PhD/PsyD Graduate Admissions Support Group

[WisNeuro]

Tone, and how we label things has consequences. E.g., the CISD lit and the pediatric concussion lit on expectancies. It's great to empathize with people in a stressful time, or through some type of loss. But, we can also do harm. No one is saying that this isn't some type of loss, more so that the tone and labels seem to be overpathologizing normal things, and that that will likely lead to worse outcomes for some people. Nothing controversial about the feedback we're giving, it's well established in multiple lines of clinical literature. We're not missing anything with our patients, we're just more aware of our impact on them.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted760483]

So you don't believe in ambiguous loss or ambiguous grief? When you say "it" is well established in literature are you referring to the potential harm caused by overpathologizing normal experiences? Because while that is true, whether that is what is occurring here is subjective, so I feel you are overstating your case.

 

[WisNeuro]

I believe that people can have normal stress reactions to normal stressful life circumstances. And according to the literature, equating normal stress reactions with trauma/PTSD/etc., will lead to some of those people who would have had a normal recovery from normal stress, to have a prolonged recovery and possible significant mood symptomatology.

 

[deleted760483]

I don't dispute that. I question your assertion that not getting into graduate school, and thus potentially having to change a career you may have been invested in in more ways than one for quite some time, is a normal life experience. People can experience grief from job loss, and I could easily see a case being made for failing to get into grad school having a more profound impact on your future and your career than a job loss. Simply stating a general pattern that exists in the literature is insufficient to prove its application to the present situation.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'd easily put that in the realm of normal human experience. It's part of growing up. We're not entitled to any career we want. And, by labeling it as some profound "trauma," and equating it to things like rape, torture, etc, is just setting people up for pathology. It's harmful, and we know it is. Sure, a support group is fine, but make the tone appropriate for such so that it doesn't cause more harm than good.

 

[deleted760483]

At no point did I suggest trauma was an appropriate label. I suggested grief and/or loss may be appropriate labels. I am not equating those to trauma, you appear to have bridged that gap yourself. There are many things we are not guaranteed in life that can be incredibly painful to never achieve. Health, marriage, children, etc.

 

[WisNeuro]

Fine, it ain't "profound" grief, either, though.

 

[deleted760483]

Fine, it ain't "profound" grief, either, though.

Agreed.

 

[psych.meout]

I don't dispute that. I question your assertion that not getting into graduate school, and thus potentially having to change a career you may have been invested in in more ways than one for quite some time, is a normal life experience. People can experience grief from job loss, and I could easily see a case being made for failing to get into grad school having a more profound impact on your future and your career than a job loss. Simply stating a general pattern that exists in the literature is insufficient to prove its application to the present situation.

You keep going on and on about "ambiguous grief" and "ambiguous loss," but what are the examples you reach for when discussing the topic? Losing an actual job one actually has. Losing the reproductive fertility that one thought they had as a natural part of being a human being. Losses of actual, tangible things that people already have.

Do you really not see how you comments here are the same false equivalencies leading to overpathologizing normal loss and life stressors just like WisNeuro is discussing?

Ambiguous loss can result in feelings of grief, I.E. losing something you never had but dreamed of or planned on having. For example, a woman who learns she can't have children may grieve. Whether that broad concept applies to not getting into graduate school might be a different conversation, but some of you are acting like the idea of losing something you never "had" cannot cause grief, and I would suggest you may be missing things with your clients if you truly believe this.

Do you not see how this unhelpful, unnecessarily confrontational, and possibly insulting?

 

[MCParent]

Ambiguous loss can result in feelings of grief, I.E. losing something you never had but dreamed of or planned on having. For example, a woman who learns she can't have children may grieve. Whether that broad concept applies to not getting into graduate school might be a different conversation, but some of you are acting like the idea of losing something you never "had" cannot cause grief, and I would suggest you may be missing things with your clients if you truly believe this.

This is not the analogous situation though. Inability to conceive is permanent (probably) and is akin thematically to the loss of a sense organ or limb. i.e., reduces what someone thought was a thing they would have. The analogous situation here would be experiencing profound grief when one does not get pregnant after two weeks of trying to. Yup, that's probably just irrational, even if it is stressful.

 

[deleted760483]

Inability to conceive means you cannot have a child via the typical route. There are many other options i.e. fertility treatments, IVF, adoption. I think that in that regard it actually is quite analogous to not getting into graduate school. Consider that we are specifically talking about psych majors in this forum. A doctorate in clinical psychology puts you, generally speaking, on what most people would consider a pretty desirable career path. A bachelors in psychology, not so much. The gap between those two career tracks is immense. I do not think the emotional impact would be to the extent that not having children would be for most people, but job/career is typically one of the most important variables in a persons life and a major source of self-concept, self-esteem, etc. not to mention the actual logistical differences such as salary.

And how exactly did you determine that two weeks of trying to conceive a child is analogous to 4 years of undergrad?

 

[MCParent]

Inability to conceive means you cannot have a child via the typical route. There are many other options i.e. fertility treatments, IVF, adoption. I think that in that regard it actually is quite analogous to not getting into graduate school. Consider that we are specifically talking about psych majors in this forum. A doctorate in clinical psychology puts you, generally speaking, on what most people would consider a pretty desirable career path. A bachelors in psychology, not so much. The gap between those two career tracks is immense. I do not think the emotional impact would be to the extent that not having children would be for most people, but job/career is typically one of the most important variables in a persons life and a major source of self-concept, self-esteem, etc. not to mention the actual logistical differences such as salary.

And how exactly did you determine that two weeks of trying to conceive a child is analogous to 4 years of undergrad?

Not getting into grad school after applying once does not meant that you "cannot get into grad school via the typical route."

 

[deleted760483]

Not getting into grad school after applying once does not meant that you "cannot get into grad school via the typical route."

I guess it depends on how you operationally define the traditional route. My definition is going straight to graduate school from undergrad.

 

[MCParent]

I guess it depends on how you operationally define the traditional route. My definition is going straight to graduate school from undergrad.

If someone wanted to go to some program and something happened that stopped them for a long time or for good (I don't know, maybe they have a kid and need to work and can't possibly afford to go to school) I'd get that as grief-ish. But again that's not the circumstance we are talking about here. Not getting what you want, even if it results in a rough road for a bit (eg year of ta work, another year before internship) really doesn't strike me as being anywhere near similar. Practically, the grief angle also has no advantages over a solution focused angle bc there are actual things you can do, and need to move on fast, to improve the chances for next time.

 

[deleted760483]

It's not really an "angle." If someone is experiencing grief it's just validating to notice and name it. As an observer I don't get to decide if someone is or isn't experiencing grief. I don't believe everyone would be terribly bothered by not getting into grad school but I have no doubt some would. It's not like there's a guarantee you get in the next year, or ever. It's bizarre to me that we simultaneously have a thread on page 1 where people are normalizing the idea of considering a career change for students who are in grad school and doing fairly well, but then we have this thread where not getting accepted into grad school is considered a moderate stressor that shouldn't really throw anyone off course .

 

[psych.meout]

Inability to conceive means you cannot have a child via the typical route. There are many other options i.e. fertility treatments, IVF, adoption. I think that in that regard it actually is quite analogous to not getting into graduate school. Consider that we are specifically talking about psych majors in this forum. A doctorate in clinical psychology puts you, generally speaking, on what most people would consider a pretty desirable career path. A bachelors in psychology, not so much. The gap between those two career tracks is immense. I do not think the emotional impact would be to the extent that not having children would be for most people, but job/career is typically one of the most important variables in a persons life and a major source of self-concept, self-esteem, etc. not to mention the actual logistical differences such as salary.

And how exactly did you determine that two weeks of trying to conceive a child is analogous to 4 years of undergrad?

But again, what is the example you drew? Someone losing an actual job that they actually held for some amount of time.

You're acting like someone not getting admitted to graduate school is some kind of permanent denial or that it was already part of their identity. For the former, applicants can always apply again and they should if the path means so much to them. It's a great lesson and experience in resilience and determination that will be helpful for the difficulties of graduate school. For the latter, I'd be less concerned about this so-called "grief" and coping with loss, but more concerned that someone is already considering graduate school and being a psychologist as part of their identity when they haven't even been accepted yet. It presents much more profound issues than this "grief" about not getting admitted.

I guess it depends on how you operationally define the traditional route. My definition is going straight to graduate school from undergrad.

And how have you established this the "traditional route?" Do you have any data backing up this assertion? What are the base rates for people getting into graduate school straight out of undergrad vs those getting in after X-years post-undergrad?

 

[deleted760483]

And how have you established this the "traditional route?" Do you have any data backing up this assertion? What are the base rates for people getting into graduate school straight out of undergrad vs those getting in after X-years post-undergrad?

Maybe ideal route would have been more accurate phrasing than traditional route. I was referencing the discussion about infertility and how while infertility does not mean you are condemned to never be a parent, the other avenues toward that goal are likely not the ones most people picture when they dream about being a parent someday. Much like spending one or more years of your twenties not in school and working low paying and generally fairly unsatisfying jobs while waiting in career limbo for some undefined period of time while everyone around you moves on with their life is likely not the experience people dream of when they decide to pursue our career.

 

[psych.meout]

Maybe ideal route would have been more accurate phrasing than traditional route. I was referencing the discussion about infertility and how while infertility does not mean you are condemned to never be a parent, the other avenues toward that goal are likely not the ones most people picture when they dream about being a parent someday. Much like spending one or more years of your twenties not in school and working low paying and generally fairly unsatisfying jobs while waiting in career limbo for some undefined period of time while everyone around you moves on with their life is likely not the experience people dream of when they decide to pursue our career.

Again, you're using these analogies that aren't really helping your arguments.

Firstly, reproduction has traditionally been tied into identity, especially for women. Lacking that biological capacity for whatever reason, especially since there are still the same hormones and other biological architecture fostering the biological imperative to reproduce, can be an actual source of grief for people. Not receiving instant gratification of getting into graduate school straight out of undergrad is categorically different.

Secondly, your arguments about how terrible it is to delay gratification and have to work in jobs that might not be one's dream or directly on the path to their dream is obtuse and entitled. This is how life works, we do things and work jobs that may not be ideal, because they are in service of our values and progress us towards our ultimate goals. It would be a completely different matter if you were talking about larger socioeconomic issues facing our society, e.g. flat wages that haven't risen over the past four decades, high Gini quotients, racial disparities, etc. Your argument falls flat when you are expecting an orchestra of violins to play for the poor soul that had to work as a psychometrist or research assistant between undergrad and grad school.

Thirdly, your arguments about "ideal" paths foster similar problems to talking about "grief" as in this thread. You're creating expectancies with that language and perception that are setting people up for the very kind of more severe disappointment and loss that you are decrying in this thread. If, instead, we talk about the "many paths up the mountain" to grad school, as many forums members have discussed in the past, it allows people to more fully understand the reality of the admissions process and life in general. We shouldn't be overpathologizing disappointment and lack of instant gratification.

Fourthly, why is getting into graduate school straight out of undergrad "ideal?" How are you conceptualizing "ideal?" Is this "ideal" in terms of satisfying the desires of aspiring grad students or is this ideal in outcomes, e.g. being more prepared and successful, possibly in terms of publication rates, match rates, licensure rates, etc? Do you have any data or sources to back up you argument?

 

[foreverbull]

We're back to trying to operationalize "grief," it looks like.
I think that people can grieve for things they never had but always planned for, particularly if the desired outcome is strongly attached to self-concept/identity, as CWard12213 mentions. One example would be a client who worked hard to get through college, but failed math 4 times even after seeking tutoring, etc. and changing his tactics each time to try to pass. He was stuck without a degree and in a dead-end job, grieving for the loss of careers that were no longer options to him. This was not a small setback to him, but life-changing, and caused a lot of distress because he didn't know what to do with his life now that his chosen path was not available. His emotional experience closely resembled Kubler-Ross' stages of anger, denial, depression, etc., and my past supervisors encouraged me to frame it as grief/loss of career. Or what about folks who take the EPPP 4 or 5 times and eventually just give up on ever getting licensed and have to change their career plans? That would involve grief/loss for something you never had, but spent years working toward (a license).

Having said that, whether or not the OP and grad school applicants can experience grief or loss after one unsuccessful application round is debatable and subjective, and of course, we shouldn't minimize or pathologize either way.

I think what people in here seem to be speaking to is the grief-heavy language on the OP's support website that attends strongly to grief and loss aspects of unsuccessful applications...it comes off a bit strong, although I understand the intent. Language matters, and in this case, it's important not to go too far with ideas or overstate things. I can't speak to whether the grief and loss is "valid," but I'd be cautious about how I express ideas (and share personal information) on a public website.

 

[psych.meout]

We're back to trying to operationalize "grief," it looks like.
I think that people can grieve for things they never had but always planned for, particularly if the desired outcome is strongly attached to self-concept/identity, as CWard12213 mentions. One example would be a client who worked hard to get through college, but failed math 4 times even after seeking tutoring, etc. and changing his tactics each time to try to pass. He was stuck without a degree and in a dead-end job, grieving for the loss of careers that were no longer options to him. This was not a small setback to him, but life-changing, and caused a lot of distress because he didn't know what to do with his life now that his chosen path was not available. His emotional experience closely resembled Kubler-Ross' stages of anger, denial, depression, etc., and my past supervisors encouraged me to frame it as grief/loss of career. Or what about folks who take the EPPP 4 or 5 times and eventually just give up on ever getting licensed and have to change their career plans? That would involve grief/loss for something you never had, but spent years working toward (a license).

Having said that, whether or not the OP and grad school applicants can experience grief or loss after one unsuccessful application round is debatable and subjective, and of course, we shouldn't minimize or pathologize either way.

I think what people in here seem to be speaking to is the grief-heavy language on the OP's support website that attends strongly to grief and loss aspects of unsuccessful applications...it comes off a bit strong, although I understand the intent. Language matters, and in this case, it's important not to go too far with ideas or overstate things. I can't speak to whether the grief and loss is "valid," but I'd be cautious about how I express ideas (and share personal information) on a public website.

Well, let's look at how it's being operationalized in this situation by CWard12213:

I guess it depends on how you operationally define the traditional route. My definition is going straight to graduate school from undergrad.

Maybe ideal route would have been more accurate phrasing than traditional route. I was referencing the discussion about infertility and how while infertility does not mean you are condemned to never be a parent, the other avenues toward that goal are likely not the ones most people picture when they dream about being a parent someday. Much like spending one or more years of your twenties not in school and working low paying and generally fairly unsatisfying jobs while waiting in career limbo for some undefined period of time while everyone around you moves on with their life is likely not the experience people dream of when they decide to pursue our career.

If this is a situation that results in actual grief like that of failing out of undergrad or repeatedly being unable to pass the EPPP and get licensed, then I fear for the future of our society. We're just making things worse by creating expectancies that all desires should be instantly gratified with no hardship or disappointment and any loss should be perceived as grief.

 

[psych.meout]

It's not really an "angle." If someone is experiencing grief it's just validating to notice and name it. As an observer I don't get to decide if someone is or isn't experiencing grief. I don't believe everyone would be terribly bothered by not getting into grad school but I have no doubt some would. It's not like there's a guarantee you get in the next year, or ever.

You can acknowledge someone's thoughts and feelings without encouraging those distorted and irrational cognitions and emotions. Isn't helping people realize these maladaptive patterns a key part of practice in psychology?

It's bizarre to me that we simultaneously have a thread on page 1 where people are normalizing the idea of considering a career change for students who are in grad school and doing fairly well, but then we have this thread where not getting accepted into grad school is considered a moderate stressor that shouldn't really throw anyone off course.

Did you even read that thread?

 

[smalltownpsych]

Grief: deep sorrow, especially that caused by someone's death.
Google
Broadening of terms is something that devalues our field and leads to pop psychology. Same thing happens with the terms trauma or trigger or OCD. As professional psychologists, I would posit that we should resist that process as opposed to contribute to it.

 

[foreverbull]

I wasn't operationalizing it the way CWard was, then. I would simply suggest that deep sorrow can occur with things other than a death. Even with death, some people grieve more than others and feel more or less sorrow depending on their own patterns of coping and closeness to the deceased.

I'm not saying we should call every experience of setback "grief/loss" at all, or say that the setback matches someone's death in terms of grief/loss, but as I've said before earlier in this post, if you are strongly attached to an outcome as part of your identity, have spent years working toward it, plan your life around it, and it is suddenly no longer an option, I think it's reasonable to expect some level of "deep sorrow" when it doesn't come to fruition, even if it is a low level and short-lived. I'm not saying we should all run out and apply the exact same grief/loss framework to these folks and treat them exactly like someone who's lost a family member, it's just something to keep in mind as you work with them. Of course not every disappointment equals grief, and I'm not saying that either.

I simply think there's some level of subjectivity depending on the situation. I don't think it's ruining our profession to acknowledge that some large-scale setbacks/changes can have an effect beyond disappointment because I've seen it happen in practice myself.
The extreme way this is being framed makes it sound like we're all going to run out and coddle folks who suffer any form of disappointment and call everything grief/loss, and that's simply not the point I'm making or how I practice at all. Like I said, we shouldn't minimize OR pathologize, but find a balance.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I wasn't operationalizing it the way CWard was, then. I would simply suggest that deep sorrow can occur with things other than a death. Even with death, some people grieve more than others and feel more or less sorrow depending on their own patterns of coping and closeness to the deceased.

I'm not saying we should call every experience of setback "grief/loss" at all, or say that the setback matches someone's death in terms of grief/loss, but as I've said before earlier in this post, if you are strongly attached to an outcome as part of your identity, have spent years working toward it, plan your life around it, and it is suddenly no longer an option, I think it's reasonable to expect some level of "deep sorrow" when it doesn't come to fruition, even if it is a low level and short-lived. I'm not saying we should all run out and apply the exact same grief/loss framework to these folks and treat them exactly like someone who's lost a family member, it's just something to keep in mind as you work with them. Of course not every disappointment equals grief, and I'm not saying that either.

I simply think there's some level of subjectivity depending on the situation. I don't think it's ruining our profession to acknowledge that some large-scale setbacks/changes can have an effect beyond disappointment because I've seen it happen in practice myself.
The extreme way this is being framed makes it sound like we're all going to run out and coddle folks who suffer any form of disappointment and call everything grief/loss, and that's simply not the point I'm making or how I practice at all. Like I said, we shouldn't minimize OR pathologize, but find a balance.

Yes, experiencing this type of setback could be extremely distressing, disappointing, and troubling for people. I just don't think calling it grief is the right word. Some people would describe it as traumatic, but again that is not the right word for a professional. Now if a patient uses one of these words to describe this type of situation, I'm not going to correct them. I will, however, assist them in expressing their feelings as much as possible and help them to implement adaptive coping for whatever the level of distress they are experiencing. Sometimes adaptive coping is gaining perspective on what the level of emotional pain is. Not every pain, whether physical or emotional, is a ten out of ten, but some of my patients see it that way. I have seen many mental health professionals fall into that trap too.

 

[Ollie123]

To clarify my view, I do think its certainly possible that someone could experience a grief or trauma-like reaction to not getting into graduate school. I've had a number of patients who had PTSD-like reactions to non-criterion events. Integrated CPT with traditional CT, BA, PST, etc. to address as best I could depending on the nuances of the case. Won't speak for others, but I imagine many expressing concerns have encountered the same and would do the same.

In my mind, its a question of how this is approached. I forget who originally brought up CISD (Wis?) but I think its a fitting parallel. The harshest CISD critic would never argue someone CAN'T get PTSD from say - living through a natural disaster. In addition to being blatantly false, it has nothing to do with the criticism. Research has shown that "assuming" everyone processes it as a trauma and treating it as such is pretty clearly worse than doing nothing. Likewise, I'd say its OK to acknowledge some people may profound reactions to these events, but not necessarily helpful to assume that many will.

We've veered far off course, but the original postings were about a website that had a clear grief/bereavement theme. Its a little different with a website since one could argue that folks will self-select in. Maybe the target audience is exclusively people who have unusually extreme reactions to admissions denial. That's likely to be a very small group. Folks who stumble in who don't necessarily fit that category could conceivably be harmed by it. We don't know, but it doesn't seem a completely unreasonable extrapolation (to me). Even putting the clinical issues aside, I think even from the perspective of a web designer its not an approach that is likely to garner much traffic. Its an approach that could reflect badly on the creators when viewed by folks knowledgeable about the field (even while appreciating good intentions). I think that is the take-home.

 

[Sharewithme]

The website got a makeover! It's much less grief/loss language heavy now. I went back and read over my posts and realized how focused in the subject of grief/loss it was. I guess I did a lot of reading about the subject, and it was on the brain! I'm keeping the grief/loss information on the website still, but now from the angle that it's an example of what a research interest/passion can look like.

My target audience for the support group is people interested in applying for APA accredited programs. People who've experienced rejection with graduate school, whether or not it felt like grief, are welcome. People who've never applied before are welcome, too.

 

[Sharewithme]

Ambiguous loss can result in feelings of grief, I.E. losing something you never had but dreamed of or planned on having. For example, a woman who learns she can't have children may grieve. Whether that broad concept applies to not getting into graduate school might be a different conversation, but some of you are acting like the idea of losing something you never "had" cannot cause grief, and I would suggest you may be missing things with your clients if you truly believe this.

Thank you CWard12213 for the positives! It's a nice start to the second page of this thread. I did re-read my posts, and like I wrote above I gave the website a makeover b/c it was rather grief/loss language heavy. Of course I want people who feel lost and want kind guidance after graduate admissions rejection to be helped my the support group. I don't want to force any negative feelings on people who do not feel all that bad after graduate school admissions rejection. I think peer support is valuable in general, and I want to create a welcoming atmosphere. Thanks for all of your (CWard12213 and others) feedback.