Anyone want to make an ethics complaint?

Therapulse.ai - The AI Scribe for Mental Health
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
DynamicDidactic

DynamicDidactic

Still Kickin'
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2010
Messages
1,839
Reaction score
1,560
Saw this on the Daily Show
http://www.hulu.com/watch/800272#i1,p28,d1

Interview is Dr. Karen Ruskin, psychotherapist. A quick google search
http://www.drkarenruskin.com/

Of course it was a bit hard to figure out where and in what the dear Dr. has their doctorate in. Some searching comes up with the following:
Psy.D., North Central University, Philosophy in Psychology, 1999

http://www.griefsupportservices.org...vices/counselling_desc.php?councell_id=357031

So, that seems like a non-practicable doctorate. Thus, wouldn't representing oneself as a mental health professional with a doctorate that is not in the field of practice misrepresentation? Or is it all clear b/c she avoids using PsyD anywhere and does not state psychologist?
Members don't see this ad.
 
I don't think there is anyway to stop this type of misleading practice. Fortunately people do seem to understand what a psychologist is still so it is important to keep pointing out those who are not and pretend to be the same thing. When explaining it to people I usually emphasize psychologists knowledge of law and ethics to help delineate between dr. therapists like this.
 
I couldn't even find that program online (I was curious what a PsyD in Philosophy of Psychology would look like). I found a North Central University, but they have no graduate programs. Then there's this: http://www.ncu.edu/school-of-psychology/doctor-of-philosophy-in-psychology,. This is an online university called Northcentral University, and it's a PhD in psychology. Hard to tell what was around in 1999, though.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
DynamicDidactic said:
Saw this on the Daily Show
http://www.hulu.com/watch/800272#i1,p28,d1

Interview is Dr. Karen Ruskin, psychotherapist. A quick google search
http://www.drkarenruskin.com/

Of course it was a bit hard to figure out where and in what the dear Dr. has their doctorate in. Some searching comes up with the following:
Psy.D., North Central University, Philosophy in Psychology, 1999

http://www.griefsupportservices.org...vices/counselling_desc.php?councell_id=357031

So, that seems like a non-practicable doctorate. Thus, wouldn't representing oneself as a mental health professional with a doctorate that is not in the field of practice misrepresentation? Or is it all clear b/c she avoids using PsyD anywhere and does not state psychologist?
Click to expand...


Does this mean she has side-stepped violating ethics by not presenting herself as a "psychologist," even though she actively refers to herself and her practice as "Dr. Ruskin"/"Dr. Ruskin and associates?"
 
Yikes, I read her blog post about the interview out of curiosity and it is such an atrocious, clunky mess. She doesn't appear particularly adept at expressing herself across any medium.
 
what state is this woman licesned in?
 
Our hospital is going to hire a LCSW who has a doctorate in parapsychology. She was telling the admin staff to call her doctor. Me and a colleague were talking about it and I said that it was an insult to the "real parapsychologists" because she didn't even go to a university for her degree, it was an online parapsychology degree!
 
Therapist4Chnge said:
WTH is parapsychology?! I mean…I googled it, but that's a joke, right?
Click to expand...
The person is a real licensed professional who may be hired. Not a joke. The part about offending the real parapsychologists cause it's an online degree is a joke. 🙂
Haven't you ever seen Ghostbusters? Parapsychologists are cool!
ghostbusters4a-2-web.jpg
 
smalltownpsych said:
I don't think there is anyway to stop this type of misleading practice. Fortunately people do seem to understand what a psychologist is still so it is important to keep pointing out those who are not and pretend to be the same thing. When explaining it to people I usually emphasize psychologists knowledge of law and ethics to help delineate between dr. therapists like this.
Click to expand...

The way to stop it is two-fold:
1. Propose/revise stricter rules and regulations within each state regarding licensure.
2. Pursue current avenues as established by each state. All states have a mechanism to address fraud/misconduct (typically through the appropriate licensing board of the state).

A far less likely but not unheard of option:
3. Have a famous person and/or legislature loss a family member to a quack and then legislation can get jammed through.
 
Last edited:
Therapist4Chnge said:
The way to stop it is two-fold:
1. Propose/revise stricter rules and regulations within each state regarding licensure.
2. Pursue current avenues as established by each state. All states have a mechanism to address fraud/misconduct (typically through the appropriate licensing board of the state).
Click to expand...
Why would I advocate for stricter requirements for other mental health practitioners? I am glad that we have very strict guidelines for our own licensing board. In California they wanted to combine the licensing boards and thankfully they didn't. I believe in fighting for my patients by fighting to preserve the profession and title of psychologist first and foremost.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
smalltownpsych said:
Our hospital is going to hire a LCSW who has a doctorate in parapsychology. She was telling the admin staff to call her doctor. Me and a colleague were talking about it and I said that it was an insult to the "real parapsychologists" because she didn't even go to a university for her degree, it was an online parapsychology degree!
Click to expand...

First thought: WTF you can get a doctorate in parapsychology???
Second thought: Ghostbusters!
 
I guess I'll just tell you guys now that i'm not really an undergrad student, I'm also a Dr..I went to Psych844 Online University, but then again, I take my education pretty seriously.
 
A quote from her blog on the whole thing-
" I feel so blessed that FOX News provides me with such an amazing opportunity, which is to do what I love and am passionate about: provide insights through the lens of a Psychotherapist in order to help people."
First, just a general ugh cus of fox news. Second, I am reminded of last summer when a bunch of networks were bringing on psychologists to analyze the Hollywood dude's son who went on a rampage. Anything they were saying wasn't informative at all, just echoing what the anchors were speculating with the title of "psychologist" after their name.
 
Also, to that thread that was on here awhile ago asking how to become a celebrity psychologist, this woman is the answer
 
arottenapple said:
A quote from her blog on the whole thing-
" I feel so blessed that FOX News provides me with such an amazing opportunity, which is to do what I love and am passionate about: provide insights through the lens of a Psychotherapist in order to help people."
First, just a general ugh cus of fox news. Second, I am reminded of last summer when a bunch of networks were bringing on psychologists to analyze the Hollywood dude's son who went on a rampage. Anything they were saying wasn't informative at all, just echoing what the anchors were speculating with the title of "psychologist" after their name.
Click to expand...

This is what I hate about a lot of mainstream journalism, especially 24 hour TV "news" channels. Anchors playing amateur forensic psychologist, consulting with people who are horrendously underqualified and the constant coverage turns criminals into celebrities. Report what you know and move on. Leave the psychology to the psychologists.
 
Chalupacabra said:
This is what I hate about a lot of mainstream journalism, especially 24 hour TV "news" channels. Anchors playing amateur forensic psychologist, consulting with people who are horrendously underqualified and the constant coverage turns criminals into celebrities. Report what you know and move on. Leave the psychology to the psychologists.
Click to expand...
The people who think they are experts on human behavior and motivation are legion. My own mother, retired journalist by the way, loves to pontificate opinions about everything psychological with little to no evidence to support it. One incident to illustrate was when she referred to her former therapist as a psychologist and when I corrected her said that I was just being defensive. Aargh. I think I need therapy! :arghh:
 
DynamicDidactic said:
No MA people on this board looking to bring this up with their licensing board?
http://www.mass.gov/ocabr/licensee/dpl-boards/mh/
Click to expand...

MA Licensed Psychologist here. Not sure on what grounds I would bring a complaint against her. In looking at her website, I see nowhere where she refers to herself with any restricted terms. She call calls herself "doctor"- maybe a little disingenuous, depending upon her what her degree actually is in, but nothing necessarily unethical about that. Otherwise, she refers to herself as "psychotherapist"- another non-legislated term. The only regulated term she uses is LMFT, and that's a masters level credential- unrelated to her Psy.D. (or whatever it is). Calling yourself "the Human Behavior Expert" is arrogant, but not necessarily grounds for a complaint.
 
I had always been under the impression that "Dr.Drew" was a psychiatrist based on his work on tv..yesterday i looked him up and he's an internist.
 
ClinicalABA said:
MA Licensed Psychologist here. Not sure on what grounds I would bring a complaint against her.
Click to expand...

It depends on how the statutes/regulations are worded in the licensing state. Reading her website, it is obvious that she is skirting the line with titles, but she is careful to not call herself a psychologist (thankfully). Someone could argue that using "Dr." in conjunction with a mid-level licensure is being purposefully misleading as it implies a level of expertise not directly associated with that particular licensure.

For instance, if I received a Ph.D. in Physics and I was an LMHC, calling myself Dr. So and So and practicing as an LMHC could be a problem. The fact her doctorate is in Psychology isn't really relevant because it is non-licensable (just like a Ph.D. in Physics, Creative Writing, etc), so it was never intended to be used in that context. Conflating the degree with other training would be my biggest objection.
 
Therapist4Chnge said:
It depends on how the statutes/regulations are worded in the licensing state. Reading her website, it is obvious that she is skirting the line with titles, but she is careful to not call herself a psychologist (thankfully). Someone could argue that using "Dr." in conjunction with a mid-level licensure is being purposefully misleading as it implies a level of expertise not directly associated with that particular licensure.

For instance, if I received a Ph.D. in Physics and I was an LMHC, calling myself Dr. So and So and practicing as an LMHC could be a problem. The fact her doctorate is in Psychology isn't really relevant because it is non-licensable (just like a Ph.D. in Physics, Creative Writing, etc), so it was never intended to be used in that context. Conflating the degree with other training would be my biggest objection.
Click to expand...

Just did a check on this issue. From the site http://www.mass.gov/ocabr/licensee/.../policy-bulletin-regarding-licensure-hsp.html

"Persons with a Doctorate in Psychology Practicing Independently as Psychotherapists. Unlicensed individuals who have a doctoral degree in Psychology from a Designated Doctoral Program*, who practice independently under the title of "psychotherapist," are considered by the Board of Registration to be practicing Psychology without a license. The Board regards such action as an attempt to circumvent the Psychology licensing law and subject to discipline."

The asterisk is referenced thusly-

"*Designated Doctoral Program in Psychology. The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) in collaboration with the National Register in Psychology, designates doctoral programs in Psychology that meet specified criteria as providing adequate preparation for licensure. Most states will issue a license only to those individuals who have doctoral degrees from a designated doctoral program. In Massachusetts, the Board has required since September 2000 that the doctoral degree must be granted by a program that has been designated at the time the degree is granted or within two years thereafter (215 CMR 3.03(1)(b))."

It's still not clear if this clearly applies in this instance. Her doctorate is likely not from a "designated" program. It's also not clear if she technically counts as "unlicensed" as she is a licensed LMFT. However, it seems to me that she is violating the intent of this bulletin, in that she is deceiving the public by connecting her doctorate with the term "psychotherapist," as the two things are not related. Perhaps it's worth some follow-up.
 
ClinicalABA said:
Just did a check on this issue. From the site http://www.mass.gov/ocabr/licensee/.../policy-bulletin-regarding-licensure-hsp.html

"Persons with a Doctorate in Psychology Practicing Independently as Psychotherapists. Unlicensed individuals who have a doctoral degree in Psychology from a Designated Doctoral Program*, who practice independently under the title of "psychotherapist," are considered by the Board of Registration to be practicing Psychology without a license. The Board regards such action as an attempt to circumvent the Psychology licensing law and subject to discipline."

The asterisk is referenced thusly-

"*Designated Doctoral Program in Psychology. The Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) in collaboration with the National Register in Psychology, designates doctoral programs in Psychology that meet specified criteria as providing adequate preparation for licensure. Most states will issue a license only to those individuals who have doctoral degrees from a designated doctoral program. In Massachusetts, the Board has required since September 2000 that the doctoral degree must be granted by a program that has been designated at the time the degree is granted or within two years thereafter (215 CMR 3.03(1)(b))."

It's still not clear if this clearly applies in this instance. Her doctorate is likely not from a "designated" program. It's also not clear if she technically counts as "unlicensed" as she is a licensed LMFT. However, it seems to me that she is violating the intent of this bulletin, in that she is deceiving the public by connecting her doctorate with the term "psychotherapist," as the two things are not related. Perhaps it's worth some follow-up.
Click to expand...
Wow, that is amazing work on your end. As a lowly post doc in a far away state, I do not feel secure complaining about this. However, if there is a licensed MA practitioner, I think its worthwhile to contact the licensing board.
 
eremitestar said:
I couldn't even find that program online (I was curious what a PsyD in Philosophy of Psychology would look like). I found a North Central University, but they have no graduate programs. Then there's this: http://www.ncu.edu/school-of-psychology/doctor-of-philosophy-in-psychology,. This is an online university called Northcentral University, and it's a PhD in psychology. Hard to tell what was around in 1999, though.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, the site where she lists "North Central University" as the source of her doctorate also lists Nova Southeastern as the source of her MA in Marriage and Family Counseling. However, a license search on her LMFT at the MA Division of Professional Licensure lists "S Cal Univ" as her "School" (as a point of reference, my info on that site lists where I received my terminal degree related to the discipline I'm licensed in). I find no such place as "Southern California U.", but given all the other goofiness going on, it's likely California Southern- 100% longline degrees!! The plot thickens!
 
ClinicalABA said:
Interestingly, the site where she lists "North Central University" as the source of her doctorate also lists Nova Southeastern as the source of her MA in Marriage and Family Counseling. However, a license search on her LMFT at the MA Division of Professional Licensure lists "S Cal Univ" as her "School" (as a point of reference, my info on that site lists where I received my terminal degree related to the discipline I'm licensed in). I find no such place as "Southern California U.", but given all the other goofiness going on, it's likely California Southern- 100% longline degrees!! The plot thickens!
Click to expand...

The misrepresentation of her educational background on her website -- can that be grounds for an ethical complaint?
 
Therapist4Chnge said:
Yes.
The APA Ethic Guidelines are quite clear about misrepresenting yourself to the public.
Click to expand...

As as a non-psychologist, the clinician in question would not be subject to the APA guidelines. However, the AAMFT Ethical guidelines have similar language. It gets confusing regarding actual reporting of misconduct (at least in MA)- The Board of Registration of Psychologist would be the likely recipient of a complaint regarding a misleading combination of the terms "doctor" and "psychotherapist", as- in certain circumstances- that would be classified as practicing psychology without a license. On the other hand, a complaint about misrepresenting your education as an LMFT would be heard by the Board of Allied Mental Health. All that said, it's not clear that she has misrepresented any education- the info on the websites may have been posted by third parties, and she may not even know about it. (I know that on the website of an institutional I'm affiliated with, they list my credential as "Psy.D." (oh the horror😱!!), and continue to do so despite my (documented) efforts to correct the slight.. I mean oversight on their part. As for actually making a complaint, the usual first step in non-emergency cases like this is to informally point out the discretion to the "guilty" party. If that doesn't lead to changes, then more formal complaints may be warranted.

Coincidentally, the pop-up add that came up on the AAMFT site is for NorthCentral University.
 
Just noticed this from the AAMFT Code of Ethics:

9.5 Educational Credentials.
Marriage and family therapists claim degrees for their clinical services only if those degrees demonstrate training and education in marriage and family therapy or related fields.

I think we have a winner in the category of actual, substantiated ethical violation! She calls herself Dr. Karen all over the place (it should actually be a felony, or even some violation of international treaty, to refer to yourself as "Dr. FirstNameOnly"- it's sorta okay if you work with little kids and your last name is difficult to pronounce, for the kid to refer to you as "Dr. FirstNameOnly", though I still think "Dr. InitialOfLastName" is better).
 
Sorry for all the posts, but I'm on roll with this one. On her website, one of her "associates" lists his specialties as:
  • Substance Abuse
  • Addictions (e.g., drugs, pornography)
  • Crisis
  • Life Transitions
  • Trauma
  • Depression
  • Anxiety
  • Grief
  • Severe and Persistent Mental Illness
  • Divorce
  • Parenting
  • Job Change
  • Couples/Relationship Issues
  • Chronic Medical Illness
  • Family Counseling
  • Men’s Issues
  • Young Adults

How the heck could you "specialize" in all that!! As a comparison, my list of "specialties" is limited to a combination of specific age-groups, diagnoses, and service delivery locations (e.g. diagnosis and community-based treatment of young children with ASD). I have experiences and competencies in other areas, and do provide other types of services, but would never profess them to be "specialties"). Dr. Karen (or "the doc" as she calls herself on her website) lists, as one of her many areas of specialty, "human behavior". I wonder if she truly believes that. (I bet she couldn't tell the difference between a discriminative stimuli and a discrimination lawsuit). I have had the opportunity to interact socially and professionally with many researchers and clinicians who are truly experts in human behavior, but few- if any- would represent that to the public as their "specialty"- it's too broad and all-encompassing to be meaningful, plus it makes you sound like an arrogant ****.
 
On a related note-- I recently became aware of a clinician practicing in NYC as an (legitimate) LCSW... who refers to herself as a "Licensed Clinical Psychologist with a foreign license". She also represents herself as "Dr. So-and-so". Her doctorate was earned outside of the US. I think she's not technically breaking any rules in that she's disclosing enough to toe the line, but it kind of leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.
 
thewesternsky said:
On a related note-- I recently became aware of a clinician practicing in NYC as an (legitimate) LCSW... who refers to herself as a "Licensed Clinical Psychologist with a foreign license". She also represents herself as "Dr. So-and-so". Her doctorate was earned outside of the US. I think she's not technically breaking any rules in that she's disclosing enough to toe the line, but it kind of leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Well, I would say that calling herself a licensed clinical psychologist actually is a technical violation considering she is not licensed in that capacity where she is practicing. I'm curious as to what the state regulatory board would think.
 
BuckeyeLove said:
I've noticed this trend on websites for certain psychologists who solely work in PP. Experts in everything. Often with no explanation re: the specialized training.
Click to expand...

I root for those people to be "experts" in a court case, but most know better and just prey on then unsuspecting public.
 
ClinicalABA said:
Just noticed this from the AAMFT Code of Ethics:

9.5 Educational Credentials.
Marriage and family therapists claim degrees for their clinical services only if those degrees demonstrate training and education in marriage and family therapy or related fields.

I think we have a winner in the category of actual, substantiated ethical violation! She calls herself Dr. Karen all over the place (it should actually be a felony, or even some violation of international treaty, to refer to yourself as "Dr. FirstNameOnly"- it's sorta okay if you work with little kids and your last name is difficult to pronounce, for the kid to refer to you as "Dr. FirstNameOnly", though I still think "Dr. InitialOfLastName" is better).
Click to expand...
someone should really contact the authorities.
 
smalltownpsych said:
Why would I advocate for stricter requirements for other mental health practitioners?
Click to expand...
I can only speak to my own tiredhead, but I have oft experienced said tiredhead from new clients who came from a clearly unqualified (or multiple unqualified mental health practitioners). "He just talked about Adler and his family to me". (Not to pick on Adler, but you get the gist). I tire of these people, but that's a minor issue. Most important is that I care about these people and they're being underserved by imbeciles with fake/low level/inappropriate degrees practicing well outside the scope of their practice and skirting getting busted by using vague terms. So, I'm all about asking for stricter requirements.

As a licensed clinical psychologist, I recognize that most people outside of mental health (and even some IN mental health) cant keep straight the difference between what I do and what our psychiatrists do. If people cant remember that, how are they going to discriminate between what either of us do and "psychotherapists"? And that's why I'm all about completely nixing the term "psychotherapist". I think the term you use should be the term you're licensed under. In fact, I just remembered talking to a Physical Therapist (so someone in allied health, someone you'd think should know the difference) and she told me her mom was a psychologist. Later, it became clear she didnt actually know, and from context I figured out her mom is an LCSW. No hate against LCSWs by any stretch, but she should represent herself as an LCSW, not a "psychotherapist"- even her own daughter is confused and she's an intelligent woman.

MFT's - gotta call yourselves MFT's not "psycholinguistic marital bliss maker and shaman". If people are called what they're licensed as, much of this goes away because it invites a semblance of transparency.
 
Using the term "psychotherapist" is intentionally vague. It is the responsibility of the treating provider to be crystal clear about their title/training/role, it isn't up to the patient to try and figure those things out.

This all goes back to, "you do therapy, I do therapy! You 'assess' people, and so do I!" Blurring the line is good for business for many....and bad for us bc out training gets marginalized.
 
bmedclinic said:
I can only speak to my own tiredhead, but I have oft experienced said tiredhead from new clients who came from a clearly unqualified (or multiple unqualified mental health practitioners). "He just talked about Adler and his family to me". (Not to pick on Adler, but you get the gist). I tire of these people, but that's a minor issue. Most important is that I care about these people and they're being underserved by imbeciles with fake/low level/inappropriate degrees practicing well outside the scope of their practice and skirting getting busted by using vague terms. So, I'm all about asking for stricter requirements.

As a licensed clinical psychologist, I recognize that most people outside of mental health (and even some IN mental health) cant keep straight the difference between what I do and what our psychiatrists do. If people cant remember that, how are they going to discriminate between what either of us do and "psychotherapists"? And that's why I'm all about completely nixing the term "psychotherapist". I think the term you use should be the term you're licensed under. In fact, I just remembered talking to a Physical Therapist (so someone in allied health, someone you'd think should know the difference) and she told me her mom was a psychologist. Later, it became clear she didnt actually know, and from context I figured out her mom is an LCSW. No hate against LCSWs by any stretch, but she should represent herself as an LCSW, not a "psychotherapist"- even her own daughter is confused and she's an intelligent woman.

MFT's - gotta call yourselves MFT's not "psycholinguistic marital bliss maker and shaman". If people are called what they're licensed as, much of this goes away because it invites a semblance of transparency.
Click to expand...
I do believe in protecting patients and part of that is ensuring that psychologists continue to focus on and demonstrate our advantages over the midlevel providers. i agree that we need to protect our patients but I also think that the proliferation of therapists with poor education and faux supervision is a huge problem that we tend to ignore and act as though all of them have gone through similar rigorous training. My final point is that I don't really believe that they should practice independently.
 
I'm all for transparency. If this became wide-spread practice, I wouldn't have to make an ad lib presentation every time someone asks what I'm going to school for. Nobody outside of the healthcare setting seems to understand that not every mental health professional is a psychologist, let alone what clinical social work is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Ethics complaint question
Replies
7
Views
771
Psychai
Psychai
quickpsych
Republicans Push to Make 'Trump Derangement Syndrome' a Mental Illness
Replies
30
Views
2K
PsyDr
PsyDr
D
Ethics of this 1099 contract clinical psychologist job
Replies
7
Views
1K
ClinicalABA
ClinicalABA
fy6190
non-practicing MD wanting to make transition to PsyD/PhD, or a Master's
Replies
31
Views
3K
singasongofjoy
singasongofjoy
BuckeyeLove
Olfactory ethics: The Politics of Smell in Modern and Contemporary Prose
Replies
29
Views
6K
ClinicalABA
ClinicalABA
Top