Potential imposter?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
T

texanpsychdoc

Clinical Psychologist & Assistant Professor
Verified Member
2+ Year Member
Faculty
Psychologist
Verified Expert
Joined
Feb 15, 2022
Messages
964
Reaction score
1,038
I was looking for psychologists around me to do some market analysis for my own private practice, and I stumbled across this person's website. To be honest, I am unsure if this person is licensed by any behavioral health board (e.g., social work, LPC, psychologist, etc.). Their website seems to be worded in a manner that actively avoids using terms like "psychologist, therapy, psychotherapy, etc." What are your thoughts? Is this person practicing without a license? Is this a reportable offense?

Carolyn Cowl-Witherspoon Ph.D. in Psychology

drcarolyncowl-witherspoon.com drcarolyncowl-witherspoon.com

Upon digging further, it appears she has a Psychology Today profile as well, but there is no mention of any license. Also, it shows that she is affiliated with Sugar Land Psychology - so I checked them out as well and saw no reference to her. I thought, well maybe she is getting supervision by someone else...but no overt mention of that as well.

www.psychologytoday.com

Carolyn Cowl-Witherspoon, Richmond, TX, 77406 | Psychology Today

Carolyn Cowl-Witherspoon, Richmond, TX, 77406, No matter what challenges you’ve endured or you're facing, you are worthy, complex, unique, and capable of striving for and achieving your goals and dreams. I’m here to help. I'll approach our interactions from an open, positive, and empowering...
www.psychologytoday.com www.psychologytoday.com
Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
From a quick Google search, her Psychology Today page says she got her PhD from Walden, which doesn't seem promising.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The “My Approach” section on her website references coaching, and she states “The non-diagnostic orientation of the Coaching Model is a good fit for clients who are emotionally and psychologically well and who prefer participating in a collaborative relationship of equality between themselves and me, where I recognize my client as the expert in their own life. This allows me to assist my clients in finding the answers within themselves as we navigate through the challenges in their life that may be prohibiting them from achieving their goals. Importantly, I do not pathologize. I prefer to listen to my clients to understand them, not to diagnose them.” Doesn’t mention therapy. Shady to mention the PhD, for sure, but not sure she is advertising as a psychologist, per se. Slippery slope though!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
MAClinician said:
The “My Approach” section on her website references coaching, and she states “The non-diagnostic orientation of the Coaching Model is a good fit for clients who are emotionally and psychologically well and who prefer participating in a collaborative relationship of equality between themselves and me, where I recognize my client as the expert in their own life. This allows me to assist my clients in finding the answers within themselves as we navigate through the challenges in their life that may be prohibiting them from achieving their goals. Importantly, I do not pathologize. I prefer to listen to my clients to understand them, not to diagnose them.” Doesn’t mention therapy. Shady to mention the PhD, for sure, but not sure she is advertising as a psychologist, per se. Slippery slope though!
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.
 
Non clinical psychologist coach eh
 
For those people with imposter sydrome- have the confidence of this lady!! lol
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 10 users
My problem with her actions is that if I (a psychologist) can infer she is a psychologist, and knowing what I know to verify someone's credentials to confirm, I am going to bet that most lay people will not have such insight and experience to do that. For all they know, when they contact her, they are contacting a psychologist or a licensed mental healthcare professional. This gets even more convoluted as many psychologists often prefer to call themselves "therapist" instead of psychologist, so, because of the variations of titles out there from those who are psychologists, LPCs, LCSWs, etc., it's a recipe for disaster, and frankly, it is manipulative to the American public. My other problem is that while she does make a very clear effort to avoid using terms like "therapy, psychotherapy, psychologist," she is using terms like "psychology, individual, group, relationships" which often can be construed as the practice of psychology - and that is the point I am making. At least in my opinion, the way she is marketing herself gives the impression that she is practicing psychology. Even the header of her website says "Ph.D. in Psychology." She is doing just enough to fly under the radar, and maybe no one has ever brought her up to the board because they didn't care, they didn't know any better, etc. My big problem is that she is giving off the impression that she is practicing a regulated profession, in this case, take your pick (psychologist, LCSW, LPC).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Years in practice: 21
Year graduated: 2020
:rofl:
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Hmm
Reactions: 8 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Depending on jurisdiction, referencing the doctoral degree in psychology while not being licensed at the doctoral level may be considered to be practicing psychology without a license. Report her to the board- it'll only take a few minutes to fill out the form.

ETA- She also calls herself "Dr." On her promotional website. Using that title but no being licensed at the doctoral level may also be considered practicing psychology without a license in some jurisdictions. Any member of the general public reading her website would reasonably conclude that she's a psychologist, thus her behavior could be sanctionable. I don't know texas board policies, but my board (MA) has position statements on such things.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
ClinicalABA said:
I actually don't recall. Do you remember any more details?
Click to expand...
I'm very fuzzy on the details myself, but I think it had something to do with a politician either referring to herself as a psychologist or in some other way stepping on professional toes. But the board basically said it was fine.

Something like that.

Edit: Also, doesn't TX now allow unsupervised practice by LPAs?

Double edit: PsyDr to the rescue. And to then be fair to the board, they didn't say it was fine, the circuit court of appeals basically did (i.e., that her use was protected free speech because it was in the context of trying to get votes rather than attain clients, and that extant regulations were overly-broad in defining the "practice of psychology"). Which is probably worse, IMO.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
AcronymAllergy said:
I'm very fuzzy on the details myself, but I think it had something to do with a politician either referring to herself as a psychologist or in some other way stepping on professional toes. But the board basically said it was fine.

Something like that.

Edit: Also, doesn't TX now allow unsupervised practice by LPAs?

Double edit: PsyDr to the rescue. And to then be fair to the board, they didn't say it was fine, the circuit court of appeals basically did (i.e., that her use was protected free speech because it was in the context of trying to get votes rather than attain clients, and that extant regulations were overly-broad in defining the "practice of psychology"). Which is probably worse, IMO.
Click to expand...

In Texas, LPAs have to practice supervised at least until they acquire a certain amount of hours supervised, then, once acquired, they can then apply to practice independently. It is a travesty in my opinion. They really screwed the pooch on this as it adds yet more confusion and uncertainty about who is who, and who does what in our field, with pre-existing confusing elements. It's just unnecessary, but somehow, folks were able to pander and lobby and won. I'm sure they done so in the spirit of "oh, it's to help the underserved population" BS rationale. We psychologists also use that same rationale for RxP stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
ohiopsychdoc said:
In Texas, LPAs have to practice supervised at least until they acquire a certain amount of hours supervised, then, once acquired, they can then apply to practice independently. It is a travesty in my opinion. They really screwed the pooch on this as it adds yet more confusion and uncertainty about who is who, and who does what in our field, with pre-existing confusing elements. It's just unnecessary, but somehow, folks were able to pander and lobby and won. I'm sure they done so in the spirit of "oh, it's to help the underserved population" BS rationale. We psychologists also use that same rationale for RxP stuff.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's unfortunate. I believe psychologists were present to speak against the change, but it ultimately still went through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Doesn't Dave Ramsey have a dude on his shows that falls into this category? Dr. John something. He's got like a doctorate in counseling supervision and a doctorate in higher education. But peddles himself as a longtime mental health interventionist and expert on the relationship between thoughts/feelings/behaviors and money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Medicine is pretty straight forward. You want to be a physician? Cool - do 4 years of med school, then the corresponding residency of your choice to receive your medical license. Want to be board certified as a physician? Cool - you need to attend X residency to be eligible for boarding.

Psychology - not so much. Our field is convoluted: you can't call yourself a psychologist without a license, unless, you put "social, cognitive, developmental" in front of your title if you don't have a doctorate in clinical, counseling, or school psychology. Oh, you want to be a psychologist? At least in 4 states you can earn a master's degree and be called a "limited licensed psychologist." Well darn, now we really have to clarify who a psychologist is. Want to be board certified? Cool, you can either complete a residency program, which can be formal or informal...or, just complete 5 years of experience.

We've dug ourselves into this mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
BuckeyeLove said:
Doesn't Dave Ramsey have a dude on his shows that falls into this category? Dr. John something. He's got like a doctorate in counseling supervision and a doctorate in higher education. But peddles himself as a longtime mental health interventionist and expert on the relationship between thoughts/feelings/behaviors and money.
Click to expand...
The Simpsons taught me to never trust anyone who uses "Dr. Firstname".

ohiopsychdoc said:
Medicine is pretty straight forward. You want to be a physician? Cool - do 4 years of med school, then the corresponding residency of your choice to receive your medical license. Want to be board certified as a physician? Cool - you need to attend X residency to be eligible for boarding.

Psychology - not so much. Our field is convoluted: you can't call yourself a psychologist without a license, unless, you put "social, cognitive, developmental" in front of your title if you don't have a doctorate in clinical, counseling, or school psychology. Oh, you want to be a psychologist? At least in 4 states you can earn a master's degree and be called a "limited licensed psychologist." Well darn, now we really have to clarify who a psychologist is. Want to be board certified? Cool, you can either complete a residency program, which can be formal or informal...or, just complete 5 years of experience.

We've dug ourselves into this mess.
Click to expand...

Eh, medicine did this stuff too. Physician assistants and nurse practitioners started out as physician extenders.

Let's not pretend like everyone in senior leadership completed a residency and could get boarded today or even licensed. They learned somehow, without formal training.
 
PsyDr said:
The Simpsons taught me to never trust anyone who uses "Dr. Firstname".



Eh, medicine did this stuff too. Physician assistants and nurse practitioners started out as physician extenders.

Let's not pretend like everyone in senior leadership completed a residency and could get boarded today or even licensed. They learned somehow, without formal training.
Click to expand...

Perhaps? But I suppose I am referencing more-so the current times, at least within the past 30+years, it appears medicine has been relatively streamlined in terms of what credentials are needed for a medical license, that the title of "physician" is only granted to those with a M.D. or D.O., and for one to be boarded, they needed to complete an accredited residency program. Both of our respective fields have mid-level equivalents, but in our field, it is much more convoluted. I've seen people refer to themselves as "psychologist" even tho their degree is a master's degree and are a "limited licensed psychologist" which their board requires them to use that title as to not confuse the public with those who are "independently licensed psychologists."
 
ohiopsychdoc said:
Perhaps? But I suppose I am referencing more-so the current times, at least within the past 30+years, it appears medicine has been relatively streamlined in terms of what credentials are needed for a medical license, that the title of "physician" is only granted to those with a M.D. or D.O., and for one to be boarded, they needed to complete an accredited residency program.
Click to expand...

1) My friend, let me introduce you to the MBBS degree and chiropractic "physicians".

2) But we are getting there.

3) If training is about education and safety, then everyone should have the same standards. No grandfathering. Committees should have zero financial interests in how fellowships work.

4) If ad hoc learning is okay for the older people, then it should be for the younger generation.


*The rumor is that they physically locked Reitan out of the room when deciding how to standardize things.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 4 users
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 2 users
PsyDr said:
3) If training is about education and safety, then everyone should have the same standards. No grandfathering. Committees should have zero financial interests in how fellowships work.
Click to expand...

I suppose you wouldn't be opposed to adding predictive validity to this list? IMO, some (not all) of the bounds of between sub-specialties in psych are much fuzzier than they are in medicine and are more concerned with self-promotion than anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
PsyDr said:
1) My friend, let me introduce you to the MBBS degree and chiropractic "physicians".

2) But we are getting there.

3) If training is about education and safety, then everyone should have the same standards. No grandfathering. Committees should have zero financial interests in how fellowships work.

4) If ad hoc learning is okay for the older people, then it should be for the younger generation.


*The rumor is that they physically locked Reitan out of the room when deciding how to standardize things.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't get me started on the folks that come here to practice medicine and call themselves "doctor" despite their medical degree being a bachelor's degree. And chiropractors had it rough....they had to go to a weekend of college at a school in a strip mall off of an interstate highway. My favorite title thus far has been "chiropractic physician."

Still, if you are an American trained physician, the level of protection of the title of "physician" is far superior to our field. As is getting boarded. But yeah, it's a bit of a s**t show all around, some more-so than others. The standardization has improved but still has room for much improvement. My spouse had to go back to school to get their Pharm.D. because their bachelor's degree in pharmacy from their home country would have not met the requirements to sit for pharmacy licensure, so they enrolled into an international Pharm.D. program at Nova Southeastern University where they completed 3 years instead of 4, then they went onto residency to be a clinical pharmacist. Since the 1990's, the entry-level degree required to get licensed as a pharmacist is the Pharm.D.
 
To be fair, a psychologist from outside the U.S. (excluding Canada), such as from most of Europe, would likely have to go back to school, or at least complete additional training and establish the equivalence of their training/education extant, before being able to get a license anywhere in the U.S.

Psychology is still variable and there's definitely room for improvement (things like PSYPACT may help with this), but we're better than we were.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
ohiopsychdoc said:
Since the 1990's, the entry-level degree required to get licensed as a pharmacist is the Pharm.D.
Click to expand...
Boomers really had it easier (in terms of school access and no debt) in every possible way. Case in point right there: Get a bachelor's with no debt and become a pharmacist. Then get grandfathered over with the rule change. Still reap the benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
BuckeyeLove said:
Boomers really had it easier (in terms of school access and no debt) in every possible way. Case in point right there: Get a bachelor's with no debt and become a pharmacist. Then get grandfathered over with the rule change. Still reap the benefits.
Click to expand...

The savvy folks among us are the ones who will grab those last MA level NP degrees before the DNP is a uniform thing and get grandfathered in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
R. Matey said:
I suppose you wouldn't be opposed to adding predictive validity to this list? IMO, some (not all) of the bounds of between sub-specialties in psych are much fuzzier than they are in medicine and are more concerned with self-promotion than anything else.
Click to expand...
Do away with practice samples. Test for academic content. Then test using a standardized cases d that objectively have a right answer. Psychiatry does that, pediatrics does that. This avoids the ethical issues of making opinions about someone we have never seen, any subjective differences, and allows for test validity. Everyone takes the tests.
BuckeyeLove said:
Boomers really had it easier (in terms of school access and no debt) in every possible way. Case in point right there: Get a bachelor's with no debt and become a pharmacist. Then get grandfathered over with the rule change. Still reap the benefits.
Click to expand...

Older psychologists also did not have the same internship requirements, post docs, match, etc.


Look at how much the older psychologists were getting paid. Relative to inflation, they were making a ton of money.

average psychotherapy fee billed to CMS in 1987= ~$100. Maybe $50 reimbursement, but we can’t be sure.
average psychotherapy fee reimbursed by CMS in 2022= ~$102.

Billed vs reimbursed has to be used due to changes in how Medicare allowed billing.

Inflation adjusted, we are making between $30- $160hr LESS than they made in 1987.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 6 users
PsyDr said:
Do away with practice samples. Test for academic content. Then test using a standardized cases d that objectively have a right answer. Psychiatry does that, pediatrics does that. This avoids the ethical issues of making opinions about someone we have never seen, any subjective differences, and allows for test validity. Everyone takes the tests.


Older psychologists also did not have the same internship requirements, post docs, match, etc.


Look at how much the older psychologists were getting paid. Relative to inflation, they were making a ton of money.

average psychotherapy fee billed to CMS in 1987= ~$100. Maybe $50 reimbursement, but we can’t be sure.
average psychotherapy fee reimbursed by CMS in 2022= ~$102.

Billed vs reimbursed has to be used due to changes in how Medicare allowed billing.

Inflation adjusted, we are making between $30- $160hr LESS than they made in 1987.
Click to expand...
I always did suspect that that Bob Newhart cat was making out way better than me but...dayum.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Fan_of_Meehl said:
I always did suspect that that Bob Newhart cat was making out way better than me but...dayum.
Click to expand...

And if those guys were working at the VA, they usually took two hour lunches and went golfing. You ever notice how many VAs are near golf courses?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
PsyDr said:
Had to look it up.

www.apa.org

When the regulation of psychology conflicts with free speech

Are definitions of the “practice of psychology” too broad?
www.apa.org www.apa.org
Click to expand...
Honestly, I kind of agree with the court here—psychology is a broad field and many people with doctorates in psychology aren’t licensed as psychologists. If she was trying to provide treatment, that would be an obvious issue but she wasn’t using it in a clinical context. And if you want to argue that the public thinks “clinical psychologist” when they hear “psychologist”, even in a non-clinical setting, you could also argue that clinical psychologists shouldn’t call themselves “doctor” in any setting (especially clinical ones!), because people think “physician” when they hear “doctor.” Context matters.
 
futureapppsy2 said:
Honestly, I kind of agree with the court here—psychology is a broad field and many people with doctorates in psychology aren’t licensed as psychologists. If she was trying to provide treatment, that would be an obvious issue but she wasn’t using it in a clinical context. And if you want to argue that the public thinks “clinical psychologist” when they hear “psychologist”, even in a non-clinical setting, you could also argue that clinical psychologists shouldn’t call themselves “doctor” in any setting (especially clinical ones!), because people think “physician” when they hear “doctor.” Context matters.
Click to expand...

Legally, chiropractors are also physicians. The horse left the barn long ago in terms of doctor and physician as protected terms.
 
What kind of fancy pants VA places did you guys have? My first VA had, like, … a Burger King nearby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

N
Potential to become a psychologist with mental illness?
Replies
16
Views
2K
ClinicalABA
ClinicalABA
mind_over_matter277
Potential issue with obtaining licensure in California (please help).
Replies
18
Views
1K
foreverbull
foreverbull
memiller
Psychologist salary potential private practice in Pennsylvania
Replies
5
Views
1K
Harry3990
H
ThatPsyGuy
Earning Potential For Assessment Focused Practitioners?
2 3
Replies
112
Views
5K
WisNeuro
WisNeuro
DynamicDidactic
APS and Potentially Biased Editorial Experience
2
Replies
63
Views
3K
PsychPhDone
PsychPhDone
Top