Psychologists that look good only on paper

[baba ganoush]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Does anyone else know of some psychologists who look good on paper (e.g., CV, personal writings/blog), but when you meet them in person, you think something along the lines of WTF?

I had an interview a while ago for a private practice by the two psychologists there. Without getting into too much detail, the moment I sat down I felt like I was being "analyzed" and as if it was more of a staring contest than an interview. During the interview, I felt they oscillated between appearing unassuming and almost timid to shockingly abrasive. At times during the interview, I literally felt my mouth drop open...LOL. I guess I wasn't prepared for what seemed like some confrontation as previous interviews that I had were mainly informal and very relaxed.

This just irks me because prior to the interview, I explored their practice website as well as their personal websites, which were describing their psychological approaches in more detail. It appeared that I actually had a lot in common with one of them...but when I met them (particularly one of them), I was so disappointed. For example, one in his writings talks so much about the importance of rapport building, trust, empathy etc....But I felt nothing of that in our interview.

By the way, of course, this is only going off one meeting and I don't think one meeting is a fair basis for any conclusions. But in general, I was curious if anyone else had any similar experiences.

 

[PsyDr]

IME, this type of behavior is more the rule than the exception. It kind of makes sense. You have a profession which requires an individual to be competitive in the classroom (e.g., publish more, AAPI hours, etc), and noncompetitive in the clinic (e.g., unconditional positive regard, empathy induction, rapport building). Those that are competitive will thrive, but have to hide the fact that they are competitive.

When you look at the modal MMPI codetypes for psychologists, you'll see that the majority of psychologists would hang you out to dry if it suited their purposes. Observationally, this can be seen by students or post docs in unethically low pay packets, demands for hours that are correlated with poor work performance, admitting more students than there are post docs, etc.

Most patients wouldn't go to the clinician who admitted that he/she was trained in this manner. So psychologists put on the softie voice, add in something about "holistic", "patient centered", and "reach your goals" and get more patients. It's like offering coca cola: people always have it on the menu because it sells.

 

[PHD12]

Most patients wouldn't go to the clinician who admitted that he/she was trained in this manner. So psychologists put on the softie voice, add in something about "holistic", "patient centered", and "reach your goals" and get more patients. It's like offering coca cola: people always have it on the menu because it sells.

Good point. What i've seen on PP websites is particularly atrocious, mostly due to market saturation and the glut of clinical psychology graduates due to shady programs. There many grads (mostly from professional schools) who did not complete accredited internships or decent post-docs. They are all "internationally renowned experts" in multiple treatment approaches and attest to "curing" their patients in short-term treatments. They also hide where they went to school and lie/exaggerate their training experiences. AND most have patient testimonials (first name of patient or initials). That doesn't even seem ethical to me. In addition, many claim to be experts in neuropsychology, but without any practicum, internship or postdoc experiences.

 

[bmedclinic]

They are all "internationally renowned experts" in multiple treatment approaches and attest to "curing" their patients in short-term treatments. They also hide where they went to school and lie/exaggerate their training experiences. AND most have patient testimonials (first name of patient or initials). That doesn't even seem ethical to me. In addition, many claim to be experts in neuropsychology, but without any practicum, internship or postdoc experiences.

 

[beingintherapy]

Good point. What i've seen on PP websites is particularly atrocious, mostly due to market saturation and the glut of clinical psychology graduates due to shady programs. There many grads (mostly from professional schools) who did not complete accredited internships or decent post-docs. They are all "internationally renowned experts" in multiple treatment approaches and attest to "curing" their patients in short-term treatments. They also hide where they went to school and lie/exaggerate their training experiences. AND most have patient testimonials (first name of patient or initials). That doesn't even seem ethical to me. In addition, many claim to be experts in neuropsychology, but without any practicum, internship or postdoc experiences.

My favorite is the "Single-Session Therapy" boom. Might as well put "Massage Parlor" on the shingle outside.

 

[thewesternsky]

My favorite is the "Single-Session Therapy" boom. Might as well put "Massage Parlor" on the shingle outside.

...Is this really a thing? If so, how do they justify that? I understand "drop-in counselling" (which I usually see at university counselling centres and some CMHCs), but that's typically empathic listening with a little bit of problem-solving thrown in every once in awhile, and it's usually free for the client. Is "single-session therapy" the same thing but in a PP setting?

 

[PsyDr]

There's actually a book about it. Long story short: sessions last 2-3hrs, the therapist is encouraged to literally refuse to treat the presenting problem and ask for a more simple problem to solve, and then outcome is measured by that.

I would not waste your time reading it

 

[thewesternsky]

Huh. Thanks for the info. I looked up the book and it looks... interesting. :S

 

[futureapppsy2]

There's actually a book about it. Long story short: sessions last 2-3hrs, the therapist is encouraged to literally refuse to treat the presenting problem and ask for a more simple problem to solve, and then outcome is measured by that.

I would not waste your time reading it

That sounds really ethically sketchy, to say the least.

 

[Rivi]

Does anyone else know of some psychologists who look good on paper (e.g., CV, personal writings/blog), but when you meet them in person, you think something along the lines of WTF?

Fortunately, the majority of psychologists that I have met over the years were intelligent, kind people.

HOWEVER, I have met a few sketchy ones. I will categorize them for you.

1. "The Freudian": This category of psychologist has a borderline cult mentality when it comes to their theoretical orientation. For whatever reason, they are really emotionally invested in their treatment approach, and would rather adhere to it AT ALL COSTS than adapt and integrate more current evidence-based approaches. These individuals are often found in obscure APA divisions.

2. "The time traveler": Similar to the Freudian, this brand of psychologist is one that hasn't significantly changed or modified their treatment approach since they graduated in 1980. "Poor VCI score on the WAIS? Let's slap a Learning Disorder on them and send them packing."

3. The "Bill O'Reilly": This psychologist has finally reached the position of authority they have longed for, and now feel that they have the right to express their opinions freely and openly about everything, regardless of how misinformed they are. These individuals were often called a "know it all" throughout their early childhood years. With the emotional maturity of an adolescent, they often sidetrack meetings with tangential arguments.

4. "The milker": This psychologist is one who has been around for years latching onto an easy government or managed care job, and is planning on riding that thing out until retirement. They have no real accountability, and do about 30 hours worth of work each week and make six figures. These individuals are commonly found working in the American Psychological Association.

5. "The cannibal": This individual makes up for their lack of business sense by screwing over other psychologists. They are commonly seen operating private practices with 50-50 splits, or working for managed care companies readily cutting back psychological testing hours. "Traumatic Brain Injury eval? We'll pay for two hours of testing. Better make that interview count Dr. Smith."