Possible expansion of Canadian clinical psychology training programs

[Therapist4Chnge]

This is an off-shoot from another thread. I thought it was a worthwhile discussion to have, as many of the same issues we currently have in the USA in regard to a lack of rural providers are also present in Canada. One of the "solutions" proposed in Ontario (see below) is the possible addition of training programs (FSPS and traditional).

I don't really have specifics or links.

Basically, I was at a presentation with the President of the Ontario Psychological Association who said there is a push within CPA for more Psy.D. programs and Free Standing Professional Schools to produce more psychologists, particularly in rural areas. He mentioned there were some Psy.D. expansion proposals at the formal stage and that a FSPS proposal was recently rejected (but that more would likely be coming). He was a strong advocate for this approach to produce more psychologists in Canada.

Nevermind that pay for psychologists in rural areas is reduced in accordance with cost of living and that there is no shortage in the metropolitan areas. Of course this would produce more psychologists, but would it actually address the issue of getting services in underserved areas?

I don't believe adding more training programs will address the underserved areas, as we have the same problem in the USA. The largest % of psychologists are concentrated in major metropolitan areas, and far less (or none) are distributed in the more rural areas of the country. Adding more programs will most likely not fix anything, as there is no mechanism to influence the distribution of those clinicians to act any different.

However, I believe establishing a training path modeled after the Health Professional Scholarship Program could be a viable option to attract more providers to practice in rural areas. The gov't would subsidize the training of psychologists in existing programs, in exchange for X number of years of service as a provider in an underserved and/or rural parts of Canada. Obviously the commitment wouldn't be military, but civil service.

This solution could better address the shortage of service providers in rural areas AND avoid contributing further to the internship imbalance that currently exists in the field. The funding for such a program can be re-allocated from the more expensive avenues the gov't takes to provide services to these underserved areas (e.g. private contractors, sending citizens hundreds of miles away for services, etc). Additional $ can be saved in the long-term through early intervention programs in the rural areas (e.g. substance abuse education/outreach) and more tax revenue collected bc of higher paying healthcare/white collar jobs moving into the area.

I'm guessing some sort of program probably already exists in Canada, but given the current shortage of rural providers, additional funding for providers should be considered.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[thewesternsky]

As a Canadian psych student, I find this infuriating. We already have an internship shortage, which is is not getting better (a few new PhD programs have popped up recently-- Ryerson's first cohorts are beginning to apply).

I like your idea very much, T4C. We have some incentives for northern workers in general (the Northern Allowance) and for northern healthcare professionals in particular. They don't work perfectly, but they are better than flooding the markets in desirable locations. Monetary incentives for psychologists willing to work in remote area would be my favourite solution.

I don't think a scholarship program would be quite as effective-- and that's because the vast majority of our programs are already fully funded and provide decent stipends. We also have governmental graduate scholarship programs (which are merit based) that work quite well. For example, last year the average income for students in one Ontario program was over $35000. That beats the HPSP stipend already, so a similar scholarship (or even one offering a little more) is unlikely to be super-appealing.

 

[dumbledoresgirl]

This is an off-shoot from another thread. I thought it was a worthwhile discussion to have, as many of the same issues we currently have in the USA in regard to a lack of rural providers are also present in Canada. One of the "solutions" proposed in Ontario (see below) is the possible addition of training programs (FSPS and traditional).



I don't believe adding more training programs will address the underserved areas, as we have the same problem in the USA. The largest % of psychologists are concentrated in major metropolitan areas, and far less (or none) are distributed in the more rural areas of the country. Adding more programs will most likely not fix anything, as there is no mechanism to influence the distribution of those clinicians to act any different.

However, I believe establishing a training path modeled after the Health Professional Scholarship Program could be a viable option to attract more providers to practice in rural areas. The gov't would subsidize the training of psychologists in existing programs, in exchange for X number of years of service as a provider in an underserved and/or rural parts of Canada. Obviously the commitment wouldn't be military, but civil service.

This solution could better address the shortage of service providers in rural areas AND avoid contributing further to the internship imbalance that currently exists in the field. The funding for such a program can be re-allocated from the more expensive avenues the gov't takes to provide services to these underserved areas (e.g. private contractors, sending citizens hundreds of miles away for services, etc). Additional $ can be saved in the long-term through early intervention programs in the rural areas (e.g. substance abuse education/outreach) and more tax revenue collected bc of higher paying healthcare/white collar jobs moving into the area.

I'm guessing some sort of program probably already exists in Canada, but given the current shortage of rural providers, additional funding for providers should be considered.

This is somewhat off topic, but do you know how the Navy HPSP you mentioned works? Can people who are already in funded programs apply for this, even if they're not in a military track?