I apologize if this has already been discussed; I am new. I was a supporter of NAPPP and generally agree with their take on APA and advancing psychology practice. However, I have become disillusioned with their overall confrontational tone and their "anti-medication" rhetoric. Thoughts?
NAPPP Discussion
- Thread starter stigmata
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Messages
- 469
- Reaction score
- 29
They seem in favor of prescriptive authority, though.
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 42
They are in favor of whatever brings them the most money and power. The organization was formed after APA's Board of Educational Affairs ruled that RxP couldn't be taught as CE, but only through accredited college programs. There had developed an industry of RxP training in motel rooms. Thus, they broke away to create a group focused on RxP training under any circumstances, in motels, online, anything.
The leaders of NAPPP HATE the scientist-practitioner model of training and instead favor cranking out as many psychologists as possible under any training standards they can get away with. He states that psychologists should be thinking as entrepreneurs. They are 100 percent business people who think "professional" means doing anything for a buck, not adhering to professional and ethical standards.
One NAPPP official has started a program at Arizona State to take master's-level therapists and turn them into "doctors of behavioral health" inside of 18 months, ready for licensure. It's all about quantity, not quality.
They are also affiliated with the Academy of Medical Psychology and have their own American Board of Medical Psychology which awards Diplomates in Medical Psychology. They threatened to sue if Div. 55 and APA succeeded in getting an ABPP in Medical Psychology, since they had already staked out that franchise.
NAPPP and AMP are completely against the Louisiana Academy of Medical Psychologists (LAMP), the screwballs who got their own law passed secretly by greasing the palms of the state's most powerful lobbying firm. That law puts their licensure and regulation under the state medical board ... not only to prescribe, but also to practice clinical psychology, an incredibly dangerous precedent but it served the purposes of the LAMP members. And they don't seem too concerned about what they do to psychology, as long as they have more power and more money (oh by the way, if you want to join LAMP, it'll cost you $2,500 a year ... the prescribing business is good.)
Lately, NAPPP has been downplaying the use of medication and instead is touting their Medical Psychologist training for health-related practices. You can be sure they are doing this for more money and power.
Fortunately, NAPPP and the RxP campaign by APA have been extremely limited in their effect. The rest of the world doesn't think much of them.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,675
- Reaction score
- 5,025
When the NAPPP first came about, I was glad to see an alternative organization to the APA because the APA leadership seemed disconnected from the average practitioner. As I dug deeper into their agenda, I became less supportive because they seem to push for maximizing the numbers of psychologists and increasing the scope of psychologists, while also supporting lower training standards.
I have followed their RxP efforts, and the standards they support are much lower than I feel is adequate for ethical practice. The "business" focus isn't inherently bad, but it is when part of the model wants to increase supply. They are still in the minority in regard to size, but I'm concerned that they will still gain enough support to influence legislation.
I have followed their RxP efforts, and the standards they support are much lower than I feel is adequate for ethical practice. The "business" focus isn't inherently bad, but it is when part of the model wants to increase supply. They are still in the minority in regard to size, but I'm concerned that they will still gain enough support to influence legislation.
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 234
- Reaction score
- 42
For an alternative to APA I favor the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, which adheres to science-based psychology but is very applied in its focus. The Association for Psychological Science is also an excellent alternative. Both have shown a great deal of integrity, collegiality and transparency.
This is opposed to the arrogance and secrecy with which many parts of APA operates, particularly the practice directorate and APAPO.
As someone who is a psychologist, and a businessman since I'm in private practice, I'm not against paying attention to the business side of our work, or political advocacy. However, some years ago the "practice" side of APA went off the rails and made money and political power (inside and outside APA) their number one priority.
That signaled the decline of professional and scientific integrity and the ascension of greed as the driving force. NAPPP was simply more extreme, and more impatient, than the Practice Directorate and split off. (The BEA, whose rule helped push out the NAPPPsters, has been a force slowing down RxP and forcing them to behave a little more appropriately. It was the BEA that also limited how much of RxP training could occur predoctorally, since RxPers wanted it ALL to be predoctoral as an option.)
This led to RxP as a political campaign, rather than a scientific or professional one. The focus was getting RxP incorporated into psychology for wealth and power, which requires that it be within psychology's (and APA's control), that training be done by the corporate private training schools, and that training be as quick, easy and profitable as possible. Again, it's about quantity and power, not quality and professionalism. This profit-and-political-power attitude also drove them to insanely deceive the APA membership for 10 years over the practice assessments.
If psychologists obtain RxP through accepted medical training routes, it does APA no good at all, since it doesn't put money in the pockets of the professional schools and it doesn't add to APA's power. You'll notice they never advocate any avenues to RxP that doesn't fit this model of additional wealth and power.
Among the reasons why what LAMP did in Louisiana was disturbing was that a group of 51 psychologists got their own law passed that created what is in effect a new profession. Their psychology and prescribing practice is done completely outside all other psychological oversight. If they can do that, what keeps others like NAPPP from getting their own laws passed to create psychology providers?
