Is it really worthy of all this effort?

[Sanman]

---

Members do not see this ad.

The unfortunate problem with average is that, like it or not, that is what most of us will be. Hence the meaning of the term. I honestly do not know if being a better than average therapist will make a difference. THe public will only go by who is likable, not better.What you must know how to do is run a business. You must also not be averse to change. The good and bad thing about psychology is that people can branch out and practice other things. Ideas such as corporate mediation, arbitration, etc are a possibility. Another idea is executive coaching or even a cash only practice. There are many ways to make money using your degree. If nothing else, it lends credibility and thus money. Now if you want to go into psychology with the idea of helping the indigent, working at a CMHC, etc that is a noble calling, but don't expect the big bucks. The fact is that there is only money in certain niche areas of psychology and if you do not fill that need, then you will have to settle for making five figures. However, I have yet to encounter a psychologist through my program that did not have the ability to make six figures. I know a neuropsych that was recently offered 110k to work in a neurology practice. However, the same can be said for medicine, there are many family med docs working in clinics for 100k a year. It is up to you if the hassle of being a good businessperson is worth the money.

 

[PsiKo]

The unfortunate problem with average is that, like it or not, that is what most of us will be. Hence the meaning of the term. I honestly do not know if being a better than average therapist will make a difference. THe public will only go by who is likable, not better.What you must know how to do is run a business. You must also not be averse to change. The good and bad thing about psychology is that people can branch out and practice other things. Ideas such as corporate mediation, arbitration, etc are a possibility. Another idea is executive coaching or even a cash only practice. There are many ways to make money using your degree. If nothing else, it lends credibility and thus money. Now if you want to go into psychology with the idea of helping the indigent, working at a CMHC, etc that is a noble calling, but don't expect the big bucks. The fact is that there is only money in certain niche areas of psychology and if you do not fill that need, then you will have to settle for making five figures. However, I have yet to encounter a psychologist through my program that did not have the ability to make six figures. I know a neuropsych that was recently offered 110k to work in a neurology practice. However, the same can be said for medicine, there are many family med docs working in clinics for 100k a year. It is up to you if the hassle of being a good businessperson is worth the money.

Surely there must be an existing cottage industry within psychology that caters to career-building for practioners who want to earn above-average salaries. Yeah, I could Google around for some, but perhaps instead some of the well-heeled members here can point the way to the (reputable?) practice building gurus.

 

[50960]

Sanman I disagree. Average is what the majority of a random sample will be, but people who have made it to completion of a doctoral degree and licensure are already well above the mean, some even say in the 99th percentile. So to set your goals to average is mediocre. Sure some of us will be mediocre therapists, diagnosticians and business managers, but should students set their goals for such levels? I don't think so. Hoever, I am up before the sun to go work out for an hour before work, so maybe I am the crazy one!!!😀

 

[PsychIntegrator]

Here, Here psisci, I second that! (and if your crazy for being up before the sun then many of us are diagnosable!)

 

[Sanman]

Well that depends on who you are comparing yourself to when you refer to the term 'average'. I am saying that as psychologists, the majority of us will be average when compared to each other. Now the level of average for such a high achieving group may well be above the general public. However, we are not competing with the general public for patients or jobs, we are competing with each other. I don't think average is a pejorative term. I consider myself an average graduate student. It is the only way I keep my sanity and balance (and my workouts). However, the level of performance I am putting forth be 'average' in this degree program is far above the average of society. I am simply arguing that the idea of being above average isn't a solution, since by definition most of us would have to be average. If we were all above average, then above average would be average🙂 . Confused yet? Well that's all for me cause I just cranked out two midterms and am staying up to finish a presentation. Here's to it being average.

 

[PsychevalIII]

I wouldn’t encourage any graduate student to be an “average” psychologist. In fact, a smart working and hard working psychologist can make more than the “average” psychiatrist.


Rich Dad, Poor Dad

What the Rich Teach Their Kids about Money-
That the Poor and Middle Class Do Not!

By Robert Kiyosaki

 

[Logic Prevails]

For the record Sanman, I get what you mean.

 

[positivepsych]

If you are going to work for the VA, a CMHC, or similar type job which pays $ 50 – 75 thousand / year, I don't think it is worth it (at least financially). Your job could be intrinsically rewarding, but that doesn't pay the bills. If you decide you are going to continue to work hard and be in the top 5% after graduate school, then it is worth it. I don't see any reason why a psychologist who is self employed cannot make $100 – 175 / year. Even with crappy reimbursement, the salary potential is available.

I've talked to a bunch of psychologists in private practice in affluent areas. Only 2 were making over 100K: One was seeing 35-40 patients a week (which is a lot), and had two people working under him and was taking a cut from them. The other one had been practicing for about 8 years and had very slowly built up his practice, while working a ton in the meantime.

The rest were making less (around 70K) or only working part-time because they couldn't maintain a full patient load. I don't know where you're getting this 100-175K number. At least from the people I've talked to, I think its very difficult to do this as a solo practioner in the first 5-10 years post-PhD.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I think to make into the 6 figures, you have to diversify your work. The days of only hanging a shingle are over (if you want to make that kind of money).

-t

 

[50960]

Ya, I agree. However there are alot of options if you look. Before I moved to Colorado, I had a good child testing agreement with a local child advocacy non-profit that earned me 20K+ /yr in addition to my regular incomes. My advice to newly licensed psychs is be assertive, charge what you are worth, and produce a good product. If you can get ahold of a good intern or psych asst to work under you, and you can double your workability as well as your networking.

 

[C.C.G.]

and if you only want to be a therapist, become a social worker.

I want to be a therapist, but i want to be a well payed therapist, as well payed as a therapist could be. Eventually i want to open up a private practice. Now, there are different ways to go about doing this.. masters in social work, masters in counseling psych or psyd in counseling psych. I've heard that i dont need my psyd to be a therapist and that insurance is more likely to take an msw over a masters in psych. I'm willing to go for the psyd in counseling psych if it will make the lucrative difference. I keep hearing different things, and i just wanted to know what you all have to say about this.

 

[Logic Prevails]

I want to be a therapist, but i want to be a well payed therapist, as well payed as a therapist could be. Eventually i want to open up a private practice. Now, there are different ways to go about doing this.. masters in social work, masters in counseling psych or psyd in counseling psych. I've heard that i dont need my psyd to be a therapist and that insurance is more likely to take an msw over a masters in psych. I'm willing to go for the psyd in counseling psych if it will make the lucrative difference. I keep hearing different things, and i just wanted to know what you all have to say about this.

I'm not sure about reimbursement rates as a function of your degree, but I can tell you my opinions about training...

For the most part, I agree with Dr. JT's quote: "If you want to be a therapist, become a social worker." That is, I believe a PhD in clinical psychology to be overkill if the only thing you want to do is therapy. If the clinical market was seeing greater demand for highly trained (and educated) therapists, and were willing to pay accordingly, then I might sing a different tune. The reality is that the market appears to be going in the opposite direction, where an average PhD clinician who may have 6 years of graduate training (and debt) can do "therapy" at the same pay rate as a Social Worker who went to school for two. I'm making a bit of a generalization, but this is certainly a possibility. This is unfortunate, as there are a large number of clients who have compicated issues and are in need of the most skillful clinicians. Third party payers are referring to the lowest bidder, making it more and more challenging for PhD psychologists to earn what they did years ago for running your "standard therapy practice." This is why there is so much talk on these forums about "being flexible" and being able to "offer something different."

That said, from my own experience I believe Social Work to have a totally different paradigm for treating clients. To give you an example, I don't believe a Social Worker would touch the bio/neuropsyc stuff with a ten foot pole. They are also unable to use or interpret tests. You'd have to see if this paradigm works for your own personality and goals as a clinician.

If you don't want to go the PhD route, I would look into a really good program that will get you a license as an LPC. I think this would be a smart choice for someone who wants to focus primarily in the therapy arena.

my 2 cents.

 

[positivepsych]

Ya, I agree. However there are alot of options if you look. Before I moved to Colorado, I had a good child testing agreement with a local child advocacy non-profit that earned me 20K+ /yr in addition to my regular incomes. My advice to newly licensed psychs is be assertive, charge what you are worth, and produce a good product. If you can get ahold of a good intern or psych asst to work under you, and you can double your workability as well as your networking.

I would get incredibly bored doing assessment. WAIS, WISC, Woodcock-Johnson, etc. take hours to administer and score, and are mind-numbingly repetitive. I got into the field for the intellectual stimulation, not to ask "what is missing in this picture" x 100.

I understand the calls to diversity one's services, but I find it kind of sad that psychologists seem like they need to "hustle" by doing a little therapy, a little assessment, a little teaching/supervision, a little consulting/speaking, etc.

It's nice to be able to do one thing and do it well, and then diversify for your own pleasure (e.g. teach on the side just so you don't get bored doing therapy all day). But HAVING TO constantly diversity services seems to me that psychologists are without a niche and trying to do whatever they can to get by...

 

[PsiKo]

But HAVING TO constantly diversity services seems to me that psychologists are without a niche and trying to do whatever they can to get by...

So what's on the other side of your closing ellipsis "..."? You led us/you up to the water's edge and then stopped short of offering your answer to the riddle of this thread? Does the effort involved in becoming a psychologist justify the (increasingly meager?) rewards?

What's your personal vision of "making it" and making ends meet as a practicing psychologist?

 

[positivepsych]

Does the effort involved in becoming a psychologist justify the (increasingly meager?) rewards?

What's your personal vision of "making it" and making ends meet as a practicing psychologist?

The answer to the question is a completely personal one, based on several factors:

1) Alternatives? For some people, geting a Psy.D. from Alliant is their best shot at a career. Good for them. Others I know could have gone to a solid medical school, law school, consulting/banking position. Most students do not have these alternatives, so the thought of making 70K after their PhD sounds great to them.

Classmates of mine got 60K offers + 10K signing bonuses right out of college. Nobody goes into psychology for the money, but it may grate on some people to know that you are going to school for 6-7 years for a doctorate in order to get paid the same as what your college buddies are getting paid now.

2) Cost of Living & Personal Standards of Living are Important. Some people are frugal, but others want more material things. This is a completely personal decision in what kind of salary you want to make. However, if you want to live in certain parts of the country (e.g. major metropolitan centers), cost of living will kill you on a meager salary, no matter how aescetic you are. So it depends on where you want to live and what homes cost there.

3) What do you want to do with your career? Some people like the thought of doing neuropsychology or assessment or organizational behavior consulting involving running a lot of statistics. More power to them. If you would honestly like to do highly specialized niche work, you could make it work.

However, most people I talk to got into the field to work with people and improve their well-being. It's my opinion that if you are one of these people, and feel like you have to resort to neuropsychology or trying to be a 'medical psychologist' to make a good living (and this was not your original intention or interest), just go to medical school instead of having doctor-envy for the rest of your life. If are looking into doing a bunch of testing/number-crunching to make a living (and this was not your original intention or interest), just go into consulting.

4) Risk-Aversity. If you are willing to take the risk of opening a private practice and being in the top 5% of clinicians by being extremely good, in the right location, being great at networking/referrals, and being business-savy, and are okay with taking that risk and possibly failing to live up to your expectations, then go for it. Some people are just more risk-averse than others with their careers.

5) How important is it to have a job you enjoy vs. the time and money to do what you enjoy? I have friends who work 36 hours a week in jobs that they are simply content with (not their passion), but they have the income and free time to do what they enjoy outside of work. This works great for them, while others may hate it. This is a personal choice as well.

I don't have the answers, I wish I did. I just hope others students will ask themselves these questions and make a smart choice that is right for them.

 

[50960]

"psychologists are without a niche and trying to do whatever they can to get by... "

This is the reality in healthcare today. Administering and scoring tests are what interns are for as they need the experience. There are still "good jobs" in psychology, but they are not easy to find, and the best way to find them is by serving your time networking and doing alot of different kinds of work.

 

[Dr.JT]

I would get incredibly bored doing assessment. WAIS, WISC, Woodcock-Johnson, etc. take hours to administer and score, and are mind-numbingly repetitive. I got into the field for the intellectual stimulation, not to ask "what is missing in this picture" x 100.

Do you consider doing therapy all day intellectually stimulating?

Also no one is talking about "constantly diversifying." What I am hearing is the suggestions to have a well thought out career path (you know, the way they do in other professions) rather than people coming into psychology with the vague notion that they "want to help people" and then complaining about doing research, limited salary potential, not liking assessment (which is the foundation of clinical psychology), etc...

 

[docjohng]

I think a doctoral degree in clinical psychology gave me a great background to do therapy. While I agree the market appears to be moving toward lesser-credentialed professionals for therapy, I don't think I'd discount my educational experience as helping me a better therapist coming out of school. (This is just a personal experience, as the empirical research doesn't support that greater education = better patient outcomes.)

But I agree with psisci's comments about that if you're already getting your doctorate, you're a step ahead of 95% of the population. That may not translate into income (try an MBA if that's your goal), it does translate into understanding more about life and what you want out of life, and being in a good position to take advantage of all of that education and experience.

People, I think, are looking for assurances that are impossible to give -- if I get my MBA from Harvard, I'll be set for life. No, that's not true. Some people graduate with their MBA from HBS and get into crap careers they spend years trying to undo. The same is true for our field. No one degree, graduate program, or type of training is going to give you any guarantee about making it pay off. Only you can do that. You need to be focused on working hard, working smartly, and looking for areas where you seem to be strong in and focus on those areas.

It can be done -- it's done everyday.

John

 

[Neuro-Dr]

I think you need to consider what you imply by "hustle".
The reality is that psychology is a unique profession within mental health that was designed to allow a single practitioner to:
evaluate and diagnose - not all states let master's level clinicians do this
formally assess - again, even in basic cases such as ADHD, the most common pediatric outpatient referral, the comorbidity of psych, LD and social issues is +50%
treat - with interventions ranging from therapy, to bio/neurofeedback, group and in some states pharm
research - evaluate the outcomes of mental health care
administrate and supervise
teach - as this is a doctoral degree

It is not that the psychologist is doing many things because they have, it is because that is the nature of our training. This is why you here those of us in practice saying over and over, if you want to be a therapist, get an MA/MSW.

As for salary data, please consider the practice dorectorate supplimental data or that from the specific sup-field when considering the data. I have nothing in common with the "average" psychologist except a license.

 

[50960]

Thanks for the words of wisdom Docjohn and neuro-doc. At the end of the day we are here to help students get a realistic idea of what they face in the real world. Your input is great.

 

[50960]

Thanks for the words of wisdom Docjohn and neuro-doc. At the end of the day we are here to help students get a realistic idea of what they face in the real world. Your input is great.

 

[Neuro-Dr]

my pleasure and sorry for the typos

 

[Rapunzel]

That said, from my own experience I believe Social Work to have a totally different paradigm for treating clients. To give you an example, I don't believe a Social Worker would touch the bio/neuropsyc stuff with a ten foot pole. They are also unable to use or interpret tests. You'd have to see if this paradigm works for your own personality and goals as a clinician.

If you don't want to go the PhD route, I would look into a really good program that will get you a license as an LPC. I think this would be a smart choice for someone who wants to focus primarily in the therapy arena.

my 2 cents.

I understand that social workers receive training that is quite different in focus, and that does not include training in assessment (although individual students might seek it out). Social workers are into getting their hands dirty and doing what needs to be done to fix the problem. To a degree, I admire that.

I'm currently on the LPC route, although I would choose a PhD and hope that I might have the opportunity (and the energy left over) to eventually do that. When I started my master's program I had doubts about it, as it seemed like a watered down version of counseling psychology, and the LPC license is newer and less accepted (increasing in pupularity though), and I never wanted to settle for a master's level degree. Now I can see advantages. It is psychology-based, and does include training in assessment. It's sadly lacking in research though, other than consuming research and considering each client to be a single-subject research case. One of my instructors, who is an LPC, claims that he can do everything that a psychologist can - we just need to get supervision if we are doing something where we lack the training and experience.

In the past, I have been guilty of mistrusting master's level therapists. Now I am a little hurt when someone says that master's level folk shouldn't be allowed to do therapy. Sure, there are some differences, but when all is said and done by the time we are eligible for licensure we will have roughly equivalent experience to new PhD graduates. We have 2-3 years of course-work, and one year of internship. After that two more years of supervised experience are required before licensure. There is a continuing education requirement during that time and from then on as well. So it still takes 5-6 years, just with more emphasis on experiential learning than bookwork and research. From there it is what you make of it. Whether or not I go for a PhD, I intend to take specific training and become certified in specific areas and techniques, and I want to get involved in research somehow.

Requirements for doing therapy have changed so much from time to time. Carl Rogers as a PhD psychologist was accused of practicing medicine without a license. He noted that social workers were doing therapy though, and that seemed to be okay, so why shouldn't psychologists be able to do therapy too and not just research? Erik Erikson became a well-respected theorist and psychoanalist without ever earning any university degree whatsoever. The APA once recognized master's level clinical psychologists. None of us can tell what tomorrow may bring.

I have to admit that it is frustrating when I read that some PhD programs expect applicants to justify why they want a doctoral degree, since anyone who wants to be a therapist may just as well go for master's level licensure, and then I hear that already having a master's degee will not be looked on favorably by those same programs in case master's level therapists desire to go on from there (perhaps upon finding that their current level is more limiting than they really wanted), and also psychologists lobby against recognition for master's level clinicians and attempt to limit what holders of those licenses can do (such as not allowing them to do therapy and/or assessment - um, well, those are what we are primarily trained to do). It's a scary world.

 

[50960]

I have alot of respect for most masters level therapists, but honestly a psychologist is a completely different animal. It is like comparing an NP/PA to a physician; both can do many things very well, but only doctors can do some things. There is no way MSW, LPC or MFT's are qualified to do testing and assessment, let alone behavioral medicine, RxP, have hospital privileges, be expert witnesses et al.
Even as an RxP trained psycholgist I would never equate myself with a psychiatrist, nor should MA therapists try to equate themselves with psychologists.👎

 

[50960]

I have alot of respect for most masters level therapists, but honestly a psychologist is a completely different animal. It is like comparing an NP/PA to a physician; both can do many things very well, but only doctors can do some things. There is no way MSW, LPC or MFT's are qualified to do testing and assessment, let alone behavioral medicine, RxP, have hospital privileges, be expert witnesses et al.
Even as an RxP trained psycholgist I would never equate myself with a psychiatrist, nor should MA therapists try to equate themselves with psychologists.👎

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Social workers are into getting their hands dirty and doing what needs to be done to fix the problem. To a degree, I admire that.

I agree. They utilize a different treatment model than a clinician would use. It isn't good/bad, just different. I think in the case of an LCSW, they can work on a very results oriented plan, and try and get some meaningful change in a short period of time.

One of my instructors, who is an LPC, claims that he can do everything that a psychologist can - we just need to get supervision if we are doing something where we lack the training and experience.

This is problematic.

It is a disservice to tell students this, because it isn't true.

......by the time we are eligible for licensure we will have roughly equivalent experience to new PhD graduates. We have 2-3 years of course-work, and one year of internship. After that two more years of supervised experience are required before licensure. There is a continuing education requirement during that time and from then on as well. So it still takes 5-6 years, just with more emphasis on experiential learning than bookwork and research.

I think this is very misleading. An MS is typically 45-60ish credits; Doctoral programs are 115-125 credits. The course work is also different in depth and breadth. A year doesn't equal a year when you compare the programs.

Additionally, we have practicum hours (typically it is 2 years of rotations, sometimes 3....all pre-doctoral). Then we have internship, then we have additional hours (2000?)...which people usually take as a post-doc. THEN we can sit for licensure.

We are trained for different things, and that doesn't make one better than the other, but they are definately different. I think because there is overlap in the therapuetic area it makes people want to compare and/or combine them into one general catagory. I know a ton of great MS level therapists, and I'd trust them with friends/family, but the referral would be based on their core skill set. For instance, I have an MS level colleague who probably knows Substance Abuse better than the vast majority of general clinicians I know, so in that case i'd refer a substance abuse case to him for therapy. That being said, I wouldn't refer an assessment case, someone with severe pathology, or someone with an eating disorder (sub-speciality) to him. He wouldn't even have the general training to deal with those areas effectively. Not good/bad, just different.

I have to admit that it is frustrating when I read that some PhD programs expect applicants to justify why they want a doctoral degree, since anyone who wants to be a therapist may just as well go for master's level licensure, and then I hear that already having a master's degee will not be looked on favorably by those same programs in case master's level therapists desire to go on from there (perhaps upon finding that their current level is more limiting than they really wanted),

This is because it is a long hard road, and it is much more than therapy, some research, and some classes. Every place I interviewed asked me (more than once) about this. It is just as important to the program as it is to the applicant that they are in this for the right reasons, and that they understand everything it entails.

......also psychologists lobby against recognition for master's level clinicians and attempt to limit what holders of those licenses can do (such as not allowing them to do therapy and/or assessment - um, well, those are what we are primarily trained to do). It's a scary world.

Assessment is an entirely different animal than therapy. I think clinicans are justified in lobbying for certain areas of therapy, such as sub-specialities that are much more involved than a general therapy case. As for assessment.....that is an area that should be and needs to be for clinicans only. A good portion of training and practicum experience involves testing, as do many of the post-doc experiences. It isn't as simple as reading a BDI or doing a mini-mental status exam. True psych testing involves extensive training and understanding of not only the tests, but also all of the research, statistics, and metrics behind them. This is why it takes YEARS (after training) to really be proficient in the range of assessments you may run into as a clinician.

I want to encourage you to learn as much as you can, and to not limit your learning.....but I also would hope you see that there are very distinct differences. Best of luck with your training.

-t

 

[Sanman]

Well there are some good points being made here. I for one agree with what therapist4chnge has said. There are some areas in which I feel that LPCs are extremely competent and others where I feel they lack the necessary qualifications. For example in my presnt practicum, I work with a 2nd year LPC student in a college counseling center and have found certain areas of strength and certain areas of weakness in her training. She has received much more extensive training in group work, career issues, and the like,even more so than I at this point. However, she has not been exposed to many of the different theoretical orientations (little knowledge of CBT and Humanistic therapies) and she knows very little about assessment with the exception of some screening tools. Now, she may develop expertise in a certain area, but she lacks the foundation to deal with many more serious issues and she is unlikely to go out and learn it after the program.


On a side note, I found this doctoral employment survey on the APA site that looks at salaries of new grads. Though, the report does not mention if this is including the post-doc year or after it for clinicians:

http://research.apa.org/des03_t11.pdf

http://research.apa.org/des03.html


All i have to say is ouch if you want to work at a college counseling center. 38k is less than I would have been offered out of college. The others aren't much better.

 

[phd2006]

As many have indicated, if you want to do assessment (I'm not referring to test administration which a number of MA level practitioners do, but to full assessment interpretation and integration) and research, you need a doctorate. If you're only interested in doing therapy, get a Master's level license. A handful of states not only license social workers at the MA level but psychs as well.

...

On a side note, I found this doctoral employment survey on the APA site that looks at salaries of new grads. Though, the report does not mention if this is including the post-doc year or after it for clinicians:

http://research.apa.org/des03_t11.pdf

http://research.apa.org/des03.html


All i have to say is ouch if you want to work at a college counseling center. 38k is less than I would have been offered out of college. The others aren't much better.

OUCH is right! Although from 2003, those salaries are horrible. I don't know anyone who would work for a graduate degree with the intention of expecting these salaries. Two cautions: First - the N in some of the settings is fairly low, so this may not be an accurate reflection. Second - the university-based salaries are based on a 9-10 month academic year. As indicated, multiply by 11/9 for an annual salary -- but many universities will only pay for the 9-10 months/year according to their academic calendar.

 

[PsiKo]

Put the surveys aside. What do your eyes tell you? Look at the psychologists you know. How do they dress? Where do they live? What kind of car do they drive? This is not an appeal to surface values, but material possessions are a pretty reliable reflection of one's earning power.

With the exception of one well-heeled psychologist I know whose ample discretionary money was earned in side ventures unrelated to psychology, the clinical and neuro psychologists I know earn mostly humble (some, sadly, very humble) salaries.

 

[docjohng]

This is the case study phemonenon. While we can learn some things from single case studies, I'm not sure we can draw general conclusions or trending information from non-random data points.

I know a *large, wide* variety of psychologists, given my position. I know some who graduated with me who are doing extremely well within the field. I know others who are struggling to get by. I can't look at any of them and say, "Well, it's obvious these folks are doing so well because of (a), (b) and (c)." It's not at all obvious, although geographic location seems to have something to do with earning potential (e.g., living around a thriving metropolitan area is going to be kinder to you than living out in the country).

Also, it's not all about money. Some people greatly value benefits, vacation time, healthcare, and job security. For instance, I have colleagues working in the VA who absolutely *love* it. Great benefits, great job security, and while the pay may not be as good as the top pay in private practice, it still pays well after a few years.

John

 

[Sanman]

Well, If we are looking around at what we see, then I would be pretty happy. I have met a number of psychologists and I have yet to meet one that is more than 5 years out who does not seem to be doing well. I have seen a lot of BMW's and Infinitis. One of my professors just rented a beach house for his daugther's wedding and then vacationed in England. I have also seen a hyundai, a nissan sentra and a 15 year old dodge. However, all of those individuals had been in practice less than five years. Two of them had gotten married within the last few years and one them just had a child. With the challenge of starting a family and a career, I'm not surprised that they are struggling a bit.

As an aside, I had always been led to believe that the pay at VA hospitals was good compared to other types of non-private practice work. However, I have also met a more than a few psychologists who seemed burned out and angry there. Anybody else find either of these to be true?

 

[FamilyMD]

I have a psychologist that rents office space from me. He drives an older model Civic that is spewing smoke out the tailpipe. Personally, to put in as much schooling as you guys do, this low salary **** has got to stop! Demand to be paid what you are worth! This is mainly directed at new pysch grads accepting $40k/yr jobs. As long as there are people willing to take these jobs, why would the employer change their offers?
This also applies to my medical brethrens. It makes my blood boil when I hear FP grads accepting $100k/yr job offers (unless there's some loan repayment). I tell them you are more educated than 95% of the population, you should make more than 95% too! There are always people willing to prey on unsuspecting new grads, that's why the internet is so great, for us to warn each other.

 

[Sanman]

I definitely agree with your sentiments FamilyMD. I would also like to add that it isn't what activities you are conducting as a psychologist that matters, it is how you are getting reimbursed. I don't think that many psychologists are able to properly handle the latter part of that statement. Unfortunately, in many cases our hearts are bigger than our brains. The other issue is that with so many females in the profession, there will always be those who are willing to the low pay, of say a counseling center, for the time off. However, it has been suggested to me that counseling centers and school districts are great places to work for those fresh out of school who want to build a practice.

I, for one, plan on getting a hospital job after I graduate and then will begin to build a small private practice taking only cash or perhaps also very good insurance. My plan is to continue to build my practice to whatever level is sustainable and work elsewhere the rest of the time. I would rather find a laid back hospital job and see one extra client a day for cash, than accept the cut rate reimbursements just to pay the bills. In the long run, I believe that it will be more profitable that way, unless I have enough clients with quality payors or cash to sustain a full-time practice.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I, for one, plan on getting a hospital job after I graduate and then will begin to build a small private practice taking only cash or perhaps also very good insurance. My plan is to continue to build my practice to whatever level is sustainable and work elsewhere the rest of the time. I would rather find a laid back hospital job and see one extra client a day for cash, than accept the cut rate reimbursements just to pay the bills. In the long run, I believe that it will be more profitable that way, unless I have enough clients with quality payors or cash to sustain a full-time practice.

That is also my plan. I will also do some consulting on the side, but that is more about generating additional cash flow, and not a real area of long-term interest.

-t

 

[SFPsyd]

Hi fellow psychologists/psychologists in training. I'm new to SDN, but not so new to the field, and just wanted to chime in. It seems like there's a ton of negativity regarding the job prospects for those entering the field of psychology. Some of this negativity is understandable, in that things are certainly harder for new graduates than they perhaps were in years past. However, in response to the prior posts on this topic, I just wanted to say that this has not at all been my experience in the field. I received my PsyD degree in 200, and was extremely worried about the high degree of debt I had accumulated. However, I am pleased to report that for those of you interested in private practice, there is still good $ to be made. The keys are whether or not you are a good, competent, clinician (if you're not...well, there's not much you can do), and also whether or not you network yourself well and have a business-savvy mindset. As for myself, when I got my degree I worked at a clinic for 2 years part-time, while simultaneously building my private practice. In less than 2 years, I had a full patient load and was easily making 6 figures. This is not at all unusual, as many of my colleagues have done the same. A lot depends on what area you live in (in my case I moved from DC to the Bay Area, and there is certainly much $ in the Bay Area), but more depends on making yourself marketable. If you can do that well...you will be fine, and it won't matter whether you got a PhD or a PsyD. Sorry for the long post...just wanted to give the perspective of someone in the field.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Thank you for the post. I think it is important for people to hear some of the positive experiences out there. I hope it is like that (or better) when I finally get out. SF is at the top of my list for places to live, but it probably won't happen because of housing costs. How is the commercial space out there? I'd love to work in/around a major city life SF, but the $/s.f. seems prohibitively expensive.

-t

 

[SFPsyd]

Commercial space, much like housing, is expensive. However, the trade-off in income has made it worth it, at least for me (not to mention the lifestyle). Like I said earlier, places like the bay area, NYC, LA, allow you to charge higher rates and oftentimes allow you to work outside of insurance. Get 5-6 clients/day, each paying ~150/hr. and you can do the math.

 

[positivepsych]

Commercial space, much like housing, is expensive. However, the trade-off in income has made it worth it, at least for me (not to mention the lifestyle). Like I said earlier, places like the bay area, NYC, LA, allow you to charge higher rates and oftentimes allow you to work outside of insurance. Get 5-6 clients/day, each paying ~150/hr. and you can do the math.

SFPsyD, thank you for your contribution. I'm glad to hear that you are doing well. My only question is this--major cities like San Diego, LA, San Fransisco, NYC, etc. have some of the highest rates of psychologists per capita (Marin County for instance, has an astounding rate of 1 psychologist for every 144 people, and that's not even including master's level providers).

I certainly know that some exceptional psychologists are doing well around the big cities, but I really wonder if the market has enough demand to support the growing number of psychologists and master's levels therapists? Are people like you really just exceptions who managed to do well because of a combination of skills and savvy?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Great information. I will be specializing, so I'll be doing some serious market research before moving somewhere (this was beaten into me from my biz career).

-t

 

[SFPsyd]

Sorry for the slow response...haven't had a chance to log back in. To answer your question, I am sure there are some clinicians out there who are not doing well. However, I wouldn't call myself exceptional by any means. Many of my colleagues in the field earn between 80,000-175,000, in some cases more. Much of this is done through not accepting insurance, and much is through good marketing. My advice: don't listen to the naysayers (of which there seem to be many). And don't be afraid to follow your dream based on what the "average" clinician earns. You can indeed do well in this field...so, relax.

 

[Sanman]

Out of curiosity, Does the cash market work well for regular psychotherapy or is it only for niche practices/clients? I know it is big in New York, but many of those individuals are well established and have been doing it since the heyday. It's good to hear that it is still possible for new practitioners.

 

[SFPsyd]

The cash market can be done for regular psychotherapy, depending in large part on geographic location, marketing, etc. I've said it before, but marketing/networking really is the name of the game, and it's a shame that clinicians don't get more training in this area...it really is important. Having a niche is useful too, but be able to work outside of that niche as well. For example, I specialize in adolescent mood/anxiety disorders, but I keep up to date on other areas as well and accept a pretty wide range of clients. Having experience helps your salary only so far as it increases your referral base and network. However, you can be a relatively new clinician and still do fine.

Finally, a word on salary issues in general. People see things like "the average psychologist only earns 70K/year" and get terrified. Personally, I don't know of one single psychologist who works in private practice in a metropolitan area who earns anywhere close to that (unless you are just starting out). The salary surveys are skewed terribly by geography, specialization, etc. Also (and this is a big point), our field includes a very high number of female clinicians. Many of them do not work full-time, as they scale back their hours in order to raise families, etc. So, in short, I would say that a psychologist who:

A) Is competent
B) Networks/markets themselves well
C) Accepts limited insurance
D) Practices in a well-off area
E) Works full-time (~30 pts/week)

...should earn no less than 150K per year, sometimes more.

Hope that helps!

 

[PsiKo]

The cash market can be done for regular psychotherapy, depending in large part on geographic location, marketing, etc. I've said it before, but marketing/networking really is the name of the game, and it's a shame that clinicians don't get more training in this area...it really is important. Having a niche is useful too, but be able to work outside of that niche as well. For example, I specialize in adolescent mood/anxiety disorders, but I keep up to date on other areas as well and accept a pretty wide range of clients. Having experience helps your salary only so far as it increases your referral base and network. However, you can be a relatively new clinician and still do fine.

What percentage of your income is derived from performing assessments?

 

[SFPsyd]

I would say about 10% of my time, and maybe 15% or so of my income. I spend limited time conducting assessment (some intelligence testing for younger children and ADHD assessments for adolescents). Assessments can certainly be lucrative, but can become boring if you're only using a small number of tests.

 

[Logic Prevails]

This is some really good information - wish there was more discussion of the business/practical side of clinical psychology.

Thanks for sharing

 

[docjohng]

If you work in a large metropolitan area, maybe, sure...

But one of my friends works in Dayton, a fairly good-sized midwest city, and is not pulling in $150k/year. And it's not for lack of trying. She works full time and just has difficulty in getting enough clients to keep her schedule full. She does accept a lot of insurance (as do most therapists who are in their first decade or so of practice), and doesn't specialize in any particular area. Dayton isn't exactly "well-off" either.

So yeah, I think it has a lot to do with geography. And understanding that the cost of living in a place in Dayon, OH is going to be a lot less than it is in Boston or DC. So any salary number has to be put into perspective of what the cost of living is in their particular geographical locale.

John

 

[PsychevalIII]

This is some really good information - wish there was more discussion of the business/practical side of clinical psychology.

Thanks for sharing

I think you should focus on the business and have a GOOD product. The product does not have to be perfect. How many can make a better hamburger than McDonalds? Just about everyone, yet they make millions and millions of dollars / year.

Inc. & Grow Rich

by

C.W. Allen; Cheri Hill, Diane Kennedy, and Garrett Sutton, Esq.

Make Your Life Tax Deductible

by

David Meier

Breaking Free of Managed Care

by

Dana Ackley

Good luck, and don't settle for average.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I was looking for something and came across this, and I thought it has some good info, so I'm bumping it.


-t

 

[Ollie123]

Thread is a good read!

A couple months ago I was also in a panic about the job outlook in this field, but now that I'm in grad school, hearing stories about what previous graduates are doing, I think alot of the folks in this thread are blowing things WAY out of proportion.

If I wanted to earn TONS of moeny I'd have chosen another field. Hell, I was better set up to go into corporate law than clinical psych when I graduated. Even if I'm earning in the top 1% of clinical psychologists I'd probably be earning way less than I'd have earned as a mediocre corporate attorney. That doesn't mean you'll be poor though. Heck, my parents earn WAY less than 60k a year and we weren't poor by any stretch of the imagination.

I think some folks early on hit the nail on the head when they said entitlement. Yes, getting into grad school is a competitive process, but that doesn't mean you can coast once you make it in. I kept reading posts like this where "You'll NEVER find a full-time academic job after graduation, they don't exist anymore!" but guess what - tons of graduates from my program and lab manage to. Some in psychiatry departments, some at cancer center, some in psychology departments, it depends.

That being said, I'm always super suspicious of salary surveys. They usually aren't terribly clear in how they define "salary". Sure, if you want to work a 9-5 in a VA or clinic, see clients, go home afterwards and not think about anything again til you get up the next day to do it again, you're probably not going to earn that much. Yes, going through grad school is TOUGH, but you shouldn't go through it with the expectation that it means you can coast for the rest of your life.

If you look at the "salary" of new professors here, its probably terrible. I'd guess around 40-50k. And these are often the numbers that would get reported in a salary survey. Yet is their "salary" the same as what they actually make? HELL no. For starters, that's a 9 month salary. Teach a class or 2 over the summer, that's another few thousand dollars. Most everyone has a grant, many professors have several so you can fund yourself over the summer. Add in the money you get from being written into other people's grants, extra income from book sales for those who publish (though admittedly, academic publishing is usually not exactly a gold mine), speaker fees as you advance in your career and get better established, and your "salary" isn't remotely representative of what you're actually taking home.

The mantra I keep hearing here is that if you set yourself up well from the start, you will be fine. Its just when people go into grad school without a clear plan, thinking they can be a "general" therapist at a VA and get paid enough to have scrooge mcduck-like money-vault that issues arise. I'm working in some hot and highly technical specific areas (psychophysiology and behavioral genetics) in a very hot overall area (health psych), which should provide tons of opportunities for collaboration and an easier time getting grant funding later on. Since those are very technical areas that many researchers are interested in, but far fewer have the technical skills to do so by themselves, I should have consulting opportunities. I'm getting a strong quantitative background so I can hopefully get some work as a statistical consultant as well. I have plans for integrative, translational research with I/O, neuroscience, biologists, etc. that makes me more marketable. Its a long-term project, but I'm a big computer-nerd and hope to get some software written for use in research and clinical settings. I have a business background too, so while it isn't a primary goal for me right now, the kind of consulting T4C is talking about isn't completely out of the question for me later on either.

Its still too early for me to know what this means for my salary 10 years from now, but I'm not worried. I want to do more than just work 9-5. I'm going into this field because I want a CAREER, not just a job.

I say all this not to toot my own horn, but to emphasize the importance of thinking these things through in advance. Its easy to say "I want to do x research", apply to grad school, then come out the other end with no clear plan. If you WANT to set yourself up to not just be "a" psychologist, but to be an expert in a variety of areas, you can do it. Just don't want until you graduate after not publishing squat for 5 years and finding yourself unable to find a post-doc to do so.

Thus ends my soapbox rant.

 

[PsychevalIII]

I've talked to a bunch of psychologists in private practice in affluent areas. Only 2 were making over 100K: One was seeing 35-40 patients a week (which is a lot), and had two people working under him and was taking a cut from them. The other one had been practicing for about 8 years and had very slowly built up his practice, while working a ton in the meantime.

The rest were making less (around 70K) or only working part-time because they couldn't maintain a full patient load. I don't know where you're getting this 100-175K number. At least from the people I've talked to, I think its very difficult to do this as a solo practioner in the first 5-10 years post-PhD.

35 hours billed / week making around 100K sounds like a poor business person.