PSLF no longer allowing payments made during residency - and that's about it for changes

[BuckeyeLove]

PSLF Rules Could Change For Doctors In Training

Doctors in training could lose PSLF credit under a Republican student loan bill that targets medical residency.

thecollegeinvestor.com

Just an FYI re: the reconciliation proposal from the right. This is blowing up all over the medical and dental forums. Not so much relevant for psychology (except if have loans and you're making payments during fellowship). Honestly I'm shocked that this is all the repubs are proposing (however, i do know they're coming for the non-profits and PSLF eligibility, but that seems like a much harder hill to climb). As it stands now, if you're working in govt and have been for some time, your loans are likely going to be discharged after 120. It seems they're going much more scorched earth on potential future borrowers (grad plus loan limits, stricter repayment plans, etc.). So the diploma mills (across the spectrum - including all of the bad law programs), are really going to feel this it looks like down the line - if it passes.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Sanman]

Good luck working for the federal government for the next few years to make 120 payments. Also, I imagine the shift to more contracting jobs will mean fewer pslf positions available.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Good luck working for the federal government for the next few years to make 120 payments. Also, I imagine the shift to more contracting jobs will mean fewer pslf positions available.

Methinks that the PTSD assessment/treatment landscape is getting ready for a seismic migration from VA to community care and--with it--the initiation of a new 'Gold Rush' reminiscent of the 'Wild Wild West.' Sadly, what is most likely to result is the proliferation of many operations/businesses catering to veterans as 'customers' (e.g., like the fast food industry does) and offering extremely brief/efficient (with near 99% 'positive' rates) drive-thru diagnoses of PTSD, mTBI, etc. along with a menu of treatment options such as medical cannabis, service dogs to order, equine therapy, ibogaine treatment (complete with chartered flights to Mexico), hunting lodge memberships, etc. Then we'll see the little operations swallowed up by the bigger operations and it will all cater to increasing veterans' 'satisfaction scores.'

The train has left the station and has a LOT of momentum. I don't think we're going to see any slowing until public perception changes and I don't see public perception changing until something ridiculous like 80%+ of all veterans being service-connected for a mental health disorder of some type (mostly PTSD). I am seeing massively increased numbers of referrals for 'rule out/in PTSD,' and 'veteran requesting eval for PTSD' with extremely thin/atypical 'traumatic stressors.' It's always been there but it's getting really bad. It seems like everyone is trying to get s/c for PTSD. I have seen so many cases that are already s/c for other things (e.g., 100% s/c for major depressive disorder) and clinicians are just clicking on buttons and entering referrals with the auto-generated text of 'military trauma, combat trauma' when often there isn't even anything in the note (or in reality, once you examine the veteran) to support that.

 

[quickpsych]

It seems they're going much more scorched earth on potential future borrowers (grad plus loan limits, stricter repayment plans, etc.).

I imagine this is in part because technically if they change the terms of the existing loans, there is a chance that will be challenged and contract of the loan might be considered null and void. For example many of us have promissory notes that were signed with the understanding, in writing, that the Dept of Education is the other party in the contract AND the terms state options such as PSLF, IBR, and loan forgiveness terms by number of years.

Hell private lenders have learned the hard way, and I know this from first hand experience, that changes to the documents after already signed can lead to risk of rendering the contract null and void. Long story short I had a bunch of private undergrad loans that were passed around to different "sub companies" of the same lender more than a joint at Woodstock; well they somewhere along the way lost the original documents and decided instead to simply slap my "signature" and the terms of the old loans on newer forms..then sent them to me when I asked for proof because suddenly I owed more and the terms had changed. At that time was paying based on a payment plan that suddenly they just changed and then when I asked for proof of the promissory notes (which I had kept the originals of all those years later and they didn't match up), well.... These got passed around even more and sold off, I think last count in my case about 8-9 times and by law are now well past any statutes of limitations. This coincided with said company being defendant in multi-state lawsuits about their practices and violations of consumer protection laws. I was not the only one , turns out there were ALOT of these things happening. So you can imagine how this went down and what happened next.

So not the best platform to say from this administration and the GOP: "no longer will taxpayers be burdened by helping students!" and then even MORE taxes end up being needed to offset the millions of dollars in payment plan payments never received because the contracts were challenged and voided for illegal change of terms.

Even in the proposed GOP bill it says changes to most repayment plans and caps on grad loans will take effect on loans issued after July 2026. It's still ****ty either way because its going to cause reductions in admissions and by proxy reduction in trained professionals to be felt a few years down the line.

So the diploma mills (across the spectrum - including all of the bad law programs), are really going to feel this it looks like down the line - if it passes.

Well this might be the only overall silver lining.