Advertising as PHD

[PikminOC]

I have come across a few therapists advertising as
Bob Smith PhD LCPC
And different other variations

When I dig further, the PhD is in sociology some other field that is not Psychology.

I feel this is misleading to people as even I was confused, but took the time to dig a little more. I think it makes it look like they are Clinical PhD psychologists when they are not.
Is this ok by psychology advertising standards? Would this even fall under that? Or would it fall under therapist standards?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WisNeuro]

I have come across a few therapists advertising as
Bob Smith PhD LCPC
And different other variations

When I dig further, the PhD is in sociology some other field that is not Psychology.

I feel this is misleading to people as even I was confused, but took the time to dig a little more. I think it makes it look like they are Clinical PhD psychologists when they are not.
Is this ok by psychology advertising standards? Would this even fall under that? Or would it fall under therapist standards?

Definitely not ok, but sometimes it's limited in terms of recourse. It depends on their licensing body. You can report them to that body for misrepresentation, but it's up to that body to do something about it. Also may depend on states and if they have a specific statute against this.

For example, in my state, masters level therapists are under a wholly separate board, so the board of psychology has no jurisdiction over this issue, for the most part. We'd have to appeal to their own specialty board. We've made complaints and had licenses taken away before from masters level people, but it's been for violation of scope of practice, I haven't seen this misrepresentation issue in my own area yet.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I agree that it seems disingenuous, but like WisNeuro mentioned, the state board of psychology may be limited in what they can do unless the person is purporting or appearing to be practicing psychology. If not, it'd fall under their own accrediting body, which may not care, particularly if the doctorate is in some semblance of a related field.

The term "psychologist" is protected in every state I know of; the use of "Ph.D." isn't (again, in any that I'm aware of).

 

[R. Matey]

Is this ok by psychology advertising standards? Would this even fall under that? Or would it fall under therapist standards?

This practice is considered completely unethical by most state licensing boards and professional organizations at the master's level. You are freely able to contact the LPC board in your state and file a complaint. In my state, people are disciplined leading up to suspension of licensure for this practice. Here's a recent post I wrote with links the various ethics codes. In this case, it's a direct violation of ACA Standard C4.d. I'll add that sometime framing it as a breach of the ACA code of ethics to a state licensing board is likely to get you further, but like @WisNeuro said, it vastly depends on where you are.

ACA (2014) Standard C.4 https://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf
NBCC (2016) Standard 38 https://www.nbcc.org/Assets/Ethics/NBCCCodeofEthics.pdf
NASW (2017) Standard 1.04 National Association of Social Workers (NASW)
AAMFT (2015) Standard 9.1 Code of Ethics

 

[PikminOC]

Definitely not ok, but sometimes it's limited in terms of recourse. It depends on their licensing body. You can report them to that body for misrepresentation, but it's up to that body to do something about it. Also may depend on states and if they have a specific statute against this.

For example, in my state, masters level therapists are under a wholly separate board, so the board of psychology has no jurisdiction over this issue, for the most part. We'd have to appeal to their own specialty board. We've made complaints and had licenses taken away before from masters level people, but it's been for violation of scope of practice, I haven't seen this misrepresentation issue in my own area yet.

Please explain violations of scope of practice

 

[MiniLop]

Cool story, bro: I did an externship at a DBT program several years ago and the group coordinator insisted on having "PhD" everywhere (his office door, nameplate, etc.), despite being an MA level clinical social worker and having a PhD in sociology. He was also a raging narcissistic and eventually got forced out because everyone hated him.

 

[PikminOC]

So should Bob Smith only advertise as LCPC?
This fictional name is on psychology today
With a license number only for LCPC listed

 

[WisNeuro]

Please explain violations of scope of practice

In this specific instance, they had a masters level person conducting assessment using neuropsychological instruments. Our state and applicable licensing bodies have specific statutes around that. Complaint to appropriate boards and the state dept of health and human services gets that providers license taken away and a fine for the clinic.

Essentially, is someone doing something that they are not trained to do as a profession, or something that a state statute specifically says is not within their scope of practice in healthcare settings.

 

[R. Matey]

So should Bob Smith only advertise as LCPC?
This fictional name is on psychology today
With a license number only for LCPC listed

Yes.

 

[Rivi]

Meh. I’m not too worried about it, with a few exceptions. They have a PhD. They have an LPC. Listing both isn’t necessarily unethical to me, unless they are practicing outside of their scope. It is probably prudent to list what the PhD is in, as many will assume PhD = psychologist.

There are PhD’s in Counselor Education who can become LPC’s, and that is where I most often see this.

 

[R. Matey]

Meh. I’m not too worried about it, with a few exceptions. They have a PhD. They have an LPC. Listing both isn’t necessarily unethical to me, unless they are practicing outside of their scope. It is probably prudent to list what the PhD is in, as many will assume PhD = psychologist.

There are PhD’s in Counselor Education who can become LPC’s, and that is where I most often see this.

The reason that master's level organizations consider this an unethical practice is that doctorates in those areas (counselor education, social work, marriage and family therapy) train people to be researchers and teachers, not clinicians. When you imply a Ph.D. in the clinical practice area, you are implying that your doctorate was in clinical practice when its is not. I've seen the CES degree used to imply doctoral level competence in the clinical area as well and it's a grey area for sure. However, that's very different than having Ph.D. in sociology with an LPC license and advertising as Bob Smith, Ph.D.

(Edit: FWIW, my friends in CES PhD programs consider what you're describing as unethical).

 

[erg923]

If the Ph.D is unrelated to MH practicing (and I really don't think a Ph.D. in sociology is), it quite obviously serves as deceptive marketing/enticing to a vulnerable population. Not much one can really do about it (sans a board complaint that is not likely to do much beyond a censure/reprimand letter.... if that), but I think its pretty clear whats going on here if you use some common sense.

 

[Rivi]

The reason that master's level organizations consider this an unethical practice is that doctorates in those areas (counselor education, social work, marriage and family therapy) train people to be researchers and teachers, not clinicians. When you imply a Ph.D. in the clinical practice area, you are implying that your doctorate was in clinical practice when its is not. I've seen the CES degree used to imply doctoral level competence in the clinical area as well and it's a grey area for sure. However, that's very different than having Ph.D. in sociology with an LPC license and advertising as Bob Smith, Ph.D.

(Edit: FWIW, my friends in CES PhD programs consider what you're describing as unethical).

Fair enough. I had a different understanding about the CES PhD.

I have no dog in this fight, just sharing my opinion.

 

[Mama Bear]

I have come across a few therapists advertising as
Bob Smith PhD LCPC
And different other variations

When I dig further, the PhD is in sociology some other field that is not Psychology.

I feel this is misleading to people as even I was confused, but took the time to dig a little more. I think it makes it look like they are Clinical PhD psychologists when they are not.
Is this ok by psychology advertising standards? Would this even fall under that? Or would it fall under therapist standards?

Master’s level therapists have their own ethical standards to follow. An LCPC would follow ACA:

https://www.counseling.org/resources/aca-code-of-ethics.pdf

Section C.4.d explicitly prohibits from “implying doctoral level competence.” I suspect many would agree that actually practicing outside of ones scope is a greater violation, whereas professionals who are just flashing their unrelated doctorates around can just begin with being politely reminded.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Its not allowed by my local board of registration of psychologists, as it's misleading to the public.

 

[PikminOC]

The reason that master's level organizations consider this an unethical practice is that doctorates in those areas (counselor education, social work, marriage and family therapy) train people to be researchers and teachers, not clinicians. When you imply a Ph.D. in the clinical practice area, you are implying that your doctorate was in clinical practice when its is not. I've seen the CES degree used to imply doctoral level competence in the clinical area as well and it's a grey area for sure. However, that's very different than having Ph.D. in sociology with an LPC license and advertising as Bob Smith, Ph.D.

(Edit: FWIW, my friends in CES PhD programs consider what you're describing as unethical).

Funny as these dnp nurse practitioner make it look like they are clinically doctorally trained when they are actually a research degree. And many are online to boot

 

[R. Matey]

Funny as these dnp nurse practitioner make it look like they are clinically doctorally trained when they are actually a research degree. And many are online to boot

 

[PikminOC]

Phd is in Human Services with emphasis in counseling..

 

[PikminOC]

This practice is considered completely unethical by most state licensing boards and professional organizations at the master's level. You are freely able to contact the LPC board in your state and file a complaint. In my state, people are disciplined leading up to suspension of licensure for this practice. Here's a recent post I wrote with links the various ethics codes. In this case, it's a direct violation of ACA Standard C4.d. I'll add that sometime framing it as a breach of the ACA code of ethics to a state licensing board is likely to get you further, but like @WisNeuro said, it vastly depends on where you are.

The aca standard states they should post their highest degree

 

[deleted820760]

Funny as these dnp nurse practitioner make it look like they are clinically doctorally trained when they are actually a research degree. And many are online to boot

They introduce themselves as Dr. so and so at my hospital. Patients get so confused when the real doctor shows up. They say they’ve already been seen by another doctor. I think it’s very misleading.

Pharmacists and Physical Therapists have doctorate degrees, and it’s clinical, not research degree. We don’t walk around the hospital introducing ourselves as Dr. so and so.

Funny story. My friend is a flight attendant, and they had a medical emergency in flight. They asked if anyone on board was a doctor. Someone with a PhD in geology showed up to help.

 

[WisNeuro]

Phd is in Human Services with emphasis in counseling..

If it's licensable in that state, they can technically use Dr. For example, some stated will license people with EdS. I may not agree with it, but the state allows it, unfortunately.

 

[PsyDr]

They introduce themselves as Dr. so and so at my hospital. Patients get so confused when the real doctor shows up. They say they’ve already been seen by another doctor. I think it’s very misleading.

Pharmacists and Physical Therapists have doctorate degrees, and it’s clinical, not research degree. We don’t walk around the hospital introducing ourselves as Dr. so and so.

Funny story. My friend is a flight attendant, and they had a medical emergency in flight. They asked if anyone on board was a doctor. Someone with a PhD in geology showed up to help.

The problem is the title is physician, not doctor. Physicians do not have exclusive rights to the title of Dr. They’ve done a great job in marketing that idea, but it wasn’t true when Chaucer wrote about it, it wasn’t true when state laws had to be created to allow non-doctoral degreed physicians to be called Dr., and it wasn’t true when the AMA tried to create failed legislation restricting the use of the Dr. title in hospitals.

I think a more accurate thing for the public would be to require everyone, including physicians, to use their professional titles instead of honorifics.

 

[MiniLop]

Funny story. My friend is a flight attendant, and they had a medical emergency in flight. They asked if anyone on board was a doctor. Someone with a PhD in geology showed up to help.

Hopefully they didn't have the fish.

 

[R. Matey]

The aca standard states they should post their highest degree

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

Highest counseling degree. You asked about someone in sociology. If this person is a counselor educator, that's a different story.

Examples:

(1) A person at my internship last year had a doctorate in education, but was also an LPC. They went by Bob Smith, LPC while working at the clinic and Bob Smith, Ed.D. while working in a university context where no clinical services were performed.

(2) Another person had a LPC and a doctorate in education at another site (private practice) I was at went by John Smith, Ed.D., LPC

(3)A third person has a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and works at a university as an assistant professor in mental health counseling. They go by Sara Smith, Ph.D.

(4) A fourth person has a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and works in a private practice setting exclusively. They go by Jane Smith, Ph.D., LPC.

1 and 3 are ethical. 2 is unethical. 4 is a grey area.

 

[PikminOC]

Website is bobsmithphd.com
Not sure this is licensable in this state.

 

[PikminOC]

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

Highest counseling degree. You asked about someone in sociology. If this person is a counselor educator, that's a different story.

Examples:

(1) A person at my internship last year had a doctorate in education, but was also an LPC. They went by Bob Smith, LPC while working at the clinic and Bob Smith, Ed.D. while working in a university context where no clinical services were performed.

(2) Another person had a LPC and a doctorate in education at another site (private practice) I was at went by John Smith, Ed.D., LPC

(3)A third person has a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and works at a university as an assistant professor in mental health counseling. They go by Sara Smith, Ph.D.

(4) A fourth person has a Ph.D. in Counselor Education and works in a private practice setting exclusively. They go by Jane Smith, Ph.D., LPC.

1 and 3 are ethical. 2 is unethical. 4 is a grey area.

So is what I said ethical?

 

[WisNeuro]

You'd be surprised, some states are pretty loose about what they consider licensable. State statutes and the board will clarify.

 

[R. Matey]

So is what I said ethical?

No, you said highest degree. ACA standards are highest degree in counseling or related field.

You'd be surprised, some states are pretty loose about what they consider licensable. State statutes and the board will clarify.

What's ethical and licensable are two separate things.

 

[WisNeuro]

What's ethical and licensable are two separate things.

If the state that they practice in licenses their doctoral degree, one would argue that it is perfectly ethical in that instance.

 

[PikminOC]

If the state that they practice in licenses their doctoral degree, one would argue that it is perfectly ethical in that instance.

The state for doesn't license this degree

 

[PikminOC]

No, you said highest degree. ACA standards are highest degree in counseling or related field.



What's ethical and licensable are two separate things.

This counts as counseling or related field?

 

[R. Matey]

If the state that they practice in licenses their doctoral degree, one would argue that it is perfectly ethical in that instance.

IN WI, Scott Walker wanted to do away with education requirements for teachers to be licensed. If he succeeded by your definition, that's ethical?

 

[WisNeuro]

The state for doesn't license this degree

Then an argument can definitely be made that they are behaving unethically.

 

[R. Matey]

This counts as counseling or related field?

You said sociology, so no. It has to be specifically counseling, marriage and family therapy and maybe social work.

 

[WisNeuro]

IN WI, Scott Walker wanted to do away with education requirements for teachers to be licensed. If he succeeded by your definition, that's ethical?

Regarding terms used for certain professions, one must use the standards as they exist within that jurisdiction. My personal feelings of whether it is right or wrong are irrelevant in that case. If the state says that teachers do not need to be licensed, for someone to practice that way would be ethical in that jurisdiction.

 

[R. Matey]

Regarding terms used for certain professions, one must use the standards as they exist within that jurisdiction. My personal feelings of whether it is right or wrong are irrelevant in that case. If the state says that teachers do not need to be licensed, for someone to practice that way would be ethical in that jurisdiction.

So laws define ethics?

 

[WisNeuro]

So laws define ethics?

In some cases, yes.

 

[PikminOC]

Phd is in Human Services with emphasis in counseling. What does this even mean?

 

[R. Matey]

In some cases, yes.

So, if the ACA is struck down by the Supreme Court, that's totally ethical? You see the problem with your position?

 

[R. Matey]

Phd is in Human Services with emphasis in counseling. What does this even mean?

Lol, I couldn't tell you.

 

[WisNeuro]

So, if the ACA is struck down by the Supreme Court, that's totally ethical? You see the problem with your position?

These are strawman arguments. The original question was that if someone was licensed or working in a particular profession in a jurisdiction in which they was the standard of practice. In which case, yes, it can be ethical.

 

[PikminOC]

Lol, I couldn't tell you.

Does anyone know? I know the therapist got pissed I was asking for specifics

 

[WisNeuro]

Does anyone know? I know the therapist got pissed I was asking for specifics

It means that they likely got a trash degree from an online diploma mill like Walden or Capella.

 

[R. Matey]

These are strawman arguments. The original question was that if someone was licensed or working in a particular profession in a jurisdiction in which they was the standard of practice. In which case, yes, it can be ethical.

No, it's a counterargument applying your same logic to another circumstance to show that it is problematic especially after you make a certain claim about the relationship between laws and ethics. I'm simply trying to understand the boundaries of your claim. If I misrepresented your claim, it was not my intention.

Let me put it another way: In what cases do ethics and laws diverge? Do states possess ultimate authority in determining ethical practice for a given profession within their jurisdiction? Suppose for instance, that in Arizona, you couldn't lose your license for practicing conversion therapy? Would that be ethical?

 

[WisNeuro]

No, it's a counterargument applying your same logic to another circumstance to show that it is problematic especially after you make a certain claim about the relationship between laws and ethics. I'm simply trying to understand the boundaries of your claim. If I misrepresented your claim, it was not my intention.

Let me put it another way: In what cases do ethics and laws diverge? Do states possess ultimate authority in determining ethical practice for a given profession within their jurisdiction? Suppose for instance, that in Arizona, you could lose your license for practicing conversion therapy? Would that be ethical?

Which is why I said "in some cases." Ethics and laws both exist in the context of their jurisdictions and the people who write them. If we wanted to supersede this with some kind of universal ethical argument, you would need some incontrovertible proof. For example, in the teaching license issue, can you show with unequivocal evidence that there is a marked difference between licensed and unlicensed given meeting of other applicable guidelines in outcomes. If so, then maybe an ethical argument can be made.

 

[R. Matey]

Does anyone know? I know the therapist got pissed I was asking for specifics

I mean that's telling right there.

 

[R. Matey]

Which is why I said "in some cases." Ethics and laws both exist in the context of their jurisdictions and the people who write them. If we wanted to supersede this with some kind of universal ethical argument, you would need some incontrovertible proof. For example, in the teaching license issue, can you show with unequivocal evidence that there is a marked difference between licensed and unlicensed given meeting of other applicable guidelines in outcomes. If so, then maybe an ethical argument can be made.

I guess I was thinking that standards of practice set forth by professional organizations counted as evidence and whether individual jurisdictions chose to follow those guidelines is a completely different matter. Sure, we can both rightly criticize the evidence for the guidelines, but they do exist on the basis of evidence. I mean why have a two year postdoc for neuropsychology if you can bill neuropsychology codes in Ohio without meeting this criteria?

 

[WisNeuro]

I guess I was thinking that standards of practice set forth by professional organizations counted as evidence and whether individual jurisdictions chose to follow those guidelines is a completely different matter. Sure, we can both rightly criticize the evidence for the guidelines, but they do exist on the basis of evidence. I mean why have a two year postdoc for neuropsychology if you can bill neuropsychology codes in Ohio without meeting this criteria?

Good question, and, if you want to live in Ohio, it becomes a choice. But, part of this is a subjective argument about what a certain group believes is ethical. Cuius regio, eius religio.

 

[R. Matey]

Good question, and, if you want to live in Ohio, it becomes a choice. But, part of this is a subjective argument about what a certain group believes is ethical. Cuius regio, eius religio.

Lol, why anyone lives in OH is a mystery to me. Maybe we should widen the scope then: do you think professional organizations set the ethical standards for practice or is this done by the states because states have enforcement authority and professional organization carry relatively little?

My opinion is that states set the ethical standards on the basis of expertise and evidence albeit imperfectly.

 

[WisNeuro]

Lol, why anyone lives in OH is a mystery to me. Maybe we should widen the scope then: do you think professional organizations set the ethical standards for practice or is this done by the states because states have enforcement authority and professional organization carry relatively little?

My opinion is that states set the ethical standards on the basis of expertise and evidence albeit imperfectly.

Both do, in actuality. As for the professional organizations, that is also fraught with bias and protectionism. Look at the arguments about RxP. Or the fact that many psychiatrists practice therapy after training that most psychologists would laugh at. There is no set of absolute ethical guidelines in healthcare professions. They are all created and shaped by parties with vested interests, oftentimes with little to no actual empirical backing. Now, I am not arguing for the abolishment of ethical guidelines or laws associated with healthcare practice, just the acknowledgement that these are not commandments from up on high from an indisputable source, they are created by people, sometimes with the aim of protecting vested financial interests. E.g., the physician definition issue that the AMA goes and lies to Congress about on a regular basis.