correct way to handle things

[bmedclinic]

So, I just noticed on facebook an acquaintance from my masters program is opening her own practice. Good for her. I also noticed that she now has a doctorate in clinical counseling. She is licensed as a marriage and family therapist in one state, and has a temporary license in another state as a MFT. That's all fine and well. However, her website says "Dr. [friendofbmedclinic] is a Ph.D. level therapist. "

My gut says this is misleading, but in the gray area. I haven't talked to this person since about 2008. Am I obligated to do something? If yes, what?

I really dont want to start something, but I think it may be better if she just said "I have a doctorate in this, and am licensed as a MFT."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

this is something that needs to be reported to the ethics board of that state she is currently working in. It seems like the MFT ethics board would be the best place to do so.

 

[deleted343839]

My gut says this is misleading, but in the gray area. I haven't talked to this person since about 2008. Am I obligated to do something? If yes, what?

I really dont want to start something, but I think it may be better if she just said "I have a doctorate in this, and am licensed as a MFT."

Sounds like a legitimate ethics board complaint to me.

People should only use their degrees in their professional titles if they are directly related to their licensed professions, "Dr. Laura" being the classic example of how educational credentials can be distorted.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Typically going to the person first and letting them know should be step one (if it is someone you know, not just some hack on the street). If they don't change anything, then you can report them.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Agreed. Talk to them first.

 

[smalltownpsych]

See APA ethics code section 1 for guidance on handling ethical violations. As stated above, the first step is to attempt an informal resolution.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

Clinical Counseling and MFT are typically under the same board. LMFT and LPC are MS degree licensure and typically the PhD in Clinical Counseling is for academic or administrative position. There is no ethical breach here unless they are working outside of their scope of practice. They most likely have the LMFT and LPC credentials. The psychology board would not have any jurisdiction over this practitioner and most likely their advertising was approved by their licensure board.

It would be ethical Breach if they had a PhD in Biology but their PhD is in Clinical Counseling and they are working under their LPC and LMFT credentials.

If they are a friend and you have concern then why don't you talk to them.

I am not sure the legality of information in face book or linkin as being legal advertising. If they have their own dedicated website this may be advertising.

 

[Pragma]

Clinical Counseling and MFT are typically under the same board. LMFT and LPC are MS degree licensure and typically the PhD in Clinical Counseling is for academic or administrative position. There is no ethical breach here unless they are working outside of their scope of practice. They most likely have the LMFT and LPC credentials. The psychology board would not have any jurisdiction over this practitioner and most likely their advertising was approved by their licensure board.

It would be ethical Breach if they had a PhD in Biology but their PhD is in Clinical Counseling and they are working under their LPC and LMFT credentials.

If they are a friend and you have concern then why don't you talk to them.

I am not sure the legality of information in face book or linkin as being legal advertising. If they have their own dedicated website this may be advertising.

Once again, false.

If they aren't licensed at the doctoral level, they shouldn't use the title without explanation. Confuses the public and misrepresents credentials.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

So, I just noticed on facebook an acquaintance from my masters program is opening her own practice. Good for her. I also noticed that she now has a doctorate in clinical counseling. She is licensed as a marriage and family therapist in one state, and has a temporary license in another state as a MFT. That's all fine and well. However, her website says "Dr. [friendofbmedclinic] is a Ph.D. level therapist. "

My gut says this is misleading, but in the gray area. I haven't talked to this person since about 2008. Am I obligated to do something? If yes, what?

I really dont want to start something, but I think it may be better if she just said "I have a doctorate in this, and am licensed as a MFT."

The fact that they have provided a disclaimer saying they are a Ph.D. level therapist provides disclosure and accurate representation of credentials. Secondly, and in my opinion, if this person has a Ph.D. in counseling and has their license in something like marriage and family therapy, I know of several programs in which a degree such as counselor education leads people eligible for a license as an LPC. I know of a program at SMU who provides a master's degree in counseling that can lead someone the ability to sit for multiple licenses, including MFT. So, I fail to see a blatant abuse in credentials. If they had a Ph.D. in computer science and a master's with subsequent license as an LPC and referred to themselves as "Dr.", that would be an issue. I have a friend here in Dallas who is a transgender therapist with an LPC license who does this...it's a shame.

Also, people can go onto Ph.D. programs and attain the license usually attained at the master's level, there are many programs that do allow this.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

Once again, false.

If they aren't licensed at the doctoral level, they shouldn't use the title without explanation. Confuses the public and misrepresents credentials.

I think you have it reversed. LPC and LMFT do not have doctoral degree license but many have the PhD/PsyD/EdD so it is not an ethical breach as they are practicing within their scope of practice under their license and they have the doctoral degree for the area they hold license.

 

[Pragma]

I understand that they don't have a doctoral level license. Why would it be a problem for them to explain that? Their capacity to see patients is limited by their license. So why not present yourself as an lmft and then use the title after explaining? Seems like the ACA remains way too permissive/wishy washy in their ethical guidelines. The doctorate they receive does not enhance their licensable abilities, so I question the use of the title in a clinical marketing context.

ETA: ACA and AAMFT both discuss this in their ethics codes quite vaguely. They say claiming degrees for clinical practice is ok "in related fields." What does that even mean? Scope of practice is limited by scope of license. End of story. No wonder we've got so many midlevels misrepresenting themselves.

 

[Pragma]

Perhaps us psychologists are irked about this because our ethics code is quite clear about this: we dont claim a degree for our clinical services unless it was "the basis for psychology licensure by the state in which they practice."

The fact that midlevel ethics codes allow for misrepresentation definitely bothers me.

 

[smalltownpsych]

If you want to be a doctoral level therapist then you either become a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist. Anything else is misrepresenting. I see it way too often and when I do, I won't refer. At my last job, when I was hiring therapists and I saw things like that which didn't add up, they didn't get called for an interview. A great reason for psychologists to be involved in hiring decisions is that we know what the legit path is and knowledge of law and ethics is an integral part of our skill set.

 

[Goobernut]

Perhaps us psychologists are irked about this because our ethics code is quite clear about this: we dont claim a degree for our clinical services unless it was "the basis for psychology licensure by the state in which they practice."

The fact that midlevel ethics codes allow for misrepresentation definitely bothers me.

Here is the section I believe you are referring to?

C.4.d. Implying Doctoral-Level CompetenceCounselors clearly state their highest earned degree in counseling or a closely related field. Counselors do not imply doctoral-level competence when pos- sessing a master’s degree in counseling or a related field by referring to them-selves as “Dr.” in a counseling context when their doctorate is not in counsel- ing or a related field. Counselors do not use “ABD” (all but dissertation) or other such terms to imply competency.

I asked (texted) an LPC friend if (and then how)this is addressed. She said that "counseling related field" is meant to be specific to counseling degrees, and the "counseling profession" and not to include psychology PhDs. It's stated "counseling related" to encompass the large # of programs that might have different names but still grant entry into the counseling profession. And all this was explained in an ethics class, discussing which terms were protected in their state and what they could legally call themselves.

Now if that's taught everywhere, I don't know. But if you look at the ACA as a whole and the "branding" of the word counseling, I think it makes sense. I get your frustration at people mis-representing themselves, I loathe it too. But maybe let's hear from some LPCs? Other than oneneuro?

I guess in the OP's case she might be okay according to her general code of ethics? But I'm guessing at the state licensing level there might be an issue.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Here is the section I believe you are referring to?

C.4.d. Implying Doctoral-Level CompetenceCounselors clearly state their highest earned degree in counseling or a closely related field. Counselors do not imply doctoral-level competence when pos- sessing a master’s degree in counseling or a related field by referring to them-selves as “Dr.” in a counseling context when their doctorate is not in counsel- ing or a related field. Counselors do not use “ABD” (all but dissertation) or other such terms to imply competency.

I asked (texted) an LPC friend if (and then how)this is addressed. She said that "counseling related field" is meant to be specific to counseling degrees, and the "counseling profession" and not to include psychology PhDs. It's stated "counseling related" to encompass the large # of programs that might have different names but still grant entry into the counseling profession. And all this was explained in an ethics class, discussing which terms were protected in their state and what they could legally call themselves.

Now if that's taught everywhere, I don't know. But if you look at the ACA as a whole and the "branding" of the word counseling, I think it makes sense. I get your frustration at people mis-representing themselves, I loathe it too. But maybe let's hear from some LPCs? Other than oneneuro?

I guess in the OP's case she might be okay according to her general code of ethics? But I'm guessing at the state licensing level there might be an issue.

What does it say in your field of social work? Also, the title of dr. isnt so much the issue as is the term doctoral level therapist when the person is licensed as a masters level therapist.

 

[randomguy87]

I really feel like if she laid out her resume and said she is licensed as an MFT with a doctorate in clinical counseling her potential patients would have no problem with this. I don't think they would feel deceived even if she clarified this

 

[bmedclinic]

I really feel like if she laid out her resume and said she is licensed as an MFT with a doctorate in clinical counseling her potential patients would have no problem with this. I don't think they would feel deceived even if she clarified this

so clearly Im split on this one. For clarification, she's not so much a friend as a former acquaintance (we have the same masters degree, I just went on and got a phd in clinical psych, hers in clinical counseling. I think first I'll google her phd program and see what its tailored towards. I hesitate to contact her because its been a good 6 years since we've spoken.

 

[bmedclinic]

Ok, so her phd is in clinical counseling: teaching and supervision. I pulled up the course format for her program quickly, and in a way she does have a case to be made to be a "Ph.D. Level Therapist" in that her Ph.D. is geared towards teaching, supervision, and doing therapy. It's not just academic. In fact, it looks largely NOT academic.

 

[bmedclinic]

I've decided that I'll shoot her an email encouraging her to make sure that the phrasing she used is consistent with the state's licensing boards for the two states she practices in.

 

[bmedclinic]

Thanks for the feedback to help me mull through this, everyone. I sent her a facebook message.

 

[bmedclinic]

I fail to see a blatant abuse in credentials.

And that's the crux of it. If it was blatant, I wouldn't have started a thread. I would have reported them asap like I did for the chiropractor I came across who was practicing "brain therapy" a few years ago. It is a very grey area, which is why I sought advice.

 

[bmedclinic]

as an update, I messaged her, she messaged back and agreed. Stated she'd take off the phd level therapist part and that it just made things more confusing.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Glad you got it resolved. However, I really do believe she was within her rights to utilize those credentials in the capacity that she did.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Glad you got it resolved. However, I really do believe she was within her rights to utilize those credentials in the capacity that she did.

Part of our ethical standards as psychologists is to be very clear about who we are and our credentials with our patients and to avoid the potential for misrepresentation or deception. Ethical standards are higher than legal standards.

 

[randomguy87]

Genuine question - how would you guys who say it was unethical have represented yourself with these credentials? I think many therapists with a PhD in counseling would call themselves a PhD level therapist. How else would one? "Therapist with PhD in counseling"? I think the subtlety would be lost on the average client

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Part of our ethical standards as psychologists is to be very clear about who we are and our credentials with our patients and to avoid the potential for misrepresentation or deception. Ethical standards are higher than legal standards.

I understand, however, she is not a psychologist, she is a therapist, and in this case, a LMFT. My point I was making is that she is not representing herself as anything other than a LMFT with a Ph.D., she even went as far as to provider a disclaimer "Ph.D. level therapist." She covered her bases. The title "DR." isn't secluded to any one profession, she was using it accurately to reflect her level of education in conjunction with the license she holds. Like I said early, it would be a different story if she had a Ph.D. in computer science and a master's in counseling as an LPC and called herself "Dr."

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

These are links to a handful of LPC and LFMT therapists in Dallas. They attained their master's and received their license, eventually moving onto a Ph.D. in their respective fields at a later point and refer to themselves as "doctor."

1. http://drcedwood.com/about-our-doctor/ (This one has a master's in clinical psychology with an LPC credential, and later attained his Ph.D. in Family Therapy, yet doesn't have a LFMT).
2. http://www.drjandunn.com/background.html (This one has a Ph.D. in Family Therapy, she has her LMFT, LPC and LCDC under this degree)
3. https://www.texaspcs.org/about-us/dr-ken-johnson (This one has a master's in counseling where he attained his LPC and LFMT, the Ph.D. in psychology didn't factor into either license, but it is within the field of counseling, psychology, marriage and family therapy).

It's a tricky situation, because many of these people have earned doctoral degrees in a field that is directly related to their attached license. My motto on this is, don't misrepresent yourself. If you are a pharmacist with a Pharm.D., that "D" in that title refers to "doctor." You have worked hard for it, and to mitigate any confusion, it literally takes all of 4-5 seconds to explain "I am a doctor of pharmacy, not a medical doctor." Part of educating the population, is starting with yourself. My husband scoffs at the idea that psychologists with Ph.D./Psy.D. are referred to as doctor, he thinks that is confusing to the general public, even more so than the whole "one prescribes, one does therapy" thing that psychologists have to explain to people.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Genuine question - how would you guys who say it was unethical have represented yourself with these credentials? I think many therapists with a PhD in counseling would call themselves a PhD level therapist. How else would one? "Therapist with PhD in counseling"? I think the subtlety would be lost on the average client

There is no such thing as a PhD level therapist. You are what you are licensed for. You can always put the initials after your name and ask people to call you doctor.

Head over to the psychiatry forum and ask them about a DNP and how that is an attempt at a back-door to being a doctor without going to medical school. In my mind, it is the same thing.

 

[randomguy87]

There is no such thing as a PhD level therapist. You are what you are licensed for. You can always put the initials after your name and ask people to call you doctor.

Head over to the psychiatry forum and ask them about a DNP and how that is an attempt at a back-door to being a doctor without going to medical school. In my mind, it is the same thing.

My supervisor used to ask me "whose need is being met" when she felt like I used an intervention or approach that satisfied my need rather than the client's. Plenty of PhD psychologists on this thread seem to have no problem with the ethics of this, and your concern seems more about you than the supposed ethical violation that seems to have no harmful effect towards clients

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I would agree that in general, the clearest way is just to identify based on your level of licensure.

The potential harm is these situations is the potential for confusion. The client/patient ultimately may not care, but that needs to be their decision to make from the outset. Explaining it in more depth after the fact can potentially capitalize on the effects of a power differential.

 

[Pragma]

Licensed therapist with a doctorate. Simple as that. Presenting yourself otherwise implies that your doctorate adds to your licensable skills, which it doesn't when we are talking counselor education.

Use the title all you want when you aren't advertising what you are licensed to do.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

So, in this case, since 1990, pharmacists must graduate from a doctor of pharmacy program. Under this degree itself, people can apply for a license. Their title also states "doctor" in their degree. On one end of the issue, they do reserve the right to present themselves as "doctor" to the public, they have earned that right in accordance to their license and their degree. As you may know, many people in the medical field have a problem with this. It really can be as simple as stating "I am a doctor of pharmacy, not a medical doctor."

 

[Pragma]

My supervisor used to ask me "whose need is being met" when she felt like I used an intervention or approach that satisfied my need rather than the client's. Plenty of PhD psychologists on this thread seem to have no problem with the ethics of this, and your concern seems more about you than the supposed ethical violation that seems to have no harmful effect towards clients

Who benefits from misrepresenting what their level of competency is? Oh yeah, the advertiser that banks on the doctorate increasing their referrals.

 

[randomguy87]

Who benefits from misrepresenting what their level of competency is? Oh yeah, the advertiser that banks on the doctorate increasing their referrals.

My question for those without Asperger's is whether "licensed therapist with doctorate" would mean anything else to clients, and the answer is no

 

[WisNeuro]

Man, we love to throw around diagnoses on this board.

 

[randomguy87]

Man, we love to throw around diagnoses on this board.

Well clearly OP was describing a narcissistic psychopath for how much harm she was willingly commuting with no regard for others

 

[deleted343839]

My supervisor used to ask me "whose need is being met" when she felt like I used an intervention or approach that satisfied my need rather than the client's.

We really can't know what clients interpret our credentials to mean. But when a professional insists on using a credential that does not form the basis for his or her license and scope of practice, I'm pretty sure that's satisfying a need other than that of the client.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'd just be more mindful of using diagnoses in a disparaging way on a board that is viewed of consisting of professionals and almost professionals. It's insulting and disrespectful to those actually diagnosed with those disorders.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

But they aren't misrepresenting themselves. They have a doctorate within counseling. FAU has a program in counselor education which allows people to gain all sorts of licenses. It's not as black and white as medicine is, and that is simply due to the fact that counseling doesn't require a doctorate to attain their license. For the most part, psychologists need a doctorate, but in cases of school psychology they can claim status and title as a psychologist with a master's or specialist degree in school psychology. Same is said for I/O psychologists. At the end of the day, they level of education they have attained in relation to the direct work they provide is the most importance. If their master's is in counseling, they have an LPC but have a Ph.D. in family therapy, these are still closely related and can be used to capitalize upon whether it be for superior treatment options due to the higher level of education they attained in the Ph.D. program or they can capitalize on the rates they charge if you would like to boil it down to basic economics. They amount of time and money spent attaining the Ph.D. to help them operate as a better clinician is no different than someone investing in a piece of machinery to help them operate their business more efficiently.

 

[randomguy87]

But they aren't misrepresenting themselves. They have a doctorate within counseling. FAU has a program in counselor education which allows people to gain all sorts of licenses. It's not as black and white as medicine is, and that is simply due to the fact that counseling doesn't require a doctorate to attain their license. For the most part, psychologists need a doctorate, but in cases of school psychology they can claim status and title as a psychologist with a master's or specialist degree in school psychology. Same is said for I/O psychologists. At the end of the day, they level of education they have attained in relation to the direct work they provide is the most importance. If their master's is in counseling, they have an LPC but have a Ph.D. in family therapy, these are still closely related and can be used to capitalize upon whether it be for superior treatment options due to the higher level of education they attained in the Ph.D. program or they can capitalize on the rates they charge if you would like to boil it down to basic economics. They amount of time and money spent attaining the Ph.D. to help them operate as a better clinician is no different than someone investing in a piece of machinery to help them operate their business more efficiently.

GOD you're so dumb. Saying "doctoral level therapist" is harmful and wrong, they have to say "therapist with a doctorate"

 

[Pragma]

My question for those without Asperger's is whether "licensed therapist with doctorate" would mean anything else to clients, and the answer is no

Wowzers...

 

[Pragma]

I'm surprised the concept is so hard for some people. When you have s master's level license and then get a nonlicensable doctorate, even if it is sort of related, it does not mean that you should market yourself in a way that suggests your licensable skills are greater than masters level. Some patients are discerning and some assume a doctorate means more than it does in some cases. As an ethical provider, be up front. Patients will appreciate it.

 

[ClinicalABA]

In Massachusetts, If her counseling Ph.D. met the educational requirements to be a licensed psychologist,and she in fact wasn't a licensed psychologist, and was using the terms "Dr." and "psychotherapist" in any representation of her services to the public, she could be considered to be "practicing psychology without a license", and would be subject to action by the state board of registration of psychologists. That behavior is seen as potentially trying to subvert the psychology licensure laws.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

GOD you're so dumb. Saying "doctoral level therapist" is harmful and wrong, they have to say "therapist with a doctorate"

No need to get an attitude. Simply, we will have to agree to disagree. In the future, if you want to debate with people, using personal attacks is not the best way to go.

 

[randomguy87]

No need to get an attitude. Simply, we will have to agree to disagree. In the future, if you want to debate with people, using personal attacks is not the best way to go.

I was joking because for this whole debate we've been in agreement. Look at our previous posts. Come on dude. You're hurting our cause here. It was obviously satirical towards the lack of meaningful difference

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Apologies, I didn't see that. Disregard previous comment then.

 

[smalltownpsych]

My supervisor used to ask me "whose need is being met" when she felt like I used an intervention or approach that satisfied my need rather than the client's. Plenty of PhD psychologists on this thread seem to have no problem with the ethics of this, and your concern seems more about you than the supposed ethical violation that seems to have no harmful effect towards clients

Which psychologist on this board said it was ethical to call yourself a doctoral-level therapist when you are licensed as a master's level therapist?
It is not about me. I am pretty secure in my professional identity and career. It is about protecting the integrity of the professional practice of psychology and the public.

 

[randomguy87]

Which psychologist on this board said it was ethical to call yourself a doctoral-level therapist when you are licensed as a master's level therapist?
It is not about me. I am pretty secure in my professional identity and career. It is about protecting the integrity of the professional practice of psychology and the public.

I swear you're even worse than the CACREP people, which is saying a lot

 

[smalltownpsych]

I swear you're even worse than the CACREP people, which is saying a lot

I must be missing something. I thought I asked a legitimate question and made a legitimate point that I take pride in being a psychologist and what we offer and want to act to protect that for ourselves and the public.

 

[randomguy87]

I must be missing something. I thought I asked a legitimate question and made a legitimate point that I take pride in being a psychologist and what we offer and want to act to protect that for ourselves and the public.

You're missing balance and perspective to start