and says, "I want to get a PsyD because PsyDs get more clinical hours," then they are corrected with the APPIC data, the adult response is to adjust one's position to accommodate the new info (and not to throw a fit about being disagreed with, as happened on my Occupy facebook group once).

Frankly what I hear many people say when they say, "I don't feel safe posting" is "Someone disagreed with me and that made me feel bad and making me feel bad is morally wrong."

So, I would disagree with this. You are taking on a "take it or leave it" scenario. Would you say that there are no others on this forum who have in the past, made these same arguments? From your response, especially in context to your Facebook comment, it seems like you have. Lastly, it can come off as offensive calling other people delusional if they don't hold the same perspective as you as a professional, that is a pretty judgmental attitude to have.

Erg: The data is not the issue, at least with my argument, it is the fact that while you (not you specifically) claim to be only professing "data-driven results" you are also interjecting your personal opinions within it, so then it becomes a tangled mess/ hybrid of the two.

 

[erg923]

Well of course we have opinions based on the data. Data suggests things. Conclusion, trends, probabilities, etc. Humans interpret data to draw conclusions about larger samples. This is how science works.

What exactly are suggesting we do differently? Post the APPIC data and not form a conclusion?! What the pint of gathering data on a variable if you aren't wanting/willing to use it?!

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Cogneuro,

Perhaps you would be willing to share the incorrect information posted by the phd crowd that was corrected by your backchannel discussions. Most of our opinions are shaped by data, as well as demands of our jobs, so perhaps you could enlighten us on the aspects which we have not provided accurate information? If you really think our perspective is so flawed and "not representative of the field," I assume you feel compelled to provide accurate information for would be applicants?

I take into consideration much more than what a standard APA data set would probably display. From previous posts by you and others, it is pretty clear that APA is not exactly on its game in terms of providing the most robust analyses of our profession, nor accounting for or unable to measure phenomena that while important to consider, not feasible in measuring at the moment for XYZ reason. I won't name names, but at least 4-5 people who have graduated from a Psy.D. program have informed me of their circumstances as to why they attended the Psy.D. program (regionally feasible, accepted lower GRE/GPA, particular clinical emphasis, etc.), all valid, at least to them and apparently not to you or MCParent.

 

[MCParent]

So, I would disagree with this. You are taking on a "take it or leave it" scenario. Would you say that there are no others on this forum who have in the past, made these same arguments? From your response, especially in context to your Facebook comment, it seems like you have.

I don't understand the question. Are you asking if some incorrect beliefs are posted multiple times? Yes. They're typically dealt with the same way consistently (i.e., posting the relevant data).

Lastly, it can come off as offensive calling other people delusional if they don't hold the same perspective as you as a professional, that is a pretty judgmental attitude to have.

lol of course it is judgmental. I am making a judgment that that level of hypersensitivity is going to be a hinderance to professional and personal growth (being a good supervisee, reading peer reviews without abject shock and horror). I suppose it is possible that for some, this level of sensitivity is restricted only to their online posts on an anonymous message board, but I wouldn't bet on those actuarial tables.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Erg: The data is not the issue, at least with my argument, it is the fact that while you (not you specifically) claim to be only professing "data-driven results" you are also interjecting your personal opinions within it, so then it becomes a tangled mess/ hybrid of the two.

It is a fair critique to want to make sure opinion and fact don't get conflated, though I think most posters try and separate the two out. In the past I have pointed out when the two get mixed and passed off as "fact", though that tends to be mostly out-of-left-field posters who push back when their opinion isn't validated by the data. I know when I post I try and provide a citation to APPIC data (or similar) when talking about match rates. My opinion is implied in my post, but someone looking at the data should be able to see the difference.

 

[erg923]

I'm sure people pick programs for all kinds of reasons. What's your point? I'm not sure what mean by "valid" in that can text either? You mean, "understandable"?

Again, ignoring objective data because of individual circumstances is fantastic and all at the INDIVIDUAL level but it's really not how science works. The goal is to be as robust as possible, right? Actuarial vs clinical judgment issue you are pushing here. That was settled years ago.

 

[psych84]

program have informed me of their circumstances as to why they attended the Psy.D. program (regionally feasible, accepted lower GRE/GPA, particular clinical emphasis, etc.), all valid, at least to them and apparently not to you or MCParent.

But you and I are not the important ones here, it is the field. The field of psychology is a lot more important than you and I. People who are in charge set the standards, and we try to attain those standards. If we can't do it, we move on and try to do something else in life. (or at least we should) We think of the field and not ourselve because we want the best for the patients.

I wouldn't want a doctor who couldn't cut it with the GPA/MCAT, or who didn't think it was important enough to move to get a better education. Yes, that is a judgement, but we make judgements all the time.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Right, but when you have such a sample turnout of repetitive posters giving the same perspectives on every situation...while the only intentions were to provide pure data, the personal opinions attached to the interpretation of that data becomes more pervasive. So, when a new member on the forum comes and asks a question about "Ph.D. vs. Psy.D" I know that (prior to joining this board) the same handful of posters will restate the data, which is very important, but then people will come in and say "why would you take $200K in debt for a job that pays $60K a year, to me you are mentally incompetent to be a psychologist if you are willing to do that" (You know who you are). At the end the day, it doesn't matter what my opinions as to why someone decided to get their Psy.D. at $224K and landed a clinic job for $30K a year. Who is to say that their reasoning for going that path is any less? While I am not a personal proponent of the FSPS model, I won't scold someone for taking that path, I am not privy to their circumstances or goals, so I won't push mine on them.

The personal feeling within this field so far, is that it is a very rigid path in becoming a psychologist. If one ends up getting into a Ph.D. program at a crappy state school, other people who got into upper tier schools will still have something to scold them about, if a person attends a Psy.D. program, they still have to deal with the resentment and indirect insults from their peers. The list can go on, the fact remains, we simply aren't respecting other people. MCParent, if someone says they want to go to a Psy.D. program, give them the data, put your personal opinion in, but when someone opposes your opinion, consider that beyond the data, there may be extenuating circumstances and that they aren't incompetent people who refuse to see reason, they simply see the data and the context of that data in a different manner.

 

[MCParent]

"why would you take $200K in debt for a job that pays $60K a year, to me you are mentally incompetent to be a psychologist if you are willing to do that" (You know who you are).

Find me a time when I or any of the other posters you're attempting to call out actually made this kind of a comment. We never have. Critiquing the wisdom of a decision is not a personal insult.

 

[MCParent]

MCParent, if someone says they want to go to a Psy.D. program, give them the data, put your personal opinion in, but when someone opposes your opinion, consider that beyond the data, there may be extenuating circumstances and that they aren't incompetent people who refuse to see reason, they simply see the data and the context of that data in a different manner.

Find me a post of mine where I called someone an "incompetent person" for doing that.

 

[psych84]

Find me a time when I or any of the other posters you're attempting to call out actually made this kind of a comment. We never have. Critiquing the wisdom of a decision is not a personal insult.

Well, he's talking about me. I did make that comment. (or something similar)

 

[MCParent]

Well, he's talking about me. I did make that comment. (or something similar)

Then he's using you (a new poster) in a fallacious attempt to attack the more frequent posters he is attempting to insult.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Find me a post of mine where I called someone an "incompetent person" for doing that.

"you" is being in general to the regular posters on this board that have been here a long while, and in the hundreds (if not thousands) of posts that have accumulated over years.

 

[MCParent]

"you" is being in general to the regular posters on this board that have been here a long while, and in the hundreds (if not thousands) of posts that have accumulated over years.

So, in other words, this never happened. Gotcha.

 

[erg923]

Cogneuro,
I will be blunt. I think you are simply a victim of the current societal mentality of "who an I to judge"; "anybody can do anything thing they want so so long as it doesn't directly hurt me."

Well that very progressive and " liberal" and warm and fuzzy of you, but this mentality of non judgment and it's all goodness produces consequences. I remember having this debate with you on the thread regarding telling children that that can do/be ANYTHING they want. The result? Argosy. And diminished reputation for the field. Congratulations.

Would encourage you to reflect on the difference between judgment of a person and their being/Constitution vs judgment of a behavior/choice.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Then he's using you (a new poster) in a fallacious attempt to attack the more frequent posters he is attempting to insult.

Insult? I suppose that is how you framed this, I however have not framed this as such. I am simply stating my disagreement in some of the operations and practices on this board. My arguments are directed in the general sense in most cases but specific instances in some. Do a general search on the forum of Psy.D. vs. Ph.D. and you will find many of the same posters who are the most visible (like erg, Wiseneuro, MCParent, etc.) provide their "pure data" but then beyond that in many times an unfair way.

 

[MCParent]

Insult? I suppose that is how you framed this, I however have not framed this as such. I am simply stating my disagreement in some of the operations and practices on this board. My arguments are directed in the general sense in most cases but specific instances in some. Do a general search on the forum of Psy.D. vs. Ph.D. and you will find many of the same posters who are the most visible (like erg, Wiseneuro, MCParent, etc.) provide their "pure data" but then beyond that in many times an unfair way.

You said I called someone an "incompetent person." You were unable to provide evidence this actually happened. I'd call that an insult.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

IF you read the original statement I said "So, when a new member on the forum comes and asks a question about "Ph.D. vs. Psy.D" I know that (prior to joining this board) the same handful of posters will restate the data, which is very important, but then people will come in and say "why would you take $200K in debt for a job that pays $60K a year, to me you are mentally incompetent to be a psychologist if you are willing to do that" (You know who you are)"

This was not directed at you specifically, I am trying to encompass several posters here into a general phenomena.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Cogneuro,
I will be blunt. I think you are simply a victim of the current societal mentality of "who an I to judge"; "anybody can do anything thing they want so so long as it doesn't directly hurt me."

Well that very progressive and " liberal" and warm and fuzzy of you, this mentality of non judgment and it's all goodness produces consequences. I remember having this debate with you on the thread regarding telling children that that can do/be ANYTHING they want. The result? Argosy. And diminished reputation for the field. Congratulations.

Would encourage you to reflect on the difference between judgment of a person and their being/Constitution vs judgment of a behavior/choice.

So then, the conservative mentality is the appropriate one? Let's face, if we are going to claim to be dealing with "opposing" views here, I could make the same claim that you are making and say that your view on constitutionality is affecting your behavior as well...You are assuming they are both mutually exclusive by your last quote. I would disagree. They would have everything to do with each other and the behaviors of people, their decisions, etc. Beyond that, you are taking a very extreme view on my "progressiveness" with Argosy, why not a mild view? You should probably remember I am not a personal fan of the FSPS model, which Argosy is.

 

[MCParent]

IF you read the original statement I said "So, when a new member on the forum comes and asks a question about "Ph.D. vs. Psy.D" I know that (prior to joining this board) the same handful of posters will restate the data, which is very important, but then people will come in and say "why would you take $200K in debt for a job that pays $60K a year, to me you are mentally incompetent to be a psychologist if you are willing to do that" (You know who you are)"

This was not directed at you specifically, I am trying to encompass several posters here into a general phenomena.

Your post, in completeness, mentioned me by name and used quotation marks as though you were directly quoting something that was actually said (it was not actually said).

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Your post, in completeness, mentioned me by name and used quotation marks as though you were directly quoting something that was actually said (it was not actually said).

I can see that, for that I apologize.

 

[erg923]

Oh, let's sum shall we?

About a dozen posts have been posted since your original claim that PhD's have been posting biased and unfounded opinions about the state of the field. All I have gathered so far from your posts is the notion that when people take data and make a conclusion we should accept it as valid as our own? That's it. Everyone's opinion is "valid"? All Little Johnny's get their trophies even though they were beaten 12-5? That's a very "socially just"
agenda but it's just irrational any way you slice it.

 

[psych84]

Objectivity > Neutrality

 

[erg923]

So then, the conservative mentality is the appropriate one?

If we are talking about training standards, yes, it the most rationale, reality-based one. Also happens to be the one that ensures high-quality product for a vulnerable and complex
population. Win win. Right?

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Oh, let's sum shall we?

About a dozen posts have been posted since your original claim that PhD's have been posting biased and unfounded opinions about the state of the field. All I have gathered so far from your posts is the notion that when people take data and make a conclusion we should accept it as valid as our own? That's it. Everyone's opinion is "valid"? All Little Johnny's get their trophies even though they were beaten 12-5?

lol. Difficult situation, right? A conflict many social and behavioral scientists (hell, even scientists in general) face. As we discuss these tendencies, I notice the significant differences between the field of psychology and...sociology or anthropology, etc. Your opinions are professional in the sense that you are making them to help someone attain a certain level of psychological well-being. I can appreciate that, but as you know, there are only so many things data can explain right? There was a discussion we had on another topic and I had mentioned something to the effect of certain behavioral phenomena (whether they be macro or micro) that we can't quantify to an extent that is statistically reliable or valid nor taking into other variables that confound the data (this I think is the focal point as to why we got into this field; to research behavioral phenomena). Simply put, data in the statistical sense is confounded because it can be interpreted, that is the draw back of our field. In regards to giving everyone a trophy...it depends on how you interpret their success or aptitude on a certain task. Many developmental psychologists are studying this very thing in terms of providing a reward for coming in last place, etc.

My approach to this is to not only incorporate what the data is saying, but how this data relates in context to the being. (I know, to mushy for you ).

 

[erg923]

This isn't philosophy or sociology, no matter how much you might want it to be. I really don't know how else to respond to that post.

If little Johnny loses his soccer game, he get an encouraging pat on the back for trying from me and we work to improve. No trophies. Make sense?

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Erg...makes sense, I understand noun and verb sentences, and I did pass my 10th grade English class . I suppose if that is the route "you" want to take, then I would suggest looking into the developmental and social psychologists who do produce counter arguments but also support for what you are saying. So, this would go beyond sociology.

 

[erg923]

Erg...makes sense, I understand noun and verb sentences, and I did pass my 10th grade English class . I suppose if that is the route "you" want to take, then I would suggest looking into the developmental and social psychologists who do produce counter arguments but also support for what you are saying. So, this would go beyond sociology.

I prefer preparing my kids for reality, but thanks for the academic parenting tip. I will take that into account when one of their children breaks down and cries in my office because Susie Q got accepted to Yale and she didn't.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

I prefer preparing my kids for reality, but thanks for the academic parenting tip. I will take that into account when one of their children breaks down and cries in my office because Susie Q got accepted to Yale and she didn't.

Well, what a relief, we should all be so lucky to have the most level-headed guy around, right? Stupid women's rights, who are they kidding, civil rights...as long as they don't get in my way, right? I guess being a "realist" is a passive-aggressive way of telling people you have biases, but they are valid. At one point people validated that blacks shouldn't be taught to read or write...see, I can take the slippery slope perspective as well, just in a different scope than yours.

Listen, what you do with your kids is your way of parenting, there are over 310 million people in this country with many forms of mentoring, but you are taking your perspective and using it as the model template that all should abide by (not your parenting, I refer to your basis of rationality and reasoning). You like data right? Well, would you say the beliefs you hold, the 30 regular posters on here are what "all, or most" psychologists practice? Is there an excel spreadsheet for that on the APA website I missed?

 

[erg923]

I wrote:

I prefer preparing my kids for reality, but thanks for the academic parenting tip. I will take that into account when one of their children breaks down and cries in my office because Susie Q got accepted to Yale and she didn't.

You wrote:

Well, what a relief, we should all be so lucky to have the most level-headed guy around, right? Stupid women's rights, who are they kidding, civil rights...as long as they don't get in my way, right? I

Dude, what the **** are you talking about?! Check yourself.

I think our conversation on this particular matter is done.

 

[psyman]

This board is dominated by about four or five posters who constantly spew hate at FSPS and PsyDs and speak to people in ways they never would in person.

Okay, we get it. They take on crazy debt and are under trained. You are better. We got it. Turn the page.

It's clear how you guys view anyone who would go that route (FSPS or PsyD) to ANY reader. Many others like myself stay away from this board because of the superior attitude you guys have. Don't believe me if you want. Those few posters are the ones who keep me away as well. That same tone sticks with most of their posts even not on that topic. I regret every time I stray into these conversations.

 

[WisNeuro]

If presenting objective data makes me a pretentious ass@#$%, well then get me some horn-rimmed glasses, skinny jeans, and a PBR!

 

[psyman]

If presenting objective data makes me a pretentious ass@#$%, well then get me some horn-rimmed glasses, skinny jeans, and a PBR!

No, it's your tone that makes you that.

...and if I believe (based on your posts/tone/etc) you think less of me as a PsyD (or if I were from a FSPS), it seems logical that I don't feel welcomed by your crowd. Seems reasonable.

I came back on this board only for EPPP support recently, but get sucked into this same crap every time, because it never ends on here! You are better, we ALL get it.

 

[WisNeuro]

I don't think less of people who have PsyD's as people. I do have reservations about the competency of some PsyD degrees as clinicians, and will refuse to refer to those individuals unless I have a trusted recommendation. It's a conclusion I've made based on the data I have. Seems reasonable.

 

[MCParent]

It's clear how you guys view anyone who would go that route (FSPS or PsyD) to ANY reader. Many others like myself stay away from this board because of the superior attitude you guys have. Don't believe me if you want. Those few posters are the ones who keep me away as well. That same tone sticks with most of their posts even not on that topic. I regret every time I stray into these conversations.

This reminds me of the thing CNG brought up about the poster who said the "psyd students are better off as patients" (or whatever). Go look at that thread. What happened when that was said? Multiple poster (myself included) rapidly disagreed with that post.

The evidence does not indicate to me that being "offended" by this board occurs due to anything other than choice.

 

[erg923]

Hate is a strong word, son. Not to be used lightly. Think with your brain. Not your emotions.

 

[psyman]

I don't think less of people who have PsyD's as people. I do have reservations about the competency of some PsyD degrees as clinicians, and will refuse to refer to those individuals unless I have a trusted recommendation. It's a conclusion I've made based on the data I have. Seems reasonable.

The evidence does not indicate to me that being "offended" by this board occurs due to anything other than choice.

Wis thinks less of my clinical skills because of my PsyD. He JUST inferred that. So that offends me. Is that ridiculous?

 

[psych84]

Hate is a strong word, son. Not to be used lightly. Think with your brain. Not your emotions.

Calling people "son" is a little disrespectful.

 

[psyman]

This reminds me of the thing CNG brought up about the poster who said the "psyd students are better off as patients" (or whatever). Go look at that thread. What happened when that was said? Multiple poster (myself included) rapidly disagreed with that post.

The evidence does not indicate to me that being "offended" by this board occurs due to anything other than choice.

You guys objected to someone saying PsyDs are better off as patients? Lol. Well aren't you guys just taking a hardcore stand! Thanks for the support!