Importance of social justice emphasis in a PsyD program?

[mattyo123]

Hey all,
I'm currently deciding between two PsyD programs. One places a large emphasis on social justice and responsibility(almost all PsyD programs seem to emphasize this in some way) and the other does not place such a large emphasis on social justice(though it's still something they talk a good deal about).

I'm curious what this might mean to me as a potential student? I'd like to consider myself an advocate of social justice, but it is not at the core of what drives me to psychology(my interest in human behavior is).

Thanks for opinions!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted176373]

Hey all,
I'm currently deciding between two PsyD programs. One places a large emphasis on social justice and responsibility(almost all PsyD programs seem to emphasize this in some way) and the other does not place such a large emphasis on social justice(though it's still something they talk a good deal about).

I'm curious what this might mean to me as a potential student? I'd like to consider myself an advocate of social justice, but it is not at the core of what drives me to psychology(my interest in human behavior is).

Thanks for opinions!

Social Justice = paying a lot of money for a degree and then earning the same as someone who works at McDonalds.

If you're down with that, more power to ya. I'm not, I think that those who work hard and also work effectively should be rewarded for their efforts. I'm not against poor people, I just don't want to be one.

I think you should go where your heart leads you, because one day you'll become more pragmatic and it will be too late to turn back and indulge in your ideological fantasy of social justice. I'm not saying this to be disparaging, but the reality of having to pay bills will eventually hit home.

Mark

 

[Blue86]

Social Justice = paying a lot of money for a degree and then earning the same as someone who works at McDonalds.

If you're down with that, more power to ya. I'm not, I think that those who work hard and also work effectively should be rewarded for their efforts. I'm not against poor people, I just don't want to be one.

I think you should go where your heart leads you, because one day you'll become more pragmatic and it will be too late to turn back and indulge in your ideological fantasy of social justice. I'm not saying this to be disparaging, but the reality of having to pay bills will eventually hit home.

Mark

I don't really understand what you mean by this. (not disagreeing, just not understanding) Do PsyDs who come from a "social justice" focus school go on to work in positions that are payed less?
The thing is, a lot of programs are very "loud" when it comes to some issues - global learning, social justice, etc, but I never fully realized it influences your future job prospects by much. Hmmm...😕

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I've never heard that Psy.D. programs are anyway related to, "social justice". I'm sure some programs may have some ties to the community and may help disenfranchised people, but that is about it.

 

[mattyo123]

Social Justice = paying a lot of money for a degree and then earning the same as someone who works at McDonalds.

If you're down with that, more power to ya. I'm not, I think that those who work hard and also work effectively should be rewarded for their efforts. I'm not against poor people, I just don't want to be one.

I think you should go where your heart leads you, because one day you'll become more pragmatic and it will be too late to turn back and indulge in your ideological fantasy of social justice. I'm not saying this to be disparaging, but the reality of having to pay bills will eventually hit home.

Mark

I guess I'm remembering now that I didn't go the way of an MSW because I didn't see that "social justice" role as my motivating drive. I guess by my question I just wanted to make sure that I attend a program that will help foster in me a clinical identity outside of empirical science? Will all programs do this to some degree?

 

[deleted176373]

I don't really understand what you mean by this. (not disagreeing, just not understanding) Do PsyDs who come from a "social justice" focus school go on to work in positions that are payed less?
The thing is, a lot of programs are very "loud" when it comes to some issues - global learning, social justice, etc, but I never fully realized it influences your future job prospects by much. Hmmm...😕

Social justice as a philosophy espouses that (and yes, it's a wiki quote cause I am lazy tonight) "Social justice is also a concept that some use to describe the movement towards a socially just world. In this context, social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity and equality of outcome than may currently exist in some societies."

In our society, normally, hard work and more importantly work that is valued by society is rewarded through monetary incentive. When you redistribute that incentive you are devaluing the work of those who would normally be rewarded for their efforts. Be it a Doctor, a Lawyer, or other trained professional (like a psychologist) in order to provide a higher standard of living for those who's work is not as highly valued by society, like the meter maid, postal worker, or even the Perkin's waitresses that Tiger Woods seems so fond of.

Unfortunately, the concept of social justice means that someone has to sacrifice their liberty for the benefit of another. Taking from one group (with force) to provide for another group is stealing... it matters not if it is done by a person or a government.

I was really fond of this quote I found on Wiki tonight, and it seems appropriate, "There can be no test by which we can discover what is 'socially unjust' because there is no subject by which such an injustice can be committed, and there are no rules of individual conduct the observance of which in the market order would secure to the individuals and groups the position which as such (as distinguished from the procedure by which it is determined) would appear just to us. Social justice does not belong to the category of error but to that of nonsense, like the term `a moral stone'."

Mark

PS - I might add that I am a bit more conservative than most when it comes to the government reaching into my pocket for a "handout". Conversely, I do believe that all should be afforded an opportunity to succeed in our society, the role of government is that of one that should foster the success of all who seek it.

 

[psychgirl77]

I think Adler school of professional psychology has a big focus on social justice. One of my friends goes there and she mentioned this. I'm not sure what it entails exactly, though.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

....and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity and equality of outcome than may currently exist in some societies."

Wow...I guess I am anti-social justice if the above is true. Maybe I'm not cut out for this profession.

 

[mattyo123]

I think Adler school of professional psychology has a big focus on social justice. One of my friends goes there and she mentioned this. I'm not sure what it entails exactly, though.

This is one of the programs that I was admitted to, and I'd be curious to understand exactly what this means as well.

They also emphasize a holistic approach....I wonder if that and social justice are synonymous?

I've never heard that Psy.D. programs are anyway related to, "social justice". I'm sure some programs may have some ties to the community and may help disenfranchised people, but that is about it.

Social justice, social responsibility, some programs emphasize it. A poster on this board made it appear that a program that utilizes exclusively empirical research to treat clients can seen as soulless...and a social justice emphasis can somehow add meaning.

Anyway, I'm a bit confused by all of this, as you might be able to tell.

 

[Aura5]

Social Justice = paying a lot of money for a degree and then earning the same as someone who works at McDonalds.


Mark

I shouldn't have laughed at that, I really shouldn't have (in light of the current political climate I guess)...but it's refreshing to me to see that point of view, doesn't seem to pop up too often nowadays!

I'm not sure if that's what the PsyD program in question was talking about lol (really, no clue) but I know what you meant anyway.

 

[nicu4leo]

As a social worker I would have to say that historically the profession of social work has been more aligned to matters of social justice than that of psychology... At the heart of social work is a joint consideration for community welfare and case work (individual services) to those most in need. However, as clinical theory has been dramatically impacted within the profession of psychology the primacy of intrapsychic functioning has begun to take a back seat. Feminist theory, queer theory, as well as the introduction of systems oriented/field theory (a central social work theory) into psychology has paved the way for bringing macro issues (race, class, gender, etc) into the clinical dyad.

In regard to program emphasis- I am sure you can make whatever you like out of the experience. Yet, I feel the opportunity to work with oppressed populations is something all clinicians should experience- I know that for myself I have learned a lot from the challenges in this kind of environment.

 

[deleted176373]

I shouldn't have laughed at that, I really shouldn't have (in light of the current political climate I guess)...but it's refreshing to me to see that point of view, doesn't seem to pop up too often nowadays!

I'm not sure if that's what the PsyD program in question was talking about lol (really, no clue) but I know what you meant anyway.

LOL, you should hear my take on "strengthening the middle class" then...

What if I don't want to be middle class?
Why is my government so enamored with the idea of keeping me there?


Mark

 

[Buzzwordsoldier]

Oy vey. Gotta agree, Markp, your first quote was incredibly lazy, but you are forgiven since it was a great way to stir the pot! For the record, I am the one whom mattyo cited as being critical of status-quo-oriented scientific "discovery" programs. Your second quote was by von Hayek, the Arch-neo-liberal economist. How ironic that you chose that quote while decrying "the" "social justice" agenda as potentially coercive. Further, Markp, I know who pays your way, so I'll be pretty deliberate.

I guess I'm just one of those folks who believes global capitalism, as spurred by the neo-liberal (aka "primitive accumulation") agenda, was secured with the wealth that built up the war machine; that the war machine was secured with the fear and greed that spurred the wealth generated by neo-liberalism; and that their feedback is the rationalization of an increasingly insidious social and economic disenfranchisement (hello, oh exalted diathesis stress model!). In this sense, it's true -- there is no "social justice" that stands opposed to neo-liberalism. Justice is not the opposite of disenfranchisement, but already co-opted by the values spurring/spurred by it...Tea partiers and wobblies alike believe they are on the side of social justice, you know?

My turn to offer a quote or two. Consider the words of ethicist Emmanuel Levinas, from his work Totality and Infinity:

The art of foreseeing war and of winning it by every means -- politics --
is...the very exercise of reason. Politics is opposed to morality, as
philosophy is opposed to naivete...

But violence does not consist so much in injuring and annihilating persons
as in interrupting their continuity, making them play roles in which they no
longer recognize themselves, making them betray not only commitments
but their own substance, making them carry out actions that will destroy
every possibility for action.

I may not know much, but I am convinced -- whatever drives them to psychology, psychologists cannot be politically neutral. And coming down on the side of whatever gets espoused as "social justice" does not relegate one to a life of deprivation. Whether one's wages ever distinguish one from the burgerflippers is ultimately irrelevant. What stands opposed to disenfranchisement/justice? Levinas espoused something like hospitality and joy, which is not measured by the toys one can afford or the degree of freedom one can claim as one's own/has fought to preserve.

 

[robinsena]

Unfortunately, the concept of social justice means that someone has to sacrifice their liberty for the benefit of another.

I was really fond of this quote I found on Wiki tonight, and it seems appropriate, "There can be no test by which we can discover what is 'socially unjust' because there is no subject by which such an injustice can be committed, and there are no rules of individual conduct the observance of which in the market order would secure to the individuals and groups the position which as such (as distinguished from the procedure by which it is determined) would appear just to us. Social justice does not belong to the category of error but to that of nonsense, like the term `a moral stone'."

I agree with the first paragraph, but the second one is (forgive my term, but for me it's totally accurate) total BS. I bet whoever wrote that Wiki quote has never bothered to go out and demonstrate an iota of compassion for those who are suffering, through no fault of their own, as a result of political/social/racial/religious oppression, unless it were out of mere convenience and may benefit them in some way. It incenses me beyond belief when people use pretentious, philosophical drivel to make a point that is, in the end, still BS.

But to answer the OP's original question, there really is no PsyD program with a real 'social justice' emphasis. I agree with Mark to the extent that 'forced' social justice is stealing. My personal belief is that if you care for social justice -and for me that means helping others less fortunate than myself, at my personal expense/cost/suffering - that is a matter of personal attitude. No program, academic or otherwise, can really have an attitude like this since social justice is (as evidenced some the variety of posts so far) a matter of personal conviction. I would say what would be more important is to guage your advisor's attitude. Would they, for example, be supportive of you taking off time to help out in orphanage work in some foreign country when you could be using that time to complete your Masters? Would he/she defend your commitment to the department if other faculty members do not understand your conviction and why you give time to activities that do not immediately advance you professionally? The reason why I think this is important is because my advisor has stuck up and advocated for me in the past, and her understanding and support has helped me to maintain my positive status in my department while remaining true to myself in the conviction to sacrifice for others. I hope this helps. 🙂

 

[deleted176373]

I may not know much, but I am convinced -- whatever drives them to psychology, psychologists cannot be politically neutral. And coming down on the side of whatever gets espoused as "social justice" does not relegate one to a life of deprivation. Whether one's wages ever distinguish one from the burgerflippers is ultimately irrelevant. What stands opposed to disenfranchisement/justice? Levinas espoused something like hospitality and joy, which is not measured by the toys one can afford or the degree of freedom one can claim as one's own/has fought to preserve.

I agree that psychologists cannot be politcally neutral. I believe that it is important to understand, as psychologists, a variety of world views and concepts, like social justice. I have no axe to grind with those who think that social justice is the way to achieve the goals of a better society provided they do not infringe on my desire to maintain my liberty. You are welcome to divest yourself of as many resources you feel appropriate to achieve this goal. Like others, I believe in a certain amount of charity, but charity and social justice differ greatly. The difference being that "social justice" is forced by political means and charity comes from within. So while hospitality and joy do stand opposed to disenfranchisement, the use of coercion and force to take resources from people has little to do with hospitality. In order for it to be hospitality the resources must be freely given.

Mark

 

[mattyo123]

But to answer the OP's original question, there really is no PsyD program with a real 'social justice' emphasis. I agree with Mark to the extent that 'forced' social justice is stealing. My personal belief is that if you care for social justice -and for me that means helping others less fortunate than myself, at my personal expense/cost/suffering - that is a matter of personal attitude. No program, academic or otherwise, can really have an attitude like this since social justice is (as evidenced some the variety of posts so far) a matter of personal conviction. I would say what would be more important is to guage your advisor's attitude. Would they, for example, be supportive of you taking off time to help out in orphanage work in some foreign country when you could be using that time to complete your Masters? Would he/she defend your commitment to the department if other faculty members do not understand your conviction and why you give time to activities that do not immediately advance you professionally? The reason why I think this is important is because my advisor has stuck up and advocated for me in the past, and her understanding and support has helped me to maintain my positive status in my department while remaining true to myself in the conviction to sacrifice for others. I hope this helps. 🙂

Thank you, your response does help.

To explain what I meant in terms of a program with a social justice emphasis, I was talking about the Adler School(check their website for info. about their social justice emphasis). To sum up how I understand their perspective, it is to train psychologists who work on a policy level as well as doing psychotherapy. So, if they see lots of people who have abusive spouses, they would try to push for legislation to make it easier to have those spouses incarcerated.

Does that make sense? Whatcha think about that perspective robinsena, I'd be curious.

Anyway, your post helped a lot.

 

[robinsena]

Oh, now that's interesting! I was not aware of Adler until now. I took a quick look at their website. Take my advice with a grain of salt since I don't know about their program, but my thinking is if you're absolutely sure that you will pursue a career that is related to social justice, then by all means go for this program. Sounds like if you're going to make it your career the school's emphasis will give you a competitive edge since it'll train you in policy. So, for example, if you know right now you will want to work in Cambodia with an agency like IJM, for example, this may give you an edge. BUT, if you're open to other career paths (like me, where I want to work in a traditional psychologist setting but have committed most of my vacation time to humanitarian opportunities abroad), then I would keep other schools in your sights. Either way, you will be an asset with your doctoral training, as long as you are willing to work long-term with whatever population you commit to - it's just the nature of a psychologist's work when you flavor it with social justice, since you need time to build trust with these communities who have lost faith in the governing authorities.

Again, it would make it MUCH easier on you if during your school visits you find potential faculty advisors who are either advocates of social justice, or who will at least support you. In your visits/interviews, you can express your interest in the area and ask if there are any current students/faculty who are engaged in humanitarian, and get a feel for a) whether the program will be accommodating to your passion and b) if so, who else to talk to (in addition to your interviewers) on interview day.

I really want to applaud your concern for social justice and encourage you to stay true to your passions. In grad school I definitely felt the pressure to neglect the other parts of me so I can play the part of the 'ideal graduate student,' and it wasn't easy for me to make conscious choices in how to spend my time (e.g. working with local high school students versus attending colloquium).

I guess everyone can look at it differently, but to me, charity at best is temporary and at worse is condescending. The pursuit of social justice, on the other hand, requires a deeper conviction, and, yes, it comes at a cost. I'm sure when there were suffrage and desegregation there were people who thought -their- rights and -their- consent were not freely given. Consent is not required for social justice, because there are some things that are just wrong. Should we ask for brothel owners' 'consent' to free 10 to 11 year old girls from sexual slavery, even when the local govt does nothing about it? Social justice is not the same as socialism. I respectfully (but strongly) believe that Glenn Beck needs to shut his trap when he's talking about things he knows nothing of. I tend to lean conservative on some issues, but it gets me so fired up when he's spewing misleading nonsense out of his mouth. 👎

Sorry for the ranty digression, matt. I wish you the best of luck in your school search, and let me know if I can help in this aspect (trying to integrate a personal passion with professional goals) in any way. I've been there. 🙂

 

[deleted176373]

Thank you, your response does help.

To explain what I meant in terms of a program with a social justice emphasis, I was talking about the Adler School(check their website for info. about their social justice emphasis). To sum up how I understand their perspective, it is to train psychologists who work on a policy level as well as doing psychotherapy. So, if they see lots of people who have abusive spouses, they would try to push for legislation to make it easier to have those spouses incarcerated.

Does that make sense? Whatcha think about that perspective robinsena, I'd be curious.

Anyway, your post helped a lot.

Social justice is not seeing people incarcerated or metting out punishment for bad behavior. While spousal abusers deserve punishment, that's just plain old justice. The underlying issue of what creates spousal abusers remains unaddressed. Is it a societal ill? Is it a psychological problem? Perhaps there is a genetic component that makes some people more likely to be a spousal abuser? Who knows, but that would be a poor example of "social justice."

Social justice seeks to make everyone more equal and seeks to diminish rewards for those who perform better because of their inherent or developed abilities. After all there is no reason that the fry cook at McDonalds deserves a lessor quality of life than that of a doctor or lawyer. All should have access to medical care, affordable housing, and education regardless of their social class, race, or gender. I think that the large majority of us believe that no one should face discrimination for their social, biological, or phenotypic differences. However social justice goes farther than that, it seeks on a macro-economic level to punish the productivity of some groups to provide relief to other groups. Social justice seeks to treat all workers similarly, beliefs like the "living wage" falicy come to mind. "Living wages" just control or drive inflation and have little to do with actually providing a living wage. As lower wages increase buying power naturally decreases due to the increased cost of production, it's a zero sum game. You cannot create wealth through a minimum wage.

Anyway, we're way OT here, and to go back to the original discussion, go to where you feel most welcome. You will go through the process once (and hopefully only once unless you a masochist.)

Mark

 

[deleted176373]

Consent is not required for social justice, because there are some things that are just wrong. Should we ask for brothel owners' 'consent' to free 10 to 11 year old girls from sexual slavery, even when the local govt does nothing about it?

Talk about a strawman argument!

Taking my property and resources to advance someone elses agenda should absolutely require my consent, to do otherwise is STEALING.

Those 10 and 11 year old girls were having their resources used without their consent (they are too young to freely consent), and that is WRONG. The brothel owners have stolen what is not theirs and enslaved these young children. We all know that's wrong. So perhaps you're saying we should just tax these brothels more, and make up for it later, or should my taxes pay to provide reparations for the injustices these children have suffered at the hands of others? That would be "social justice."

Obviously not, there is a reason for laws and law enforcement, and that's to shut places like that down and to jail/punish/execute the people who operate such businesses. That's justice, not social justice.

 

[robinsena]

Mark, I'm confused how social justice would take away what you rightfully earn. The definition of social justice is the pursuit for a world state where every man (and woman) has the right to work and be fairly compensated. It does not mean that everyone gets the SAME amount of resources (that is an issue of socialism vs. capitalism). Social justice does not prohibit personal enterprise nor limits for a person's right to earn what they keep; it advocates for quite the opposite. Actually, socialism would be the opposite of social justice, because it would be one entity (the government or whoever's in charge) taking ownership of every man's work, and exploitatively claiming it as its own. It is unfortunate that they share the same word. 😉

"So perhaps you're saying we should just tax these brothels more, and make up for it later, or should my taxes pay to provide reparations for the injustices these children have suffered at the hands of others? That would be "social justice."

Actually, if you read Nicholas Kristof's newest book "Half The Sky" a strategy like that (but crucially different) has actually decreased child prostitution in some developing countries. Once there was sufficient international pressure via the limiting of trade, countries like Cambodia have cracked down on their corrupt police forces, who in response to the pressure have demanded higher bribes from brothels to the point where brothel owners shut down their own businesses to ruin legitimate, now more profitable businesses, instead. But if we are being brutally honest social justice does indeed come at a cost. We might not be taxed directly for social justice, but if I do believe in it that does mean I'm essentially advocating, for example, higher prices for goods from China in exchange for the shutting down of sweatshops in that country. There is always a price to pay and we can discuss where the lines 'should be' drawn. I think your issue is with government mandated social justice as it pertains to policy, but all I'm discussing here is the concept of social justice as it pertains to an individual lifestyle (as that is the focus of the OP).

I never said at any point that people should take away anything you earn fairly for others' benefit; all I said was that if someone is serious about social justice, it WILL cost something (either their time, money, or resources) to do it, and sometimes a corporate group of people will in some sense pay for social justice, as in my example above. There's no going around that, so if that still makes you unhappy, I don't know what to tell you. I don't think it helps either that I am radically different than you, in the perspective that I don't believe I will ever do anything to FULLY rightfully deserve whatever I've been given. I was born into a world that's unjust and even my opportunity to work is a privilege that others don't have. Maybe none of this is my fault, but that doesn't change the fact that there are some things that are wrong in this world.

If you would like me to clarify via PM, I would be more than happy to do so, but I don't want to draw away from the original intention of this post. It may not sound like it, but I really do understand your concern. It's just extremely difficult for me since this issue hits quite close to home and I have had the opportunity to see firsthand where the lack of social justice has produced.

We can debate what is an 'ok' cost of social justice, but I hope you don't have an issue against the concept of it, just potentially 'wrong' ways of producing it. And again, I agree that lines have to be drawn and that in some sense, mandated social justice is futile. I'm sorry if I have not been able to express myself well enough to clarify that I'm talking more about social justice as a personal attitude & concept, and not for or against a specific government policy of any kind. Every policy needs to be weighed and tested carefully.

 

[aagman01]

Don't listen to these people about social justice - many of them have been watching a bit too much Glen Beck (just kidding- don't want to insult people). If you are interested in working with low-income individuals and/or with people of minority backgrounds in a community mental health or local hospital setting, a program that regards itself as promoting social justice is not a bad thing. If you are interested in making money or a research career, you are probably better off in the program that does not emphasize social justice (although not necessarily - if you are interested in a research career to explore culture or what not, it would probably be a good thing - same goes if you want to get involved in practice in an urban area). The APA ethics code, I would argue, are very much in a social justice framework though, so a program that advocates for "social justice" in its curriculum and training is not necessarily "out there".

Hey all,
I'm currently deciding between two PsyD programs. One places a large emphasis on social justice and responsibility(almost all PsyD programs seem to emphasize this in some way) and the other does not place such a large emphasis on social justice(though it's still something they talk a good deal about).

I'm curious what this might mean to me as a potential student? I'd like to consider myself an advocate of social justice, but it is not at the core of what drives me to psychology(my interest in human behavior is).

Thanks for opinions!

 

[erg923]

and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity and equality of outcome than may currently exist in some societies."

Wow...I guess I am anti-social justice if the above is true. Maybe I'm not cut out for this profession.

+1 on that....I smell commy...🙂

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

If you are interested in working with low-income individuals and/or with people of minority backgrounds in a community mental health or local hospital setting, a program that regards itself as promoting social justice is not a bad thing. If you are interested in making money or a research career, you are probably better off in the program that does not emphasize social justice (although not necessarily - if you are interested in a research career to explore culture or what not, it would probably be a good thing - same goes if you want to get involved in practice in an urban area).

While I somewhat agree with the first part about targeting specific locations that may be more in like with SJ, I very much disagree with the second part of your post. Many fine researchers do work that make a positive contribution to SJ issues.

As an aside, I know MarkP and I are more similiar than not in our political views, though I think it is important to recognize that wanting to provide services for disadvantaged people isn't connected to a political affiliation, though the way in which these services are implemented can have a very real relationship in regard to political affiliation. Personally I would like to be able to provide services to people in need, but most of the traditional avenues out there require sacrafice of one's own financial stability, which I am not okay with doing. Clinicans find other ways to "give back", though be aware that if you want to work at a CMHC or the like, the pay will probably be far less than other places.

 

[phillydave]

The government (dems and reps) takes property and resources from us all the time without our consent. I wish that I could decide where my money went and for who's agenda... I wouldn't have let the govn't take a dime from me to send troops to the mid-east or pay the bar tab at the lesbian-sex re-enactment erotica club. Nevertheless, my nickles and pennies still contribute to the agendas of those I disagree with. Oh well.

 

[aagman01]

Fair enough. I was not implying that researchers could not contribute towards "SJ". The meat and potatoes of funding for research, like professional practice, is not overwhelmingly in SJ issues. That was all I was saying.

I haven't looked into the specifics of the legislation quite yet, but from my understanding medicaid will now be reimbursed at medicare rates under the new health care overhaul. That should make "SJ" type professional work at least somewhat more sustainable.

While I somewhat agree with the first part about targeting specific locations that may be more in like with SJ, I very much disagree with the second part of your post. Many fine researchers do work that make a positive contribution to SJ issues.

As an aside, I know MarkP and I are more similiar than not in our political views, though I think it is important to recognize that wanting to provide services for disadvantaged people isn't connected to a political affiliation, though the way in which these services are implemented can have a very real relationship in regard to political affiliation. Personally I would like to be able to provide services to people in need, but most of the traditional avenues out there require sacrafice of one's own financial stability, which I am not okay with doing. Clinicans find other ways to "give back", though be aware that if you want to work at a CMHC or the like, the pay will probably be far less than other places.

 

[robinsena]

I haven't looked into the specifics of the legislation quite yet, but from my understanding medicaid will now be reimbursed at medicare rates under the new health care overhaul. That should make "SJ" type professional work at least somewhat more sustainable.

May be true domestically, but probaby not for psychologists who want to participate in international work. I hear some non-profits are as competitive and cutthroat as major business corporations nowadays, especially with the current economy... that's unfortunate.

 

[deleted176373]

As an aside, I know MarkP and I are more similiar than not in our political views, though I think it is important to recognize that wanting to provide services for disadvantaged people isn't connected to a political affiliation, though the way in which these services are implemented can have a very real relationship in regard to political affiliation. Personally I would like to be able to provide services to people in need, but most of the traditional avenues out there require sacrafice of one's own financial stability, which I am not okay with doing. Clinicans find other ways to "give back", though be aware that if you want to work at a CMHC or the like, the pay will probably be far less than other places.

I do believe that people who are disadvantaged, disenfranchised, or simply unable to take care of themselves should not have to go without care. It's not a matter of wanting people to flourish and prosper. I think that most everyone wants their fellow man or woman to live happy and productive lives that they can be proud of. So I am a realist, I realize that not everyone can life a great life. I certainly want that, but it's not always possible. Those that can't through no fault of their own deserve support and help, that's being humane. Those that can need to find the motivation to elevate not only themselves but those around them, they and we have a duty to inspire positive growth in ourselves and those whom we share our lives with.

The government (dems and reps) takes property and resources from us all the time without our consent. I wish that I could decide where my money went and for who's agenda... I wouldn't have let the govn't take a dime from me to send troops to the mid-east or pay the bar tab at the lesbian-sex re-enactment erotica club. Nevertheless, my nickles and pennies still contribute to the agendas of those I disagree with. Oh well.

Well that's true to some extent, we elect leaders to represent us, and this is where the choice part exists. Through this representation we have agreed to allow those people to negotiate what we will or will not do as citizens... including paying taxes, fees, fines, and even allowing ourselves to be incarcerated. If we don't like it, we have the freedom to leave anytime we want (assuming we have not already been jailed.) Now, I can safely say that I did NOT want to ever pay 6 figures in taxes (and I have) and I did NOT feel that was my fair share, but I consented to be governed and had the choice of leaving prior to that period where I wrote the check to the IRS.

The lesbian sex re-enactment you refer to I believe was not paid with public money, but monies raised privately. I guess you're a Republican then?

Mark

 

[phillydave]

Well that's true to some extent, we elect leaders to represent us, and this is where the choice part exists. Through this representation we have agreed to allow those people to negotiate what we will or will not do as citizens... including paying taxes, fees, fines, and even allowing ourselves to be incarcerated. If we don't like it, we have the freedom to leave anytime we want (assuming we have not already been jailed.) Now, I can safely say that I did NOT want to ever pay 6 figures in taxes (and I have) and I did NOT feel that was my fair share, but I consented to be governed and had the choice of leaving prior to that period where I wrote the check to the IRS.

The lesbian sex re-enactment you refer to I believe was not paid with public money, but monies raised privately. I guess you're a Republican then?

Mark

You're right about that, I realized that about the private vs. public money soon after I posted it.

And six figure taxes? Yikes, that's no fun. I'm sure many of my opinions will begin to change somewhat when I start to earn a higher salary in 4-5 years. However, I'm somewhat of a Moderate, although I lean to the liberal side. I am in favor of the current bill, and sort of see it as being similar to the "handouts" we get with other public services such as police, fire, public schools, trash disposal (although many cities are starting to charge for this). My head says I should be scared to death about the economic consequences of the new legislation, my heart says we'll look back in 25 years and wonder why we didn't do it sooner. I sort of feel like it's like saying unless you can afford police assistance you shouldn't expect the government to just simply give it to you, why should others pay for your safety? I know the logic doesn't translate exactly, but part of me thinks that we get handouts all the time from the govn't, like the ones above. Another part of me thinks that we are taxed without representation all the time, i.e. paying city wage taxes (in Philadelphia) but being unable to vote in city elections because I no longer live within city limits. Anyway, I'll halt now before I go into a diatribe.

 

[deleted176373]

You're right about that, I realized that about the private vs. public money soon after I posted it.

And six figure taxes? Yikes, that's no fun.

Making enough to pay six figure taxes is fun... but paying the taxes, that feels like rape when you write the check. I think if we did away with the withholding system and had everyone who had to pay taxes write a check each month we'd have a revolt on our hands.

I'm sure many of my opinions will begin to change somewhat when I start to earn a higher salary in 4-5 years. However, I'm somewhat of a Moderate, although I lean to the liberal side.

Time will tell. I don't hold political views or beliefs against people, everyone has a right to feel the way they want to and support the policies they believe in.

My apologies for the thread drift.

Mark

 

[phillydave]

Making enough to pay six figure taxes is fun... but paying the taxes, that feels like rape when you write the check. I think if we did away with the withholding system and had everyone who had to pay taxes write a check each month we'd have a revolt on our hands.

Time will tell. I don't hold political views or beliefs against people, everyone has a right to feel the way they want to and support the policies they believe in.

My apologies for the thread drift.

Mark

Ya must be doing something right to owe Uncle Sam that much!

And I second your sentiment on the rest. My apologies for getting off topic as well.

dave

 

[aagman01]

Haha...why exactly are you getting into this field if you were making enough to pay six figures in taxes? Why didn't you stay in your old field, since you had to be making upwards of a quarter mill annually. Let me know what career you were in where you were making that kind of loot. And why are you taking fellowships from the military and going into thsi field when you were making so much $$$?

Making enough to pay six figure taxes is fun... but paying the taxes, that feels like rape when you write the check. I think if we did away with the withholding system and had everyone who had to pay taxes write a check each month we'd have a revolt on our hands.

Time will tell. I don't hold political views or beliefs against people, everyone has a right to feel the way they want to and support the policies they believe in.

My apologies for the thread drift.

Mark

 

[Aura5]

LOL, you should hear my take on "strengthening the middle class" then...

What if I don't want to be middle class?
Why is my government so enamored with the idea of keeping me there?


Mark

Because everyone should be equal, everyone should be leveled out to middle class, give and take to make it that way...because that's obviously a capitalistic democracy! wait...

 

[lookitssara]

This seems to have gotten onto another topic but if anyone reading this is still wondering about social justice and how that emphasis plays into a clinical program...

I would suggest checking out UMich's Social Work website. A good friend of mine got her masters there, and a CORE of their curriculum is "Poverty, oppression, diversity, and social justice". It might more specifically address how it is part of a program.

You should think about what population you intend to serve when you're done. Lower class, minority, etc....a social justice theoretical background would serve you well. If you wanna do private practice...then you might find the coursework interesting, but it wouldn't as directly impact your clinical work.

 

[Buzzwordsoldier]

Social justice is not seeing people incarcerated or metting out punishment for bad behavior. While spousal abusers deserve punishment, that's just plain old justice. The underlying issue of what creates spousal abusers remains unaddressed. Is it a societal ill? Is it a psychological problem? Perhaps there is a genetic component that makes some people more likely to be a spousal abuser? Who knows, but that would be a poor example of "social justice."

Right back to the diathesis-stress-friendly analysis. Nothing personal, but this is a pretty obvious distraction ploy. You seem to suggest punishment might be misunderstood as social justice, and use this as an argument against social justice. Yet the example of spousal abuse is certainly an area where activists have provided psychological services ameliorating individual cases of distress by intervening, at the community level, in institutionalized causes and effects of impoverishment discriminating against breaking the continuity of exploitative relationships.

Social justice seeks to make everyone more equal and seeks to diminish rewards for those who perform better because of their inherent or developed abilities.

Oh foo. Your argument equating social justice with economically punishing the productivity of some is (sugestively) off the mark. Most of the social activist types I've known are much more interested in divesting society of competition perverted thanks to artificially sustained differences -- those granted thanks to the helping hand of institutional "isms." It has little else to do with abolishing competition pursued thanks to "inherent or developed abilities" -- some of the most staunch social justice types I have known have also been the most heartily competitive (whether they were athletes, shop owners, artists, etc.).

After all there is no reason that the fry cook at McDonalds deserves a lessor quality of life than that of a doctor or lawyer. All should have access to medical care, affordable housing, and education regardless of their social class, race, or gender. I think that the large majority of us believe that no one should face discrimination for their social, biological, or phenotypic differences. However social justice goes farther than that, it seeks on a macro-economic level to punish the productivity of some groups to provide relief to other groups. Social justice seeks to treat all workers similarly, beliefs like the "living wage" falicy come to mind. "Living wages" just control or drive inflation and have little to do with actually providing a living wage. As lower wages increase buying power naturally decreases due to the increased cost of production, it's a zero sum game. You cannot create wealth through a minimum wage.

Anyway, we're way OT here, and to go back to the original discussion, go to where you feel most welcome. You will go through the process once (and hopefully only once unless you a masochist.)

Mark

So yes --where suffering is caused by disproportionate distributions of institutional and capital resources themselves, psychology has an obligation to root out and heal society of its exploitative ideologies, to not itself be exploitative, and social justice has a place. The decision to foster an identity as a professional psychologist cannot be made out of context of these issues. We seem to agree that by your practice, your're necessarily "either part of the problem or part of the solution."

And as an aside, that was a pretty loose statement about the efficacy of living wage programs...I say, prove it.

 

[mattyo123]

This seems to have gotten onto another topic but if anyone reading this is still wondering about social justice and how that emphasis plays into a clinical program...

I would suggest checking out UMich's Social Work website. A good friend of mine got her masters there, and a CORE of their curriculum is "Poverty, oppression, diversity, and social justice". It might more specifically address how it is part of a program.

You should think about what population you intend to serve when you're done. Lower class, minority, etc....a social justice theoretical background would serve you well. If you wanna do private practice...then you might find the coursework interesting, but it wouldn't as directly impact your clinical work.

Thanks! You're right, this has gotten off topic, but I'm still looking for answers to my original post, and your answer is helpful.

 

[deleted176373]

Haha...why exactly are you getting into this field if you were making enough to pay six figures in taxes? Why didn't you stay in your old field, since you had to be making upwards of a quarter mill annually. Let me know what career you were in where you were making that kind of loot. And why are you taking fellowships from the military and going into thsi field when you were making so much $$$?

I owned an ISP, I sold it to Earthlink in early 2001. As CEO, I found myself working all the time, whether it was attending promotional events, helping charities, running the actual business, managing employees, etc. I was burnt out from always being on call and really couldn't even take a vacation without having to worry about other being capable of dealing with some of the unique technical challenges we would often face.

The year that I paid my highest taxes, I believe our gross income (me and the wife) was about $450k. Money is nice, don't get me wrong, but if you can't enjoy it, it serves little purpose. Certainly I could make more money... a lot more money doing IT security consulting, I used to charge $5000 per week plus per diem to show up in Texas. That's feast or famine though, consulting in a down economy is tough.

So that begs the question. Why am I back in the military? I actually missed the type of person who typically joins and serves in the military. I think that right now, yes, I am doing quite well for a student, my net income exceeds that of my wife who was making $110k per year, I am not on call and have some time for myself, and when I graduate I will be still making more than $100k per year. Add to all that a retirement plan that kicks in for me in 2018 and will pay me more than $40k a year for the rest of my life and the decision was simple. Why am I back in the military... Why wouldn't I jump on a free education, a great salary, a guaranteed APA internship, doing a job I love in a field I like, and a retirement plan that included medical for the rest of my life? I dunno, call me crazy for doing that! Hope that answers your question.


Mark

 

[deleted176373]

So yes --where suffering is caused by disproportionate distributions of institutional and capital resources themselves, psychology has an obligation to root out and heal society of its exploitative ideologies, to not itself be exploitative, and social justice has a place. The decision to foster an identity as a professional psychologist cannot be made out of context of these issues. We seem to agree that by your practice, your're necessarily "either part of the problem or part of the solution."

And as an aside, that was a pretty loose statement about the efficacy of living wage programs...I say, prove it.

I wish I had more time to address your post this morning, because it is an interesting one, if I get time later I will try to get back to it. I hear you saying prove it, but there is no proof that living wage programs have helped anyone, you can't prove what doesn't work. You know that. I see no evidence that living wage programs have eradicated poverty... because I still see plenty of poverty. All the minimum wage ensures is that people will not be hired until their value exceeds the minimum wage they can be paid.

Mark

 

[phillydave]

Amen!!! Unfortunately, those of us that pay taxes are soon to be outnumbered by the democratic party voting base (the ~40% or so that don't pay taxes).

Ugh.. I wrote tax checks for a while as a contractor. No fun.

 

[Buzzwordsoldier]

Problems arise in who gets to define "exploitative." I observe that the social justice crowd tends to favor big government and be restrictive of freedom. I think this will result in the opposite effective result with respect to justice. Suffering is subjective. Suffering isn't caused by disproportionate distributions of capital resources in my opinion. It can be caused by imposition of central power over resources (e.g., communist Russia). We cannot erradicate poverty, I don't believe. What we can do is attempt to provide an environment that is economically viable and full of opportunity for as many people as possible. Prosperity is the name of the game. Kill the economic engine and you kill social justice.

Webster's on-line has a decent enough seeming definition for the moment --

exploiting or tending to exploit; especially : unfairly or cynically using another person or group for profit or advantage <exploitative terms of employment> <an exploitative film>

where exploit means

1 : to make productive use of : utilize <exploiting your talents> <exploit your opponent's weakness>
2 : to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage <exploiting migrant farm workers>

I like the appeal to hospitality and joy as a counterweight to cynicism and meanness....

These sentiments were always front and center in my own experiences with social justice... Full disclosure, my experiences in social justice were in no means efforts to advance the cause of big governement -- they were on the contrary more of an anarcho-syndicalist bent, a celebration of something akin to freedom but much more enamored of "direct action" as an antidote to exploitation. I've found this experience a rich area of meditation when working on issues of empowerment and client rights in the mental health system...

Sticking with your example of suffering (which can also be plain to see given the right context) caused by the imposition of central power, I agree. Let's not forget, then, that in such societies, psychology can be and has been used as an instrument of oppression. Most of the social justice types I've worked with are slow to recognize that psychology can also be an instrument of oppression in so-called "open" (democratic, free market) societies. Rooting out the kinds of prejudice, fear, and greed that perpetuate it is what I understand to be but one area of overlap between social justice and psychology...