Online Psy.D - Why not?

[Ollie123]

Okay, now answer the question as to why some state licensing boards of psychology are ok with it? CA and AZ are two of them. I might practice in either state.

Because the licensing board also has exceedingly low standards in this field and is likely under political pressure from the state government and businesses that own these institutions? Because of lawyers?

You seem to assume we all believe the system is perfect. Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, I believe it is a tremendous shame that the licensing boards allow this sort of thing. There are a tremendous number of practicing psychologists who I believe should have their licenses yanked as they seem to do little beyond preying on the mentally ill to make a buck. In a best case scenario they are ignorant and lazy as opposed to downright evil. You seem hellbent on joining that group for some reason I don't fully understand.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Jxz]

I said I was done, but I can't resist.

"Havnt a govenemtn sanction something in no way legitimizes it"

Of course it legitimizes it, it's the government. That's who decides who a licensed psychologist is--the government.

Sorry to break it to everyone here. But the government decides that, not you guys.

 

[erg923]

lhsalover,
The definition of narcissism is thinking that you are the star of the show, when you are NOT.

Patients are the stars of this show. No one is forcing you to do anything. Its all your ego. Pay you bills some other way.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

But, the state licensing board of psychology is ok with it...You want to explain that?

48 states will not license you. Can you explain that?

 

[lhasalover]

You're right - I don't know why those other 78% of graduates from that program aren't employed in private practice since it's so easy. I sincerely hope that no client dies because you were so flippant and negligent about your training.

I have no idea why they failed. I do know, however, that you get out of education what you put into it. I'll just have to be one of the 22% who is successful, if not, I can go the route of an educational psychologist thanks to my masters degree.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I said I was done, but I can't resist.

"Havnt a govenemtn sanction something in no way legitimizes it"

Of course it legitimizes it, it's the government. That's who decides who a licensed psychologist is--the government.

Sorry to break it to everyone here. But the government decides that, not you guys.

The government and state licensing boards, as informed by those practicing in the field and involved in training and education. And when the government isn't doing its job, it's our responsibility to get involved.

As for CA, like Ollie mentioned, given that the state has the largest concentration of for-profit universities, I'd imagine there's strong internal and external pressure to keep the licensing criteria as vague and lax as possible.

 

[lhasalover]

48 states will not license you. Can you explain that?

Are you sure about that? I haven't checked. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but have you checked? I'm curious.

 

[psych84]

I think there is way too much emotion in this thread. And I think some people have been pretty disrespectful. I get it, this is an emotional subject, but let's keep it together. We will not solve the problem of for-profit Universities, or unaccredited programs in this thread, or by convincing one person.

 

[Ollie123]

I said I was done, but I can't resist.

"Havnt a govenemtn sanction something in no way legitimizes it"

Of course it legitimizes it, it's the government. That's who decides who a licensed psychologist is--the government.

Sorry to break it to everyone here. But the government decides that, not you guys.

Legalizes it. Doesn't legitimize it. It is also legal to curse profusely at every elderly woman you see walking by on the street as long as you don't make a direct threat (at least in some states). That doesn't make it acceptable human behavior, nor does it mean that the behavior should be respected, let alone encouraged.

We may or may not succeed, but many of us are going to devote time in our careers to fighting to make sure this guy CAN'T put food on the table. At least not as a psychologist.

 

[LPPSYD]

Are you sure about that? I haven't checked. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but have you checked? I'm curious.

I can't speak for CA or AZ but some states I've looked at require the board to individually review each case where the program was not APA-accredited to ensure it meets the standards of one. I cannot fathom this program meeting those standards, due to its short duration alone. Kind of scary to think either of those states would consider it equal.

 

[lhasalover]

We may or may not succeed, but many of us are going to devote time in our careers to fighting to make sure this guy CAN'T put food on the table. At least not as a psychologist.

For the record, I'm a woman (I do know that you were speaking in general though). This right here, this is what this thread has been about the whole time. It hasn't been about helping ME as a person in choosing a direction to go in. It's been about how most of you on this thread want to protect your field from being flooded by psychs from online programs so that you can protect your bottom line. That almighty dollar. This is self-serving, self-righteous behavior. Like has been said, I guess all of you know better than the government in terms of who should and should not be licensed. And no, Ollie, you will NOT succeed in your objective. Times are changing. Whether that is for the better is a matter of opinion.

 

[lhasalover]

I can't speak for CA or AZ but some states I've looked at require the board to individually review each case where the program was not APA-accredited to ensure it meets the standards of one. I cannot fathom this program meeting those standards, due to its short duration alone. Kind of scary to think either of those states would consider it equal.

In CA and AZ an individual review of each case is not required nor should it be in my opinion. I haven't checked the other states yet.

 

[deleted375280]

For the record, I'm a woman (I do know that you were speaking in general though). This right here, this is what this thread has been about the whole time. It hasn't been about helping ME as a person in choosing a direction to go in. It's been about how most of you on this thread want to protect your field from being flooded by psychs from online programs so that you can protect your bottom line. That almighty dollar. This is self-serving, self-righteous behavior. Like has been said, I guess all of you know better than the government in terms of who should and should not be licensed. And no, Ollie, you will NOT succeed in your objective. Times are changing. Whether that is for the better is a matter of opinion.

No, it's ultimately about protecting clients from poorly trained providers. Times are going to change - but it's likely going to be in the direction of stricter laws and training standards - not more lax.

 

[LPPSYD]

In CA and AZ an individual review of each case is not required nor should it be in my opinion. I haven't checked the other states yet.

Consistent with your previously stated disregard for standards of any kind.

 

[Ollie123]

t hasn't been about helping ME as a person in choosing a direction to go in. It's been about how most of you on this thread want to protect your field from being flooded by psychs from online programs so that you can protect your bottom line. That almighty dollar. This is self-serving, self-righteous behavior.

Just because you prioritize money over ethics doesn't mean everyone does. I have little concern about you having even the slightest impact on my bottom line since frankly, you aren't going to get the necessary training to be taken seriously. Heck, I don't even intend clinical practice to be a primary source of income. I do have concern about your callous disregard for anyone but yourself and the fact that the field provides avenues for such individuals to prey on the mentally ill for financial gain.

 

[LPPSYD]

In CA and AZ an individual review of each case is not required nor should it be in my opinion. I haven't checked the other states yet.

I wouldn't be so sure about AZ....

http://www.psychboard.az.gov/docmgt/2011PsychELApp.pdf

 

[deleted75966]

Legit options for you:

Keep working as a school psychologist. This is good money and a good career.

Go to a funded phd program (if you have the background to pull it off)

Go to a funded psyd program (if you have the background to pull it off)

Go to social work program and become an lcsw. You can practice privately with that.

Go to an MFt program and practice privately

 

[Doctor Eliza]

In CA and AZ an individual review of each case is not required nor should it be in my opinion. I haven't checked the other states yet.

Just checked in my state and it is here. There are also specific criteria in terms of courses taken, length of program (at least 3 yrs) and the requirement that at least one year be full time.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

For the record, I'm a woman (I do know that you were speaking in general though). This right here, this is what this thread has been about the whole time. It hasn't been about helping ME as a person in choosing a direction to go in. It's been about how most of you on this thread want to protect your field from being flooded by psychs from online programs so that you can protect your bottom line. That almighty dollar. This is self-serving, self-righteous behavior. Like has been said, I guess all of you know better than the government in terms of who should and should not be licensed. And no, Ollie, you will NOT succeed in your objective. Times are changing. Whether that is for the better is a matter of opinion.

To the bolded portion, my response is: yes, we do. At least if by "we," I mean the entirety of licensed and practicing psychologists, and particularly those individuals directly involved in education and training. And if by "government," we mean elected officials who typically have little or no formal training in mental health service provision. As I mentioned above, the government writes and enacts the standards, but does so after being informed by what are deemed to be experts in the field in question. It therefore falls to us to help provide the information elected officials require in order to do their jobs.

JS provided a number of viable options that wouldn't then present you with an uphill battle in a variety of contexts. Ultimately, of course, the decision is yours, at least so long as options such as the program you've asked about are allowed to exist. Although another thing to keep in mind is that the APA is at least attempting to push for legislation requiring accreditation at the grad school and internship levels nationwide. I don't necessarily see that legislation being enacted prior to your graduating this program (if you choose to attend), but it's something else about which to remain cognizant.

 

[erg923]

I hate to play "psychologist" here but the blaming of us, and the perception that the cause is due to self protection/ send preservation at the individual level is pure projection. Projection due to inability to understand that there are things to consider other then one's own self interest.

It's really no different than the theme that runs through all similar threads; the theme that I should be able to get a doctorate if I want to and no silly standards should stop me. It's narcissism. It's personal, yes. But I think, fundamentally, that it's true and is at the heart of the matter.

 

[LPPSYD]

Just checked in my state and it is here. There are also specific criteria in terms of courses taken, length of program (at least 3 yrs) and the requirement that at least one year be full time.

Yup, I saw those same requirements in a few states I've looked at. Several states seem to have requirements that will prevent online programs from being approved because you need to be physically present. And from what I've seen a pre-doctoral internship of some kind is generally required. Also, they require face-to-face supervision, or at least a significant portion of it be face-to-face.

 

[erg923]

I am curious about the "know better than the government" comment though. As if government knows best what works best and would never ever do anything that wasn't in the best interest of a profession or the public. How naive are you, lady? Good Lord.

I work for the Feds and know full well where my critical thinking begins and where they begin. Again, necessary skills for competent psychologists. Probably the same reason my kids don't go to public schools. I know have different values and different priorities.

 

[LPPSYD]

I am curious about the "know better than the government" comment though. As if government knows best what works best and would never ever do anything that wasn't in the best interest of a profession or the public. How naive are you, lady? Good Lord.

I work for the Feds and know full well where my critical thinking begins and where they begin. Again, necessary skills for competent psychologists. Probably the same reason my kids don't go to public schools. I know have different values and different priorities.

I think the sentiment was more "the government knows best only when it's approving me for licensure/not scrutinizing my program's requirements."

 

[lhasalover]

Just checked in my state and it is here. There are also specific criteria in terms of courses taken, length of program (at least 3 yrs) and the requirement that at least one year be full time.

So, then your state will allow it too. Cal Southern's program.

I think the sentiment was more "the government knows best only when it's approving me for licensure/not scrutinizing my program's requirements."

You can quibble over program requirements as long as you want. CA and AZ will both allow me to become licensed, and yes, that is true even for AZ after reading what Eliza posted about AZ's licensing requirements.

The attitudes and behaviors on this board, which have included personal attacks stating that I am a "fraud" have cemented my decision to attend Cal Southern's online Psy. D program, not discouraged it.

 

[erg923]

Attend a program out of spite. Yet another rationale decision. Lol

 

[ikibah]

Well.....this was entertaining.

 

[psych84]

I work for the Feds and know full well where my critical thinking begins and where they begin. Again, necessary skills for competent psychologists. Probably the same reason my kids don't go to public schools. I know have different values and different priorities.

The whole political system is screwed up in the US and that is a major problem.

"Private" is actually a big problem, for education, for healthcare, and in general whenever you rely mostly on the free-market.

 

[erg923]

It should be closed and was probably fiction anyway. I was wrong. No one the same age as my mother could possible be so naive and stupid. A long lunch with her is taxing, but this? Forgetta bout it...lol

 

[lhasalover]

Here are the reasons why its a bad idea:

1) The program is of a substantially lower quality than anything reputable. Quantitatively, there is less education.
2) The alumni are advising you to deceive someone for years in order to gain licensure.
3) Given that you will have less education, there is a danger in mis-performing known procedures or doing something that has implications that you do not understand. This risks peoples health.
4) There is only a 22% chance you will succeed.
5) Even if you succeed, your peers will look down on you. Some of those peers comprise licensing board members. Some sit on hospital boards. Some sit on health insurance peer review panels. Even if you are licensed, any of the latter groups can rightfully refuse you.
6) If you ever get sued for malpractice, the first thing they will ask you about is your online education. Which will go poorly.
7) Your peers will have a field day with ethics complaints with you. Anything you vaguely do wrong, will be attributed to your education.
8) Insurance panels are private contracts. They do not have to accept ANYONE. In a saturated area, there are no spots left for many insurances. If you are BCBS or Aetna, and you have enough providers; are you going to accept the online person or the brick and mortar?
9) Hospitals review the hell out of your background. They, like insurance, do not have to accept anyone. They would not be likely to accept you.
10) If patients ask about your education, you are required to tell them about it. If you have no shame, then this won't be a problem for you.


Those are just off the top of my head. It really sounds like you made up your mind prior to posting.

How are the alumni advising me to deceive anyone??

 

[erg923]

The "private" in this case happens to the most sacred institution in my life, the Roman Catholic Church. This is important to my values and to our lives. So no, I don't fink this is "dangerous" at all.

 

[LPPSYD]

So, then your state will allow it too. Cal Southern's program.


You can quibble over program requirements as long as you want. CA and AZ will both allow me to become licensed, and yes, that is true even for AZ after reading what Eliza posted about AZ's licensing requirements.

The attitudes and behaviors on this board, which have included personal attacks stating that I am a "fraud" have cemented my decision to attend Cal Southern's online Psy. D program, not discouraged it.

I don't think you read any of that correctly. And I was the one who posted about AZ's licensing requirements so I can say that for sure.

 

[psych84]

The "private" in this case happens to the most sacred institution in my life, the Roman Catholic Church. This is important to my values and to our lives. So no, I don't fink this is "dangerous" at all.

I wouldn't touch that one with a ten-foot pole.

 

[lhasalover]

It should be closed and was probably fiction anyway. I was wrong. No one the same age as my mother could possible be so naive and stupid. A long lunch with her is taxing, but this? Forgetta bout it...lol

So, I'm "stupid", huh? Okay. What is as obvious as the nose on your face is that most of you on this board, and that includes you, are committed to keeping graduates of online doctorate programs from becoming licensed and practicing as psychologists and the major driver behind this is not concern for patients. Own up to it.

 

[lhasalover]

I wouldn't touch that one with a ten-foot pole.

Yeah, I concur with that one. Lol.

 

[erg923]

How are the alumni advising me to deceive anyone??

So, I'm "stupid", huh? Okay. What is as obvious as the nose on your face is that most of you on this board, and that includes you, are committed to keeping graduates of online doctorate programs from becoming licensed and practicing as psychologists and the major driver behind this is not concern for patients.

My mother is 54 years old. She taught me good morals. She taught me that you do what is right and that anything worth doing is worth doing right. You are doing either.

 

[erg923]

And in Kentucky, as in most states, you need to have at least three years of training in your program (three-years in residence, at least). This is how the world outside the People's Republic of California exists, just so you know.

 

[psych84]

But erg, my overall point is that the free-market promotes the idea of freedom/choice over any real standards. There is no such thing as a free market-society that has strict regulation. When this is taken to the extreme, which it is in the USA to some level, choice is important not standards. The idea is then that the best companies, the best doctors, will win out in this open competition, as long as the govt doesn't interupt this natural process. This is how you get education that is for-profit, how you get healthcare that is for profit, and how people can go to such schools and still get licensed.

 

[lhasalover]

And in Kentucky, as in most states, you need to have at least three years of training in your program (three-years in residence, at least). This is how the world outside the People's Republic of California exists, just so you know.

Thank you, but I'm not concerned with that. I'll probably end up practicing in San Diego, CA - or in AZ. I like that state too.

 

[cara susanna]

I don't think many of us are concerned about direct competition from people who graduated from this program. A lot of us work in or are hoping to work in settings that wouldn't employ people from that program, like VAs, academic medical centers, university departments, etc.

 

[lhasalover]

You know what? Most of you on here have been feeding me a load of bull. I just looked up therapists in Del Mar CA on Psychology Today. There are a lot of them, you were right about that. HOWEVER, most of them are Psy.D's and most got their degrees from online schools! How can most of you look yourselves in the mirror? This is really sad. Why should I be worried about my colleagues in the field looking down on me when most of them have their doctorates from online schools?? So, they can't look down on me.

 

[lhasalover]

I don't think many of us are concerned about direct competition from people who graduated from this program. A lot of us work in or are hoping to work in settings that wouldn't employ people from that program, like VAs, academic medical centers, university departments, etc.

Exactly. And I want to work in private practice, so what's the problem?

 

[erg923]

5 comments.

1.Selection bias. Look at your geography.
2. Source bias (psychology today)
3. Overestimation of base rates
4. Therapists, do not equal "psychologist"
5. a.)I sleep well at night. b.) I am very handsome to look at.

 

[Icculus8]

You know what? Most of you on here have been feeding me a load of bull. I just looked up therapists in Del Mar CA on Psychology Today. There are a lot of them, you were right about that. HOWEVER, most of them are Psy.D's and most got their degrees from online schools! How can most of you look yourselves in the mirror? This is really sad. Why should I be worried about my colleagues in the field looking down on me when most of them have their doctorates from online schools?? So, they can't look down on me.

do you have a citation for the idea that "most" licensed psychologists received their degrees online?

 

[deleted375280]

Exactly. And I want to work in private practice, so what's the problem?

The problem is that poor training is harmful to those seeking mental health services.

 

[erg923]

Exactly. And I want to work in private practice, so what's the problem?

1.Lack of response and acceptance to rationale feedback from those in the profession.
2.Lack of ability to abstract beyond yourself.
3. Lack of intellectual drive/curiosity/interest in the field/interest in science.
4. Lack of concern about your competence
5. Lack of forethought/planning regarding practice realities of the field.



Random thought: You respond to feedback the way my 3 year old does. What do we make of this?

 

[lhasalover]

5 comments.

1.Selection bias. Look at your geography.
2. Source bias (psychology today)
3. Overestimation of base rates
4. Therapists, do not equal "psychologist"
5. a.)I sleep well at night. b.) I am very handsome to look at.

Erg, I am looking at actual PSY.D profiles and websites. These clinicians are licensed psychologists. It appears that most of you on here have made it your life's mission to keep those of us out of the field who aren't going to APA accredited and or traditional programs.

 

[psych84]

I am very handsome to look at.

We need proof.

 

[erg923]

Erg, I am looking at actual PSY.D profiles and websites. These clinicians are licensed psychologists. It appears that most of you on here have made it your life's mission to keep those of us out of the field who aren't going to APA accredited programs.

I would actually agree with this assertion.

Program that are not peer viewed and accredited by the governing body of this profession should not exist, I agree. I can think of no other doctoral-level health service profession where this scenario exists. Perhaps you would like to explain why this SHOULD be allowed to exist? I am interested in your thoughts. Please go on.

 

[lhasalover]

We need proof.

Look it up. Google is your friend. In addition, most of you seem to know better than the psychology state licensing boards too.

Oh, wait. You were talking about, Erg. Yeah, I'd like to see some proof of that too, erg.

 

[erg923]

Done. GC is actually a psych stalking SDN. Who knew?