How was APA this year (D.C., 2011)?

[Rivi]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hello everyone,

Just wondering if any of you went to APA this year (I was supposed to present a poster but opted out due to lack of $). If so, how did it go? Was there any discussion of some of the topics that we frequently talk about on this forum (future of our field, professional schools, internship imbalance, etc.)? Anything noteworthy or interesting?

 

[PerhapsMaybeOk]

It was really nice, DC is a great city; conferences are great when there is a gender imbalance of 70% female and you're a male heh.

Nothing stood out as far as new and exciting; the internship talk was pretty much like I heard it was the last few years. Didn't notice anyone else from this forum but I suppose I wouldnt know how to find them anyway. 😛

 

[Rivi]

It was really nice, DC is a great city; conferences are great when there is a gender imbalance of 70% female and you're a male heh.

The ratio in this field is pretty sweet indeed for single heterosexual males, although I haven't really taken advantage of it (because I am a wuss).

 

[erg923]

I'm curious about this too. I attended in 2007 (for one day) and again last year for all 4 days. Frankly, after last years convention, I had little desire to go this year. Felt kinda like a circus with vendors to me.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I'm curious about this too. I attended in 2007 (for one day) and again last year for all 4 days. Frankly, after last years convention, I had little desire to go this year. Felt kinda like a circus with vendors to me.

The last APA conference I attended was in New Orleans. I thought the programming was decent, though having Dr. Phil speak was a waste.

 

[Ollie123]

I went to Toronto in 09. Probably won't go again unless I end up being invited to be a part of a symposia or something sometime in the future.

The talks are dumbed down for a general audience, the APAGS programming was just plain insulting, and opportunities for networking didn't even come close to what I'd seen at specialty conferences. I think its worth going once just to see it, but its not even in the same league as some of the specialty conferences I've been to.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The talks are dumbed down for a general audience, the APAGS programming was just plain insulting, and opportunities for networking didn't even come close to what I'd seen at specialty conferences. I think its worth going once just to see it, but its not even in the same league as some of the specialty conferences I've been to.

The tough thing about the APA conference is that it can't be all things to all people. I can only realistically attend 2 major conferences a year, maybe 3 if I'm presenting or if one is held locally. With finite time and finances, I think speciality conferences really offer the best bang for your buck. A person can get the vast majority of their CE credits done by attending a full pre-conference, and at speciality conferences the information tends to be tailored to the professionals. I usually pick 2 between NAN, INS, and Div 22....and I have yet to be disappointed. Boston this past year was mediocre because of the # of cancellations due to weather, but traditionally INS is pretty solid.

 

[erg923]

I cant really say this is APA's fault (although I do think it's a sign that they try to cram in too much), but I coauthored an imaging paper that was presented at last years conference...the session was at 8:30 in the morning and there were literally 5 people at the talk. Three of them were my coauthors...🙄

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I cant really say this is APA's fault (although I do think it's a sign that they try to cram in too much), but I coauthored an imaging paper that was presented at last years conference...the session was at 8:30 in the morning and there were literally 5 people at the talk. Three of them were my coauthors...🙄

If it makes you feel better, I would have asked you questions about your work...though not at 8:30am, that is too early for anything but a round of golf. 😀

 

[Neuropsych2be]

Well I was disappointed. I presented a poster and paper that generated mild interest. But overall I found myself wondering ehy I came. DC was very hot and the floors of the Walter Washington Convention were murder on my plantar fasciatis which had been acting up. So some of my perception may ahve been colored by my pain. Some of the plenary sessions were good. The one by Vamik Volkan was great. The conference on the internship imbalance was a waste of time. A couple things on hypnotherapy were o.k. Aaron and Judith Beck were there and Aaron looked like the whole thing was too much for him at his age and state of health. The conference was oriented towards multicultural issues and a wide mish mash of disconnected and disjointed topics. It seemed like a very vendor centric meeting. The had one vendor with an uber-cool massage chair. That and the fact I got to meet Phillip Zimbardo were the only highlights. I give it a C+.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The conference on the internship imbalance was a waste of time.

Can you speak a bit more to this? I'm curious as to how it was framed and discussed.

 

[erg923]

Can you speak a bit more to this? I'm curious as to how it was framed and discussed.

I am not surprised. I have no idea what new info they could have given out. Have they actually DONE anything or kicked any ideas around? I know they have a "committee," but I also know APA is big on patting themselves on the back for forming "action committees" to address important topics in the field.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I am not surprised. I have no idea what new info they could have given out. Have they actually DONE anything or kicked any ideas around? I know they have a "committee," but I also know APA is big on patting themselves on the back for forming "action committees" to address important topics in the field.

Committees are a common evil in large organizations. I wish they could be more proactive and solution-focused.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

Can you speak a bit more to this? I'm curious as to how it was framed and discussed.

A group of people representing various stakeholders such as APPIC and APAGS got up and discussed individually what each group is doing to reduce the imbalance. The most proactive thing is that programs with a low match rate are being counseled about what they can do to increase their match rate. Some mention was made about expanding the number of internship sites and how many sites have shut down due to economic reasons. No mention was made of professional schools flooding the market. The impressoin was of people patting each other on the back and giving the impression that they are working on real solutions.However, the problems was framed as a multifaceted one that will take a long time to solve.

 

[erg923]

The most proactive thing is that programs with a low match rate are being counseled about what they can do to increase their match rate.

Um...what!? There are so many things wrong with that, I don't even know where to start.

"Um, sorry kid, its a messed up system that we could intervene upon by changing some requirements and limiting supply...but we'd prefer that you just do everything PERFECT and be "SUPER grad student." That way you can beat out your competition and some other poor sap doesn't get an internship and you do."

How on earth does that help the problem?

 

[Rivi]

Um...what!? There are so many things wrong with that, I don't even know where to start.

"Um, sorry kid, its a messed up system that we could intervene upon by changing some requirements and limiting supply...but we'd prefer that you just do everything PERFECT and be "SUPER grad student." That way you can beat out your competition and some other poor sap doesn't get an internship and you do."

How on earth does that help the problem?

I don't understand what APA's deal is. Let's at least acknowledge the fact that we would be better off screening potential students ON THE FRONT END with stricter admission criteria to Psy.D. and Ph.D. programs as opposed to having people shafted after they spend tons of time and possibly money on the tail end of the process.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

Um...what!? There are so many things wrong with that, I don't even know where to start.

"Um, sorry kid, its a messed up system that we could intervene upon by changing some requirements and limiting supply...but we'd prefer that you just do everything PERFECT and be "SUPER grad student." That way you can beat out your competition and some other poor sap doesn't get an internship and you do."

How on earth does that help the problem?

It doesn't. The pie is only so big and helping one program increase its match rate means other students from other programs get shafted. Programs are in a bind because they have to maintain a certain number of grad students to remain open. University based programs are under financial constraints as well. A university may be forced to close down programs that don;t have enough students so there is pressure to keep a certain number slots open in a psychology department. Cutting down on admissions has the potential to cause even programs in research based clinical scientist programs to be shut down. Programs in the humanities and social sciences are being scaled back everywhere already so the pressure is intense to maintain numbers. APA is in a bind because legally the COA can't mandate how many students are admitted to programs and they can not legally just cut professional schools out of accreditation without an expensive court challenge that they would lose, not to mention what the Department of Education would do to them. APA simply does not have the kind of authority or power. APA is working towards a long term goal of a 95% match rate. That was discussed in the seminar. but how one gets from here to there is unknown. The issue of professional schools was not brought up though. One of the participants on this inter-agency committee was a faculty member at an Argosy.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

I don't understand what APA's deal is. Let's at least acknowledge the fact that we would be better off screening potential students ON THE FRONT END with stricter admission criteria to Psy.D. and Ph.D. programs as opposed to having people shafted after they spend tons of time and possibly money on the tail end of the process.

Well the problem with this is the fact that internship placement is based on ones achievements and training in a doctoral program. Ph.D. students in psychology are already the cream of the crop and at least equal or surpass most applicants to medical school in terms of quality. Screening undergraduate degree holding applicants more carefully would probably have a minimal impact. My feeling is that as a first step APPIC can eliminate non-accredited programs from the match and then we can work to increase the number of internship slots, especially in integrated care delivery systems where there is a crying need for psychologists and little in the way of training opportunities.

 

[PerhapsMaybeOk]

surprise surprise another derailed thread.

 

[2012PhD]

Well the problem with this is the fact that internship placement is based on ones achievements and training in a doctoral program. Ph.D. students in psychology are already the cream of the crop and at least equal or surpass most applicants to medical school in terms of quality. Screening undergraduate degree holding applicants more carefully would probably have a minimal impact. My feeling is that as a first step APPIC can eliminate non-accredited programs from the match and then we can work to increase the number of internship slots, especially in integrated care delivery systems where there is a crying need for psychologists and little in the way of training opportunities.

Many professional schools accept 60-80% of students who apply. Some don't even require GRE. The quality is high for funded university based programs. Things should be more selective. This is doctoral training we are talking about.

There is a need for psychologists, but the funding for psychological services is not there. Our society doesn't value psychotherapy. We need to do more in terms of advocacy.

APA is a private organization. They should and CAN regulate the professional school movement. If a school has a 5% internship match rate, they can easily deny accredidation. Nobody will sue them for this. What grounds would they have given these low statistics? Its not a governmental organization. The reason why they don't regulate is because they are greedy and want to get $

 

[erg923]

and they can not legally just cut professional schools out of accreditation without an expensive court challenge that they would lose, not to mention what the Department of Education would do to them. APA simply does not have the kind of authority or power.

Yes, I've heard that before, and I don't get it. They ARE the accrediting body of this profession. Since when did schools get to dictate their accredation status. Shouldnt it be the other way around?

"We are changing things (as they should have a right to do). If your cohort exceeds X number of students, then you lose our accreditation." New rule. Effective by XX/XX/XXXX."

 

[2012PhD]

I Cutting down on admissions has the potential to cause even programs in research based clinical scientist programs to be shut down. Programs in the humanities and social sciences are being scaled back everywhere already so the pressure is intense to maintain numbers. APA is in a bind because legally the COA can't mandate how many students are admitted to programs and they can not legally just cut professional schools out of accreditation without an expensive court challenge that they would lose, not to mention what the Department of Education would do to them. APA simply does not have the kind of authority or power. .

This is completely untrue. Where did you get this information? All APA has to do is change the rules of their accredidation to 80% of students have to match at APA internships to receive accredidation. Problem solved. Nobody can sue them since they are a private accrediting body and can select who to accredit based on X criteria. The AMA has limited the number of medical schools without any problem. This is why we don't even see one professional medical school out there and they will never have a problem matching students to residencies.

 

[cara susanna]

Over how many years, though? Maybe their 10 year match rate? Every program has a bad year every so often.

I would prefer that their criteria be more ratio-based... like, your cohort cannot exceed this ratio of students to faculty.

 

[Ollie123]

They need to be careful about how exactly that is done though...remember that a lot of the questionable programs have tons of faculty, many of whom are adjuncts and most don't have true "labs" in the same way that faculty at regular universities do. Given the size of the building the local Argosy is located in, I doubt most of their faculty even have lab space. Since APA can't dictate the job titles granted, they could just appoint them as core faculty to get around the rule if they try to specify.

I'm sure these schools would sue over anything that would cost them accreditation and this would likely be expensive even if APA did win, but I can't believe there isn't any way this could be done.

 

[cara susanna]

We were discussing this is one of my classes, and someone brought up that limiting cohort size or internship applicants would be illegal. If that's the case, how does AMA get away with it?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Let's look at this systemically...where can change be implemented (top to bottom):

Licensure: State licensure laws are too cumbersome to change across the board (each state would have to enact legislation). I'd love states to make this push, but it will cost too much money, and we all know that psychologists are already very stingy with political contributions (just look at the public data on campaign contributions, PAC funding, etc).

Postdoc: Some states have waived them, so changes would only apply to most but not all states. If someone wanted to be crafty they could limit who is allowed to acrue post-doc hours in a particular state (students from APPIC/APA acred sites). This would only really be useful in CA, NY, and a few other places, and it would be viewed as punishing the student.

Internship: Right now we have 2 system at play: APPIC and Non-APPIC. Each year more and more people are bypassing APPIC for Non-APPIC choices. This is the first logical place to make changes.

Program: If a program requires their students to complete an APA-acred or APPIC-acred internship site, that would functionally remove non-APPIC options...with no policy/law changes. In fact, this is already the case for the majority of doctoral programs. The programs who do not have this as a requirement will most likely not make the change "for the greater good". However, if the APA makes this a requirement for APA-acred...that could change things. This change will open up malignent programs to possible lawsuits from their students who are unable to match to an APPIC/APA-acred site, though that isn't necessarily a bad thing for the profession as a whole. I am sure there are other changes to the APA-acred. standards that would fall under "professional requirements", though it would take a strong APA to enforce the changes....which is its own problem.

Some people have cited anti-trust laws as a possible barriers to major restrictions in programs. I'm not a lawyer, so I cannot comment on their applicability, but I'm sure there is enough grey area that people would threaten legal action. I'm also sure there is enough "professional latitude" to allow for increases in APA-acred standards that would fix most of these problems. You may not be able to set caps, but there are other ways to limit programs.

Admittedly, any restriction to a program or the internship process will "squeeze" current students. A transitionary period is needed to allow students currently in the system to get out before such sweeping changes are enforced. I think changes need to be made ASAP because more and more people are going to be funneled to non-APPIC sites, and that threatens quality control, floods the market, and weakens our standards as a profession.

 

[2012PhD]

APA is probably using the threat of law suits as an excuse. If this is such a real threat, how come they have not gotten sued yet for all the programs they have not accredited and for all the programs on probation for minor issues (e.g. not having a certain course)? There are tons of good programs they have not accredited b/c they have not had the "right" curriculum. Having only a 5% apa match rate is a more serious offense. What goes into APA accredidation right now? I'm sure they can tweak it somewhat and reduce class size significantly at these professional programs without targeting them specifically.

The real problem is that the apa has ZERO incentive to regulate for profit schools. When Argosy is hosting the APA conference and argosy faculty are on the committee, why would they regulate? The truth is we don't know how much money APA is getting from these for profit schools. They could be giving them a good share of profits or donating money to them and we don't really know.

 

[2012PhD]

APA can also deny accred. to programs that have more than an average of 20% attrition rate over a 5 year period. I noticed the the for profit programs that admit 100 plus students have a 50% attrition rate. This is doing serious disservice to the students.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

APA can also deny accred. to programs that have more than an average of 20% attrition rate over a 5 year period. I noticed the the for profit programs that admit 100 plus students have a 50% attrition rate. This is doing serious disservice to the students.

Attrition is reviewed as part of the acred./re-acred. process, though I don't know how much of an impact it has on the overall evaluation. I have only seen bits and pieces of a program eval.

 

[roubs]

Attrition is reviewed as part of the acred./re-acred. process, though I don't know how much of an impact it has on the overall evaluation. I have only seen bits and pieces of a program eval.

These programs are still around so apparently it does not have enough of an impact. Any accreditation process that has allowed these programs to flourish is a joke. They're unlikely to fix this problem because they would have to acknowledge their own role in creating it.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

This is completely untrue. Where did you get this information? All APA has to do is change the rules of their accredidation to 80% of students have to match at APA internships to receive accredidation. Problem solved. Nobody can sue them since they are a private accrediting body and can select who to accredit based on X criteria. The AMA has limited the number of medical schools without any problem. This is why we don't even see one professional medical school out there and they will never have a problem matching students to residencies.

Every action of the COA is subject to review by the court system. All entities can be sued in court and a body operating under the aegis of the government can most certainly be sued for anything at any time. The COA is recognized by the US Department of Education as THE accrediting body for the profession of psychology. That recognition is extremely important i terms of access to federal funds. APA accreditation is a requirement for licensure in many states and most federal employment. These facts makes the COA something more that a private entity. Allowing any profession that is licensed to be controlled by a body that is totally private and not subject to external regulation or court review is a legal nightmare. The legal issue is that any private entity that moves into the public sphere and legal processes such as state licensure becomes subject to external review by the courts and other governmental agencies like the DOE. All institutions have to be subject to some form of check and balance.

 

[edieb]

This is completely untrue. Where did you get this information? All APA has to do is change the rules of their accredidation to 80% of students have to match at APA internships to receive accredidation. Problem solved. Nobody can sue them since they are a private accrediting body and can select who to accredit based on X criteria. The AMA has limited the number of medical schools without any problem. This is why we don't even see one professional medical school out there and they will never have a problem matching students to residencies.[/QUOTE]

There are a ton of professional school/for-profit medical schools that graduate doctors who both complete US residencies and then go on to practice in the USA. DOn't think that professional schools are an issue for professinoal psychology only

 

[edieb]

BTW, does anybody notice that more and more Ph.D.s and Psy.D.s are coming from these professional schools? Is it just me or are they really starting to take over the profession? At the V.A. where I work, which does not have an internship, we are getting more and more phone calls from students from the likes of Argosy and Fielding who could not find internships and are offering to do free ones at our facility 😱

 

[2012PhD]

This is completely untrue. Where did you get this information? All APA has to do is change the rules of their accredidation to 80% of students have to match at APA internships to receive accredidation. Problem solved. Nobody can sue them since they are a private accrediting body and can select who to accredit based on X criteria. The AMA has limited the number of medical schools without any problem. This is why we don't even see one professional medical school out there and they will never have a problem matching students to residencies.[/QUOTE]
y

Like which ones? I know plenty of physicians and i have never seen any from professional programs. There is one school that i heard of in the Carribean, but the students from there face many barriers when attempting to enter and complete residency in the rest of the country. I have never seen any advertised online while the psych. programs are advertised everywhere.

 

[2012PhD]

BTW, does anybody notice that more and more Ph.D.s and Psy.D.s are coming from these professional schools? Is it just me or are they really starting to take over the profession? At the V.A. where I work, which does not have an internship, we are getting more and more phone calls from students from the likes of Argosy and Fielding who could not find internships and are offering to do free ones at our facility 😱

I think our profession is about 50% professional school, 50% traditional university. Only 50% of our graduates are getting APA internships at this point. Its pretty low. My VA does not seem to hire professional school graduates either.

 

[edieb]

Like which ones? I know plenty of physicians and i have never seen any from professional programs. There is one school that i heard of in the Carribean, but the students from there face many barriers when attempting to enter and complete residency in the rest of the country. I have never seen any advertised online while the psych. programs are advertised everywhere.

They face very few obstacles when trying to practice in the USA. If you look at the M.D./D.O. forums, you will see different medical prodessional schools advertising at the bottom of the screen. I know there is one in Guadalajara, MX, one in Grenaada, one in the Bahamas and a few others.

Addendum:

Here is a list (it looks like there are a number of them)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_medical_schools_in_the_Caribbean

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

BTW, does anybody notice that more and more Ph.D.s and Psy.D.s are coming from these professional schools? Is it just me or are they really starting to take over the profession? At the V.A. where I work, which does not have an internship, we are getting more and more phone calls from students from the likes of Argosy and Fielding who could not find internships and are offering to do free ones at our facility 😱

More "campuses" are popping up, particularly in CA. I hate to pick on CA (and the CPA) so much, but they are really leading the charge to overwhelm the system with more and more students. Friends of mine work within the Kaiser system and VA system out there, and they all have commented on the plethora of applicants for practica/unfunded internships/unfunded post-docs. There are also a ton of people looking for jobs that come from non-APA acred. programs and/or non-APA acred. internships. The VA is pretty cut and dry about their requirements, but it seems like Kaiser will accept applications from "accredited universities"...though I'm not sure who gets the job.

 

[2012PhD]

They face very few obstacles when trying to practice in the USA. If you look at the M.D./D.O. forums, you will see different medical prodessional schools advertising at the bottom of the screen. I know there is one in Guadalajara, MX, one in Grenaada, one in the Bahamas and a few others.

Addendum:

Here is a list (it looks like there are a number of them)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_medical_schools_in_the_Caribbean

These are all in Mexico and Bahamas. Not in the U.S. States. This shows me that the AMA has been able to successfully regulate against U.S prof. schools. My friend who went to the carribean for his MD was not able to land a residency postion after multiple tries and went to get his MBA so there are many barriers they face if trying to practice here, unless its psychiatry because there is a shortage and nobody wants to fill the spots.

 

[2012PhD]

More "campuses" are popping up, particularly in CA. I hate to pick on CA (and the CPA) so much, but they are really leading the charge to overwhelm the system with more and more students. Friends of mine work within the Kaiser system and VA system out there, and they all have commented on the plethora of applicants for practica/unfunded internships/unfunded post-docs. There are also a ton of people looking for jobs that come from non-APA acred. programs and/or non-APA acred. internships. The VA is pretty cut and dry about their requirements, but it seems like Kaiser will accept applications from "accredited universities"...though I'm not sure who gets the job.

CA is totally saturated. NYC is also completely overwhelmed for practica/internships/post-docs. Unpaid practica in NYC have 100 plus applicants for a few spots--not so different from competitive internship sites. Post-docs are the same. I also hear that it doesn't get easier once you get licensed in the NYC area in terms of job opportunities.

 

[erg923]

Hmmm...did anyone else go to the APA convention this year? Anyone actually find it to be of high quality?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

CA is totally saturated. NYC is also completely overwhelmed for practica/internships/post-docs. Unpaid practica in NYC have 100 plus applicants for a few spots--not so different from competitive internship sites. Post-docs are the same. I also hear that it doesn't get easier once you get licensed in the NYC area in terms of job opportunities.

Absolutely. Competition is fierce for mediocre positions, let alone higher-end spots (Sloan-Kettering, Mt. Sinai, Columbia/Cornell, etc). I interviewed with a top hospital and I was told that 60+ hr was expected, and the money wasn't great considering the expected workload. Thankfully NYC isn't really a draw for me anymore, I actually wanted it mostly for the restaurants and its proximity to NJ.

 

[edieb]

I know over 20 MDs who went to Caribbean medical schools who easily landed residencies and jobs. The stats of the # of doctors practicing in the US from these schools is on each school's website (similar to APA internship outcome data on psychology programs) and I belived the percentage is over 90, so I don't know what is wrong with your friends.

Psychiatry is a whole different animal. A HUGE number of psychiatrists are from 3rd world medical schools. THis is because most American medical students do not want to become psychiatrists. Therefore, to fill the tons of empty psychiatry residency positions, the schools with empty position have to recruit overseas M.D.s. with the condition they take one of these psychiatry residency slots. There are plenty of threads about this on the the psychiatry forums

 

[FadedC]

It does appear to depend a lot on what area of psychology you are practicing though. As a school psychology student in NYC we can often call up a practicum site and be given the spot without even having to go through an application proccess. Places in less popular locations are often happy if a single student shows interest in them in a given year.

CA is totally saturated. NYC is also completely overwhelmed for practica/internships/post-docs. Unpaid practica in NYC have 100 plus applicants for a few spots--not so different from competitive internship sites. Post-docs are the same. I also hear that it doesn't get easier once you get licensed in the NYC area in terms of job opportunities.

 

[2012PhD]

It does appear to depend a lot on what area of psychology you are practicing though. As a school psychology student in NYC we can often call up a practicum site and be given the spot without even having to go through an application proccess. Places in less popular locations are often happy if a single student shows interest in them in a given year.

wow...that sounds like a dream. Each year, my cohort and I had to submit multiple applications for practica that included 3 LOR's, cover letters, CV, testing reports, and go through grueling interviews. People are told to apply to 15 (I never did that many). Some of the interviews give you a case formulation with trick questions. In more recent years, 1st and 2nd year students in NYC were not even landing unpaid practica. I have also heard of unpaid practicum that require essays! Its almost like internship.

 

[2012PhD]

I know over 20 MDs who went to Caribbean medical schools who easily landed residencies and jobs.

Psychiatry is a whole different animal. A HUGE number of psychiatrists are from 3rd world medical schools. THis is because most American medical students do not want to become psychiatrists.

They didn't want to do psychiatry, but surgery and other similar specialty areas. It is tough to get into the more desired areas with a caribbean degree. Anyhow, my point is that the AMA was able to regulate and shut down any U.S. professional medical schools. I'm curious how they were able to do this without getting sued.

 

[2012PhD]

Basically, no matter the topic every thread boils down to the internship match imbalance and the proliferation of professional schools!

 

[Neuropsych2be]

They didn't want to do psychiatry, but surgery and other similar specialty areas. It is tough to get into the more desired areas with a caribbean degree. Anyhow, my point is that the AMA was able to regulate and shut down any U.S. professional medical schools. I'm curious how they were able to do this without getting sued.

A major change occurred in medical education following the publication of the Flexner report one century ago. Many of the medical schools critiqued in the Flexner report shut down over time and the AMA exercised a degree of control over that process. However, this is not the Edwardian Era. The current legal environment has changed beyond measure.

 

[2012PhD]

A major change occurred in medical education following the publication of the Flexner report one century ago. Many of the medical schools critiqued in the Flexner report shut down over time and the AMA exercised a degree of control over that process. However, this is not the Edwardian Era. The current legal environment has changed beyond measure.

what is your agenda here? Are you just trying to justify the APA's action by inducing a false sense of fear.

The APA currently denies accred. to programs for not having certain classes even if they are rigorous with good outcomes. They have also ocassionally put programs on probation for poor quality (e.g. there is 1 argosy program on probation). They have never been sued for any of this. The AMA has never been sued in this legal climate. What is your rationale for them getting sued then? You aren't giving me any logical argument or anything based on evidence of what we have seen so far.

 

[2012PhD]

A major change occurred in medical education following the publication of the Flexner report one century ago. Many of the medical schools critiqued in the Flexner report shut down over time and the AMA exercised a degree of control over that process. However, this is not the Edwardian Era. The current legal environment has changed beyond measure.

Give me an example of a private accrediting body that got sued and lost for denying accredidation to a program with objectively poor outcomes (e.g. programs that cannot place 50% of graduates in accredited internships/jobs) and then we can talk? At this point, the risk of law suit is close to zero or really low risk.

The apa is much more likely to be sued by graduate students that attended apa accredited programs (like argosy) but were unable to secure paid, accredited internships and were thus denied licensure and employment in many places. There are many psychologists that have been disenfranchised like this and it is a just a matter of time before they sue the APA as well. Graduate students have already sued the actual programs. I think they also have a fair shot at the APA.

 

[Rivi]

Basically, no matter the topic every thread boils down to the internship match imbalance and the proliferation of professional schools!

Seriously. Debating the internship imbalance and prof schools is like internet porn, you know it probably isn't the best use of anyone's time but you just can't help it.