Grad school debt

[WisNeuro]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

They posted some of the new APPIC survey data a week or two ago. This caught my eye. The F is wrong with some of you people!?! Now, I'm astounded with people who hit 100k in debt. Who in the hell is grabbing 300k in debt and higher. That is inconceivable to me. That's way more than my physician wife accrued from undergrad and med school combined, and she'll make at least 3 times more in yearly salary than these folks!


9. Please estimate the total amount of DEBT that you have accrued
to date as a consequence of attending GRADUATE SCHOOL IN
PSYCHOLOGY, including tuition, fees, living expenses, books, etc.

Please include all forms of debt such as student loans, credit
cards, personal loans, etc. Please do NOT include undergraduate
debt or debt that is unrelated to your graduate training.

Mean = $ 90,998 Median = $63,131
SD = $100,033

$0 566 25%
$1 - $9,999 98 4%
$10,000 - $19,999 115 5%
$20,000 - $29,999 111 5%
$30,000 - $39,999 76 3%
$40,000 - $49,999 51 2%
$50,000 - $59,999 68 3%
$60,000 - $69,999 78 3%
$70,000 - $79,999 58 3%
$80,000 - $89,999 74 3%
$90,000 - $99,999 40 2%
$100,000 - $149,999 313 14%
$150,000 - $199,999 235 10%
$200,000 - $249,999 202 9%
$250,000 - $299,999 100 4%
$300,000 - $349,999 55 2%
$350,000 - $399,999 21 1%
$400,000 or higher 23 1%

 

[LadyHalcyon]

They posted some of the new APPIC survey data a week or two ago. This caught my eye. The F is wrong with some of you people!?! Now, I'm astounded with people who hit 100k in debt. Who in the hell is grabbing 300k in debt and higher. That is inconceivable to me. That's way more than my physician wife accrued from undergrad and med school combined, and she'll make at least 3 times more in yearly salary than these folks!


9. Please estimate the total amount of DEBT that you have accrued
to date as a consequence of attending GRADUATE SCHOOL IN
PSYCHOLOGY, including tuition, fees, living expenses, books, etc.

Please include all forms of debt such as student loans, credit
cards, personal loans, etc. Please do NOT include undergraduate
debt or debt that is unrelated to your graduate training.

Mean = $ 90,998 Median = $63,131
SD = $100,033

$0 566 25%
$1 - $9,999 98 4%
$10,000 - $19,999 115 5%
$20,000 - $29,999 111 5%
$30,000 - $39,999 76 3%
$40,000 - $49,999 51 2%
$50,000 - $59,999 68 3%
$60,000 - $69,999 78 3%
$70,000 - $79,999 58 3%
$80,000 - $89,999 74 3%
$90,000 - $99,999 40 2%
$100,000 - $149,999 313 14%
$150,000 - $199,999 235 10%
$200,000 - $249,999 202 9%
$250,000 - $299,999 100 4%
$300,000 - $349,999 55 2%
$350,000 - $399,999 21 1%
$400,000 or higher 23 1%

For grad school I'm at about 60 grand. Then add in undergrad and that brings me to right under 100. I'm in serious denial about it all. Yay defense mechanisms.

Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile

 

[DynamicDidactic]

I think we need an intervention - thread to follow.

 

[psych.meout]

They posted some of the new APPIC survey data a week or two ago. This caught my eye. The F is wrong with some of you people!?! Now, I'm astounded with people who hit 100k in debt. Who in the hell is grabbing 300k in debt and higher. That is inconceivable to me. That's way more than my physician wife accrued from undergrad and med school combined, and she'll make at least 3 times more in yearly salary than these folks!

C'mon, we're not all hunky enough to land a sugar mama like you did.

 

[WisNeuro]

C'mon, we're not all hunky enough to land a sugar mama like you did.

Pssh, I'm the one that shouldered the financial load when she was in residency. 🙂

 

[bcliff]

$0 in UG debt, ~$15k in graduate school debt (~$700 in interest accrued so far) -- Still in doctoral training but, fully funded, and earning ~$30k/year now through clinical and research positions. I’m saving a lot and am starting to pay off debt to avoid accruing additional, unnecessary interest. Even this level of debt is stressful and more than I had anticipated before entering a fully funded PhD program -- I can’t imagine the stress (hopelessness, helplessness) associated with $$$,$$$ levels of debt.

 

[singasongofjoy]

Just thinking about 300k debt makes my skin crawl. I was lucky enough to rope my partner into marriage before he realized quite what he was getting himself into, and he ended up paying for my school (master's then PhD) basically from about the time we met until I graduated (with no debt, thank goodness)... but I do wonder how much I would have had otherwise. I've wised up a lot- mostly due to him - and wasn't the best with money in my 20s. It probably would have been an embarrassing amount of debt secondary to mindless habits like eating out instead of cooking- I was shocked when I finally sat down and added up how much I was spending on mediocre takeout. We were extremely frugal during my PhD program mostly due to his efforts, so left to my own devices and without someone to share living costs I suspect I probably would have ended up with at least 60. Now that we both have real jobs he is more spendy than I am... habits die hard I guess. Financial literacy courses should be required in both high school and undergrad, IMO.

 

[psych.meout]

Pssh, I'm the one that shouldered the financial load when she was in residency. 🙂

Pfft, that's called "playing the long game."

 

[wtfook]

They posted some of the new APPIC survey data a week or two ago. This caught my eye. The F is wrong with some of you people!?! Now, I'm astounded with people who hit 100k in debt. Who in the hell is grabbing 300k in debt and higher. That is inconceivable to me. That's way more than my physician wife accrued from undergrad and med school combined, and she'll make at least 3 times more in yearly salary than these folks!


9. Please estimate the total amount of DEBT that you have accrued
to date as a consequence of attending GRADUATE SCHOOL IN
PSYCHOLOGY, including tuition, fees, living expenses, books, etc.

Please include all forms of debt such as student loans, credit
cards, personal loans, etc. Please do NOT include undergraduate
debt or debt that is unrelated to your graduate training.

Mean = $ 90,998 Median = $63,131
SD = $100,033

$0 566 25%
$1 - $9,999 98 4%
$10,000 - $19,999 115 5%
$20,000 - $29,999 111 5%
$30,000 - $39,999 76 3%
$40,000 - $49,999 51 2%
$50,000 - $59,999 68 3%
$60,000 - $69,999 78 3%
$70,000 - $79,999 58 3%
$80,000 - $89,999 74 3%
$90,000 - $99,999 40 2%
$100,000 - $149,999 313 14%
$150,000 - $199,999 235 10%
$200,000 - $249,999 202 9%
$250,000 - $299,999 100 4%
$300,000 - $349,999 55 2%
$350,000 - $399,999 21 1%
$400,000 or higher 23 1%

Yes but who are these poor bastards who have 400k or higher? That's 80k or more per year of training if you're in a 5 year doctoral program. What in the world is going on here???

 

[Icculus8]

Are the stats broken down by type of program? I would be curious about the debt levels of those in PhD versus PsyD programs.

 

[WisNeuro]

Are the stats broken down by type of program? I would be curious about the debt levels of those in PhD versus PsyD programs.

These are not yet. sometimes they release additional stats that break it down that way at a later date. And, you can safely assume that there are large differences.

 

[psych.meout]

Yes but who are these poor bastards who have 400k or higher? That's 80k or more per year of training if you're in a 5 year doctoral program. What in the world is going on here???

I'm betting it's for living expenses. These people were probably not working during graduate school (I don't blame them), so they used their loans, credit cards, and other financial instruments to subsidize their lifestyles.

 

[wtfook]

I'm betting it's for living expenses. These people were probably not working during graduate school (I don't blame them), so they used their loans, credit cards, and other financial instruments to subsidize their lifestyles.

ARGH. It's so much about financial literacy and long term planning and realizing you do have to pay that back eventually and the amount of money you're going to make may not cut it. We don't teach people that in primary school and we really should.

 

[psych.meout]

ARGH. It's so much about financial literacy and long term planning and realizing you do have to pay that back eventually and the amount of money you're going to make may not cut it. We don't teach people that in primary school and we really should.

Well, there's that and also just plain cognitive biases. Student loans are so intangible and abstract that they don't really have as much of an impact as they should. They are positioned so far in the future that it is easy to forget about them or go into denial about the severity of the problems they create.

It reminds of a study I read a while back about the differential emotional consequences of paying with cash vs. credit card. People were much more distressed and mindful of their spending when they paid with cash that was physically gone after spending it vs. with credit.

 

[wtfook]

Well, there's that and also just plain cognitive biases. Student loans are so intangible and abstract that they don't really have as much of an impact as they should. They are positioned so far in the future that it is easy to forget about them or go into denial about the severity of the problems they create.

It reminds of a study I read a while back about the differential emotional consequences of paying with cash vs. credit card. People were much more distressed and mindful of their spending when they paid with cash that was physically gone after spending it vs. with credit.

It's very true. Just look at the amount of credit card debt the average American has as well. People constantly feel like the amount of loans is doable and only realize too late that it's not. I also read some stuff about how once numbers get to a certain size, the human brain just doesn't process it the way it should. Like we GET that $100 is a lot or $1000 but $100,000 is so big that it stops feeling tangible and can thus feel less weighty.

 

[psych.meout]

It's very true. Just look at the amount of credit card debt the average American has as well. People constantly feel like the amount of loans is doable and only realize too late that it's not. I also read some stuff about how once numbers get to a certain size, the human brain just doesn't process it the way it should. Like we GET that $100 is a lot or $1000 but $100,000 is so big that it stops feeling tangible and can thus feel less weighty.

There's also the problem of having overly optimistic assumptions. >$100,000 isn't so bad if you're in the far extreme of the remuneration distribution for psychologists and are bringing in physician-level pay or if there are generous and easily accessible government programs for debt forgiveness. The problems are that these are outlier situations or shaky prospects at best, respectively, but also they require you being able to work consistently. You never know what is going to happen to the economy or in your personal life that will affect your ability to work and earn, so you need hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Many people do not think this way and are blissfully ignorant in their optimism that their situations and decisions will work out despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Basically, most people are Lloyd Christmas.

 

[wtfook]

There's also the problem of having overly optimistic assumptions. >$100,000 isn't so bad if you're in the far extreme of the remuneration distribution for psychologists and are bringing in physician-level pay or if there are generous and easily accessible government programs for debt forgiveness. The problems are that these are outlier situations or shaky prospects at best, respectively, but also they require you being able to work consistently. You never know what is going to happen to the economy or in your personal life that will affect your ability to work and earn, so you need hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Many people do not think this way and are blissfully ignorant in their optimism that their situations and decisions will work out despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Basically, most people are Lloyd Christmas.

Right. I get wanting to pursue your dreams and not everyone has the means to limit their debt. Most non-PhD graduate programs aren't funded and it's just ridiculous how we ask people to take better degree for career advancement with crushing debt. Sadly, the career advancement comes with lower quality of living when the debt is so high and the career doesn't actually pay you the way being a physician or lawyer does.

 

[WisNeuro]

Right. I get wanting to pursue your dreams and not everyone has the means to limit their debt.

But they do. The means they have is the choice in career and education that they make. Unfortunately they have bought into the false narrative that there is some kind of psychologist shortage in this country. Not every dream is meant to be followed. Pragmatism has to be consulted now and then.

 

[RejectClinical]

I think the problem is that this debt starts out at age 18 when students enter college. I would bet that very few 18 year-olds are thinking long-term with regard to financial prospects.....unless they are lucky enough to have parents who will fund their education and/or good mentors who truly explain to them how debt will impact them for decades to come. I have friends sitting on tons of loans who aren't able to buy homes or put anything away for retirement. They will most likely be working well into their 70s (my guess). I'm blessed that I lived at home for college and got a very generous scholarship so I left undergrad with 0 debt. I also got into a funded program with one of the best stipends in the country. I'm very lucky in that regard as there were several times throughout my career trajectory where I could have easily picked a path that put me into a ton of debt. Being a psychologist is great, but not IMO if it means accruing 6 figures worth of debt. I know that's not everyone, but I personally would rather not have to worry about $, put money away for retirement, buy a home, and vacation on a regular basis, even if that meant being some place other than psych. There needs to be more counseling/mentorship/etc regarding financial burden with young adults. This isn't 40+ years ago.....a college degree doesn't go as far as it used to and costs more than ever.

 

[wtfook]

But they do. The means they have is the choice in career and education that they make. Unfortunately they have bought into the false narrative that there is some kind of psychologist shortage in this country. Not every dream is meant to be followed. Pragmatism has to be consulted now and then.

But of course that is predicated on this idea that it's cool for some people to just not go to graduate school at all and when that becomes true almost uniformly for people of lower income it's kind of problematic. So yes doing master's instead of doctoral is also cheaper or perhaps picking a different career like PA or Nursing over MD. I'm a pragmatist as well and I think opting to just NOT do it is maybe smarter in the long run, that you can find fulfillment in a lot of things, even if it's not the thing you wanted because you couldn't afford it. However, moving outside of the individual to the system, it's a little messed up that people have to make that decision in the first place and that in the end it disproportionally affects people without money and continues to perpetuate class divides.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Seeing this data gives me anxiety from vicarious trauma. I don't even have debt.

Anyone who looks at this and looks at median psychology earnings and thinks "most of this debt is reasonable" should spend some time talking to a financial adviser/accountant.

 

[WisNeuro]

But of course that is predicated on this idea that it's cool for some people to just not go to graduate school at all and when that becomes true almost uniformly for people of lower income it's kind of problematic. So yes doing master's instead of doctoral is also cheaper or perhaps picking a different career like PA or Nursing over MD. I'm a pragmatist as well and I think opting to just NOT do it is maybe smarter in the long run, that you can find fulfillment in a lot of things, even if it's not the thing you wanted because you couldn't afford it. However, moving outside of the individual to the system, it's a little messed up that people have to make that decision in the first place and that in the end it disproportionally affects people without money and continues to perpetuate class divides.

Still plenty of people from lower and middle lower class backgrounds getting through with zero and minimal debt in grad school. Additionally, it only exacerbates the problem that you raise. This argument proposes that the only way to get these people this education is to put them into 6 figure debt. How exactly does that help?

 

[BuckeyeLove]

Funny somewhat related anecdote. I know of an individual who failed to match upward of four times. On his last and final attempt before his graduate school was set to bounce him, he matched. During the years he didn't match, he continued to work at the same place, not gaining any additional experience to make him a better candidate, or at least appear to be a better candidate. He also went on lavish trips all over the world during those years. We guestimated his overall debt to be around 350. Ended up being 460 from what I last heard.

 

[WisNeuro]

Funny somewhat related anecdote. I know of an individual who failed to match upward of four times. On his last and final attempt before his graduate school was set to bounce him, he matched. During the years he didn't match, he continued to work at the same place, not gaining any additional experience to make him a better candidate, or at least appear to be a better candidate. He also went on lavish trips all over the world during those years. We guestimated his overall debt to be around 350. Ended up being 460 from what I last heard.

And, these are the people that deserve a life of indentured servitude.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Funny somewhat related anecdote. I know of an individual who failed to match upward of four times. On his last and final attempt before his graduate school was set to bounce him, he matched. During the years he didn't match, he continued to work at the same place, not gaining any additional experience to make him a better candidate, or at least appear to be a better candidate. He also went on lavish trips all over the world during those years. We guestimated his overall debt to be around 350. Ended up being 460 from what I last heard.

I met two interns at another site when I was an intern. A group of us were all out to lunch and the two were joking about the amount of debt they each had. They were exchanging the repayment amounts they were going to have to pay on the 300-400k debt they had accrued and had gotten calls already asking to start repaying it. I remember one saying that they were being asking for 3,200/month but explained they were on internship and needed to defer. One rationalized it by saying that she knew a student who went to medical school and came out with 800,000 in debt (yes, you read that correctly), so 300-400k isn't that bad.

You'll never guess the programs they went to.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

I think I've said this before, but I've also met more than a few licensed psychologists practicing in a variety of clinical contexts, who have huge debt loads and are consistently paying the lowest that they can via whatever federal repayment plan they choose (i.e., 10% of their overall income). Two I can think of off hand have said they are just going to do this forever and "not worry about it." Scary. (the weird thing is, one of these individuals has a huge debt load and was still able to procure a home loan, still not sure how that worked, but I'm not a financial advisor or a banker).

 

[psych.meout]

Funny somewhat related anecdote. I know of an individual who failed to match upward of four times. On his last and final attempt before his graduate school was set to bounce him, he matched. During the years he didn't match, he continued to work at the same place, not gaining any additional experience to make him a better candidate, or at least appear to be a better candidate. He also went on lavish trips all over the world during those years. We guestimated his overall debt to be around 350. Ended up being 460 from what I last heard.

I met two interns at another site when I was an intern. A group of us were all out to lunch and the two were joking about the amount of debt they each had. They were exchanging the repayment amounts they were going to have to pay on the 300-400k debt they had accrued and had gotten calls already asking to start repaying it. I remember one saying that they were being asking for 3,200/month but explained they were on internship and needed to defer. One rationalized it by saying that she knew a student who went to medical school and came out with 800,000 in debt (yes, you read that correctly), so 300-400k isn't that bad.

You'll never guess the programs they went to.

I think I've said this before, but I've also met more than a few licensed psychologists practicing in a variety of clinical contexts, who have huge debt loads and are consistently paying the lowest that they can via whatever federal repayment plan they choose (i.e., 10% of their overall income). Two I can think of off hand have said they are just going to do this forever and "not worry about it." Scary. (the weird thing is, one of these individuals has a huge debt load and was still able to procure a home loan, still not sure how that worked, but I'm not a financial advisor or a banker).

Am I supposed care that PSLF and other debt forgiveness programs are on the chopping block?

 

[WisNeuro]

I think I've said this before, but I've also met more than a few licensed psychologists practicing in a variety of clinical contexts, who have huge debt loads and are consistently paying the lowest that they can via whatever federal repayment plan they choose (i.e., 10% of their overall income). Two I can think of off hand have said they are just going to do this forever and "not worry about it." Scary. (the weird thing is, one of these individuals has a huge debt load and was still able to procure a home loan, still not sure how that worked, but I'm not a financial advisor or a banker).

Depends on when it was. It's getting tighter now, but even as of like a year or two ago, you could still get home loans very easily as long as you had a steady job. The thing is, you usually have to pay PMI and get a much higher interest rate than someone with no debt and a 20% down payment. So, you pay tens of thousands more over the course of the mortgage if you go the PMI/high debt route.

 

[Justanothergrad]

Am I supposed care that PSLF and other debt forgiveness programs are on the chopping block?

You should, but not for these reasons. We need good incentives to encourage highly trained mental health providers to engage in rural areas that are desperately under-served. Its the same way that I dont like how they abuse federal financial aid programs, but I don't want to see federal financial aid cease.

Depends on when it was. It's getting tighter now, but even as of like a year or two ago, you could still get home loans very easily as long as you had a steady job. The thing is, you usually have to pay PMI and get a much higher interest rate than someone with no debt and a 20% down payment. So, you pay tens of thousands more over the course of the mortgage if you go the PMI/high debt route.

But, 'A little extra for PMI and a higher interest rate the seems like such a good deal to own a home. It's how I got a degree! Whats a few hundred thousand dollars extra cost between friends for both of those things!?'

 

[psych.meout]

You should, but not for these reasons. We need good incentives to encourage highly trained mental health providers to engage in rural areas that are desperately under-served. Its the same way that I dont like how they abuse federal financial aid programs, but I don't want to see federal financial aid cease.

Right, I get that this is the intent of the program, but exactly how effective is it? Is it a better incentive than, say, spending the same amount of money on increasing provider pay than forgiving loans?

Furthermore, are those providers who need to take advantage of PSLF and similar programs actually "highly-trained?" Debt and program quality sure seem to be negatively correlated to me.

 

[Icculus8]

I agree that those amounts of debt are unfathomable, and it makes me wonder what the ideal solution would be. That students should simply stop going to for-profit schools? Education to prospective students that if they attend certain programs they will leave with a significant amount of debt? It seems like some students just want to be therapists so badly that they are willing to endure any amount of debt for a professional degree, and view it on par with attending medical school or law school and leaving with debt. To play devils advocate to myself, is that necessarily a bad thing? if some students choose to carry that much debt, although it may mean a lifetime of paying it off, with a reasonable salary they will be able to eventually?

I think I struggle with trying to understand my own stance on all of this. I would probably personally never advocate for a student to attend a program with questionable match rates and astronomical debt, but the way the system is set up, as long as students have the interest, and these programs can retain APA accreditation, it is hard to know where the change will come from. Are there changes that could or should be made to the accreditation process or standards that could help highlight some of these discrepancies between programs?

 

[CatsFan]

I agree that those amounts of debt are unfathomable, and it makes me wonder what the ideal solution would be. That students should simply stop going to for-profit schools? Education to prospective students that if they attend certain programs they will leave with a significant amount of debt? It seems like some students just want to be therapists so badly that they are willing to endure any amount of debt for a professional degree, and view it on par with attending medical school or law school and leaving with debt. To play devils advocate to myself, is that necessarily a bad thing? if some students choose to carry that much debt, although it may mean a lifetime of paying it off, with a reasonable salary they will be able to eventually?

I think I struggle with trying to understand my own stance on all of this. I would probably personally never advocate for a student to attend a program with questionable match rates and astronomical debt, but the way the system is set up, as long as students have the interest, and these programs can retain APA accreditation, it is hard to know where the change will come from. Are there changes that could or should be made to the accreditation process or standards that could help highlight some of these discrepancies between programs?

A required class for undergraduate psychology majors about the degree prospects and graduate school? Just throwing things out there...

400k in student loans is unfathomable to me as well. Who is giving these people that amount in loans?!

 

[WisNeuro]

I agree that those amounts of debt are unfathomable, and it makes me wonder what the ideal solution would be. That students should simply stop going to for-profit schools? Education to prospective students that if they attend certain programs they will leave with a significant amount of debt? It seems like some students just want to be therapists so badly that they are willing to endure any amount of debt for a professional degree, and view it on par with attending medical school or law school and leaving with debt. To play devils advocate to myself, is that necessarily a bad thing? if some students choose to carry that much debt, although it may mean a lifetime of paying it off, with a reasonable salary they will be able to eventually?

It is when your tax dollars go to subsidize that forgiveness. I'd rather that money go to education and expanding health care options than subsidizing someone's poor life choices.

 

[PsyDr]

Just all of this.....

 

[wtfook]

Still plenty of people from lower and middle lower class backgrounds getting through with zero and minimal debt in grad school. Additionally, it only exacerbates the problem that you raise. This argument proposes that the only way to get these people this education is to put them into 6 figure debt. How exactly does that help?

I completely agree. The norm in this country is that debt is just a thing everyone has to deal with. Other people in other countries don't have this problem. We just expect individuals to handle it and work 10x harder if necessary rather than the system taking on the responsibility of making life easier for everyone. Then it ends with this mindset of, "Oh 100k debt? That's totally doable!!"

T_T

 

[psych.meout]

I agree that those amounts of debt are unfathomable, and it makes me wonder what the ideal solution would be. That students should simply stop going to for-profit schools? Education to prospective students that if they attend certain programs they will leave with a significant amount of debt? It seems like some students just want to be therapists so badly that they are willing to endure any amount of debt for a professional degree, and view it on par with attending medical school or law school and leaving with debt. To play devils advocate to myself, is that necessarily a bad thing? if some students choose to carry that much debt, although it may mean a lifetime of paying it off, with a reasonable salary they will be able to eventually?

That's fine as long as the public is not subsidizing their debt

I think I struggle with trying to understand my own stance on all of this. I would probably personally never advocate for a student to attend a program with questionable match rates and astronomical debt, but the way the system is set up, as long as students have the interest, and these programs can retain APA accreditation, it is hard to know where the change will come from. Are there changes that could or should be made to the accreditation process or standards that could help highlight some of these discrepancies between programs?

And this is why you have to counter things on the supply side, not the demand side. You need to remove the accreditation from these shyster programs, because many prospective students don't know better than to take on all this debt for poor quality training or rationalize their decisions to do so.

 

[smalltownpsych]

That's fine as long as the public is not subsidizing their debt


And this is why you have to counter things on the supply side, not the demand side. You need to remove the accreditation from these shyster programs, because many prospective students don't know better than to take on all this debt for poor quality training or rationalize their decisions to do so.

Completely agree, but doesn't the APA profit or at least derive some benefits from these shyster programs and isn't that part of the problem?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

And this is why you have to counter things on the supply side, not the demand side. You need to remove the accreditation from these shyster programs, because many prospective students don't know better than to take on all this debt for poor quality training or rationalize their decisions to do so.

Then who is going to kickback...uhm...sponsor various APA events?

The dirty worst kept secret in psychology is the APA giving a pass to the malignant programs bc they bring in $ and help w membership #’s.

 

[WisNeuro]

Let's propose a cap on loan forgiveness that equals only the median salary of your chosen profession. 🙂

 

[psych.meout]

Completely agree, but doesn't the APA profit or at least derive some benefits from these shyster programs and isn't that part of the problem?

Then who is going to kickback...uhm...sponsor various APA events?

The dirty worst kept secret in psychology is the APA giving a pass to the malignant programs bc they bring in $ and help w membership #’s.

Yep, the APA really sucks. My hope is that reform occurs, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

This is why I understand and appreciate what the PCSAS people are doing, but they also hold other positions with which I don't really agree.

Let's propose a cap on loan forgiveness that equals only the median salary of your chosen profession. 🙂

What about linking it to the quality of the institution? Why should diploma mill programs disproportionately benefit?

 

[Justanothergrad]

Right, I get that this is the intent of the program, but exactly how effective is it? Is it a better incentive than, say, spending the same amount of money on increasing provider pay than forgiving loans?

Furthermore, are those providers who need to take advantage of PSLF and similar programs actually "highly-trained?" Debt and program quality sure seem to be negatively correlated to me.

It provides a useful service that can be helpful in very important ways. It just needs tweaking.

Yep, the APA really sucks. My hope is that reform occurs, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

This is why I understand and appreciate what the PCSAS people are doing, but they also hold other positions with which I don't really agree.

Ugh. The accreditation standard that never will be for so many good (and a few bad) reasons. I dont see apa changing though.

What about linking it to the quality of the institution? Why should diploma mill programs disproportionately benefit?

I think that would work itself out.

 

[psych.meout]

It provides a useful service that can be helpful in very important ways. It just needs tweaking.

How do you propose doing this?

Ugh. The accreditation standard that never will be for so many good (and a few bad) reasons. I dont see apa changing though.

Preaching to the choir.

I think that would work itself out.

How so?

 

[WisNeuro]

How so?

Theoretically, if people knew they were still on the hook for X after forgiveness of Y, they would minimize X. So, people wouldn't go to those places with much more over the allowed forgiveness limit as much. Theoretically.

 

[psych.meout]

Theoretically, if people knew they were still on the hook for X after forgiveness of Y, they would minimize X. So, people wouldn't go to those places with much more over the allowed forgiveness limit as much. Theoretically.

Ok, but doesn't that kind of run counter to the purpose of PSLF? If people are only getting a fraction of the graduate debts forgiven, you're going to have to reduce the time commitment or you're going to get fewer people electing to use the program (ergo, fewer providers for underserved communities). Reducing the time commitment might harm the underlying purpose of encouraging providers to work with underserved populations (e.g., more turnover, fewer providers if people don't think PSLF is worth their while without full forgiveness).

Regardless, how does this get around the problem of PSLF users likely having poorer quality of training compared to those who do not? Aren't you basically relegating underserved group to receive poorer quality mental health services, thus perpetuating the disparities in care? I understand that poorer quality is better than no care at all, but that's still a bit messed up.

Would it be wiser to simply use the PSLF money to subsidize the salaries of positions in underserved areas, thus making them more competitive and attracting better quality providers (e.g., smalltownpsych)?

 

[PsyDr]

Theoretically, if people knew they were still on the hook for X after forgiveness of Y, they would minimize X. So, people wouldn't go to those places with much more over the allowed forgiveness limit as much. Theoretically.

It's not a rationale market, though. I maintain that some people go into this field for emotional purposes.

 

[WisNeuro]

As I said, theoretically. It's like economic and political theories. They make sense when you assume people are rational actors. Of course, we know that few people are rational actors. So, it'd have a likely small effect on people forgoing the debt, but at least my tax dollars wouldn't be footing the bill.

 

[PsyDr]

As I said, theoretically. It's like economic and political theories. They make sense when you assume people are rational actors. Of course, we know that few people are rational actors. So, it'd have a likely small effect on people forgoing the debt, but at least my tax dollars wouldn't be footing the bill.

Eh, your tax bill is benefiting to an incredible degree. Federal student loan rates are legislatively required to be determined by their mathematical relationship to T-bills. The formula is a bit tricky, but considering it a multiple isn't too far off. T bills are the federal govt's way of securing credit, preventing inflation/deflation, and securing the dollar as the only method by which one can buy petroleum (that's why paying off the entirety of the national debt would the terrible for the USA).

Think of it this way: I offer loans, and have no cash on hand. I borrow 100k at 1% interest, and loan that same money back to you at 7% in a way that means you can never really get out of paying and you goota pay me monthly. And I repeat this process a few thousand times. Because I pay the original lender on time, always, my credit rating is great. So I can borrow more money at even better rates. Like my lender is giving me interest rates lower than inflation. My lending business gets bigger and bigger. And I need new borrowers. So I tell our new hires that I'll forgive their loans after 10 years if they take a below market salary. People end up talking and as a result, borrow more and more because they either think they will succeed or come work for me. I do end up having to take a loss on these people, but I am making 7X what I could make otherwise so it's okay.

 

[WisNeuro]

Eh, your tax bill is benefiting to an incredible degree. Federal student loan rates are legislatively required to be determined by their mathematical relationship to T-bills. The formula is a bit tricky, but considering it a multiple isn't too far off. T bills are the federal govt's way of securing credit, preventing inflation/deflation, and securing the dollar as the only method by which one can buy petroleum (that's why paying off the entirety of the national debt would the terrible for the USA).

Think of it this way: I offer loans, and have no cash on hand. I borrow 100k at 1% interest, and loan that same money back to you at 7% in a way that means you can never really get out of paying and you goota pay me monthly. And I repeat this process a few thousand times. Because I pay the original lender on time, always, my credit rating is great. So I can borrow more money at even better rates. Like my lender is giving me interest rates lower than inflation. My lending business gets bigger and bigger. And I need new borrowers. So I tell our new hires that I'll forgive their loans after 10 years if they take a below market salary. People end up talking and as a result, borrow more and more because they either think they will succeed or come work for me. I do end up having to take a loss on these people, but I am making 7X what I could make otherwise so it's okay.

I believe that it used to be true that it was a net win for the govt. But, recent numbers coming out show that more people than anticipated and borrowing more, don't match with original estimates. Last I saw, with two of the programs, it was a net loss of 35 billion something in a short time period. At some point the numbers invert, when you are writing off much more than you are bringing in from those increased interest rates.

 

[StellaB]

In addition to some of the things discussed here, we need to bring back caps on how much graduate students can borrow. Right now there are essentially no upper limits, which means there is very little downward pressure on the cost of for-profit PsyD programs (and law schools, honestly). As long as there are delusional students willing to signs for astronomical loans, these programs will make money hand-over-fist. There are no barriers to securing these loans, and the amounts can (and clearly do) become astronomical. If students could not borrow more than say $100k (still way too much, but just for example), schools would not be able to charge so much, because their customers wouldn't be able to put up the cash.

And to add to some of the anecdotes, I myself know several psychologists with debt in the $250 - $400k range. Some are banking on PSLF, and some are just resigned to a lifetime of living with roommates. This all makes me extremely anxious - not just for these people with an albatross around their neck (who either realize it or don't), but also for our broader economy. What happens when we realize no one is going to pay the $1.4T and growing tab? Or that the taxpayers have essentially agreed to subsidize the education and living expenses of people who were already privileged in the first place? How does this unwinding end? And by the way, private loan companies fund these loans by packaging and selling the debt to investors... sound familiar?

 

[ellenew]

Because I had around $50,000 in student loans from undergrad (emancipated student with no family support), I chose my PhD program, in part, because it was funded and got $20,000 in loans during grad school. I've been making small payments since my second year of grad school (heading to postdoc now) and STILL have not gotten through the interest and into the principal balance. I wish I had a better understanding of unsubsidized interest when I took out student loans in undergrad so I could have made small payments (I worked two jobs). When I was considering attending a PsyD program (accredited) they blatantly told me not to worry about the $120,000+ debt I would accrue because of PSLF. I'm SO glad I did not go that route.