SDN members see fewer ads and full resolution images. Join our non-profit community!

Psychopharmacology/Advanced Practice Psychology

Discussion in 'Psychology [Psy.D. / Ph.D.]' started by 50960, Dec 6, 2005.

  1. SDN is made possible through member donations, sponsorships, and our volunteers. Learn about SDN's nonprofit mission.
  1. smalltownpsych

    smalltownpsych 2+ Year Member

    When you say RxP is bad because of the details of the proposal then you are going from a general to a specific. I am thinking what you mean is that the APA proposal for RxP is a bad idea because of many reasons you have elaborated previously. The second point seems to be that you believe RxP in any form is a bad idea. Why do you think incorporating medicine into psychology is a bad idea? I actually think that we should learn more biology and biochemistry, but biology (more than biochemistry) has always been an interest of mine and that was my first major so I might be biased that way.
     
  2. SDN Members don't see this ad. About the ads.
  3. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    Learning biology and chemistry is fine. Canada has a thriving program to teach psychologists enough about psychopharmacology that they can ably collaborate with physicians and other properly trained medical professionals. We psychologists are like universal wrenches in that we have a place in almost every area of human endeavor. Did I mention that this is a great profession?

    There are a number of concerns about incorporating the practice of medicine into psychology. They are generally predictive and RxP advocates can claim that such predictions will not come true. However, there is often some evidence supporting the concerns.

    One of them is the threat that it will further degrade psychology education. People will take more biology and less psychology in graduate school. You may say that we only have to pass a rule to prevent that, but that avoids the reality of the political pressure and power at work. In fact, RxP schools have indeed allowed unlimited RxP classes to be taken predoctorally. Nova was busted for that and the APA board of education affairs passed a rule that only 20 percent of the classwork could be predoctoral. The IL bill clearly stated that the RxP education could be taken predoctorally and the professional schools that supported the bill were apparently gearing up to sell those classes. The leader of the IL RxP campaign to this day claims that this education can be taken predoctorally. These are, of course, the schools already criticized for having low training standards and with low EPPP scores. It seems clear that if RxP were the law of the land, there would be extensive pressure to allow predoctoral training that undermines psychology education. And of course, the organization that would allow this is the one that has spent millions lobbying for RxP.

    Another concern is that the mountains of money available will corrupt psychologists individually and organizations. I have to smile when I see some advocates actually suggest that we psychologists are somehow more moral, more disciplined, than medical providers and we won't fall into that trap. Of course, the best evidence for allowing the lure of Pharmodollars sway the standards, practices and policies of psychology is the RxP campaign and APA's conduct of it. They have essentially sold themselves out to get their hands on a prescription pad, and then suggest that they won't let the rewards change them. Psychology may be far more susceptible than medicine for a number of reasons. One is that much of the training of psychologists is in small stand-alone private schools that are very financially oriented, if not out right for-profit. Such schools would be very vulnerable to doing what it took to please the drug companies, cranking out more and more prescribers with poorer and poorer educations, all subsidized by the drug companies. Such scenarios do not seem far-fetched given how many of the professional schools have conducted themselves so far. There is also some danger that the Pharmodollars will also harm our research ... the drug companies have zillions of dollars they can spend on drug-related research that assistant psychology professors can churn out, rather than research on psychological treatment.

    Of course, incorporating the practice of medicine into psychology will damage the mission, image and professional identity of our profession. If we practice a little psychiatric medicine, why not also a little endocrinology? Or a little gynecology? Or drill some teeth, or examine eyes? This is where the RxP proposal does start to seem absurd. One apt analogy is that psychologists play a major role in the legal system (again, we are valuable everywhere) and yet I've never heard of anyone suggest that psychologists ought to be allowed to practice law as psychologists after taking some classes online, and not have to take the bar exam. It is accepted by everyone that if you want to practice law, you go to law school, pass the bar, and practice as a lawyer who is also a psychologist. It would seem absurd to think that we should incorporate another profession such as law into ours in part because we would start to lose the distinction of psychology.

    These are three. There are more, but I do need to practice psychology, a wonderful profession :)
     
    freemontie likes this.
  4. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus 10+ Year Member

    21,144
    2,024
    Oct 6, 2006
    The Beach
    Faculty
    [​IMG]

    Of course you have a citation….

    Do you know where I've heard this argument before…from people against gay marriage. "If we allow this one thing that has been show to be beneficial in society, God only knows what "those people" would do next. :rolleyes: " The proponents would cite people wanting to marry 20 people, their livestock, and other equally asinine things in an attempt to derail the actual issue at hand. Did they have proof of these things happening…not one shred, but *boogie man*. I find your example to be equally as relevant.
     
    Goobernut, Chalupacabra and QAsPsych like this.
  5. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    Speaking of citations, I'm still curious about those numbers.
     
  6. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    I'm not inclined to spend much time answering such frivolous statements. The concerns and risks of incorporating medicine into psychology are reasonable and there is evidence to support this speculation. Furthermore, the risks are unnecessary since there are far better alternatives to obtaining the alleged outcome.
     
  7. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    What numbers were you interested in? If the sources are available I'll let you know. However, it should also be stated that I don't have much patience with people who bring no actual facts to the table. I haven't seen any such data from those who disagree with me, just more demands for citations, expect me to run around gathering answers to their questions, and think that making speculative comments without substance or support is a form of debate.
     
    nitemagi likes this.
  8. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    I was interested in the money figures being thrown around. And, I totally agree about the lack of data. My question about data has been summarily ignored in the past. I can only assume for lack of it existing after attempts to track it down myself :)
     
  9. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    Your requests for data have involved expecting other people to do the work to answer your speculative questions.

    I don't mind providing sources of information, particularly if the information seems to be especially unusual. If you claimed that surveys say that 95 percent of psychologists support RxP, that would be so divergent from the published data that I would be interested in seeing where it came from. However, I do mind it when people wish to compensate for having no facts on hand to simply ask for citations and sources or just want to "take a gander" at it, as you put it. Pulling up sources and citations can require time that I don't wish to spend unless it's part of a meaningful discussion. The information I cite has been gathered over at least 10 years of paying attention to this issue, through many different sources, including websites, speeches, letters and published articles.
     
  10. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    My requests for data have involved expecting people to provide relevant data when they are arguing from a position of assumed data. If they have no experience or familiarity with data for the position they are arguing for, they should probably not be arguing from that position. It's kind of how our field works. I wouldn't argue for a certain neuropsychological diagnosis after using a test where I had no idea of its psychometric properties.
     
  11. Goobernut

    Goobernut LMSW 5+ Year Member

    397
    191
    Jan 23, 2012
    Because Psychologists are somehow more susceptible to mountains of money more-so than Physicians? What about Politicians?
     
    wesleysmith likes this.
  12. freemontie

    freemontie Banned Banned

    514
    287
    Aug 19, 2014
    This is getting embarrassing for RxPers. The saddest part is RxPers from the 90s who pursued this instead of legitimately educating and training themselves via medical school and residency. And they are still trying to substitute education/training/expertise with politics in the year 2015.
    I sincerely hope future grad students reading this thread realize what a Psy/PhD in Psych allows them to master and what it does not. We all have our scopes of practices and areas of expertise. Utilizing politics to change that is never ideal.
     
  13. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    Viva La Status Quo! Because healthcare should never change! Back to trephination and frontal lobotomies!
     
    shooter likes this.
  14. freemontie

    freemontie Banned Banned

    514
    287
    Aug 19, 2014
    Makes sense. If you don't allow non-medical practitioners to practice medicine you are condoning trepanning and lobotomies......ok...no.
     
  15. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    Viva La Overly Literal Interpretations!
     
    shooter, Chalupacabra and Goobernut like this.
  16. freemontie

    freemontie Banned Banned

    514
    287
    Aug 19, 2014
    then make practical sense.
     
  17. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    Oh, it's in there somewhere, keep looking.
     
  18. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    I join you in that hope. RxP is a political campaign using political means to expand financial and political opportunities. It is most definitely not an initiative to improve the health care system. While there are individuals who sincerely want to be able to help people with more treatment options, the campaign is nothing more than a brazen and often unethical attempt to stake out a more lucrative practice area, without any respect for science or the safety of patients, not to mention doing what's truly best for the health care system.

    The actual proposal by the APA RxP campaign is simply indefensible, if not ridiculous. It has succeeded not because it is needed or that it is valid as a health care policy change. In the few places where it has been approved, it was done so with massive amounts of political money accompanied by the slimiest and most dishonest lobbying and public relations initiatives. It has failed so often because it is truly a bad idea.

    Psychologists have always had the chance to prescribe medications based on the same training as anyone else. The campaign is about allowing psychologists to have specially lowered (i.e. dumbed-down) training requirements that are extremely convenient (learn to be a prescriber at home and on weekends, the ads say), and in a system completely controlled by psychologists. The saddest and most embarrassing part is that if RxP had to follow the same rules as others do, it would die in about one minute flat. The IL law wound up being exactly that, and it is considered by all as a massive barrier to the RxP campaign.

    RxP is a shameful embarrassment, an example of what has gone wrong at APA, and how APA is degrading what it means to be a psychologist.
     
  19. PSYDR

    PSYDR Psychologist 10+ Year Member

    1,968
    1,133
    Dec 18, 2005
    "Your requests for data have involved expecting other people to do the work to answer your speculative questions."

    Cogpsych demands evidence of safety. Then derides others asking anything of him.

    $200 to my favorite rxp concern in honor of cogpsych.
     
  20. CGOPsych

    CGOPsych 5+ Year Member

    234
    38
    May 14, 2009
    Am I eligible for the contest?
    I think it would be great idea if you were to actually learn something about RxP as part of the conversation, since you are so interested in it.
    As for explaining where information came from, I don't mind describing that, but I'm not here to do your work for you.
     
  21. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    It's not so much as doing someone's work for them. For one, I don't get paid for it. Second, you are advancing a position which you claim as supported by evidence, of which you will not cite. It would seem to most reading the thread that the data is simply not there. Which, is ok. Many healthcare disciplines need to do a better job at safety, efficacy, and outcome data. It's just that one shouldn't advance an empirical argument in the absence of any real data.
     
    QAsPsych likes this.
  22. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    Wow let me just point out that this is the most longest lasting thread I have seen active (10 years!!). What are you guys (and gals!) stance on a person having a Psych PhD/PsyD or even be a masters level provider and also having a PA or NP degree so that the person is trained in therapy and prescribing? Do you think this is trying to play the system already in place or is a good combination to have for patients? (oh and keep in mind I have not looked entirely through this thread so if this has been answered already can someone please direct me to where it was answered?)
     
  23. smalltownpsych

    smalltownpsych 2+ Year Member

    I don't have too much objection to a psychologist also becoming an NP so they can prescribe. The NPs I have worked with were extremely limited in their knowledge of psychopathology and psychotherapy so a psychologist with an NP would be an upgrade. However, I don't know if prescription privileges are really the way to go for our profession. Positioning ourselves as the experts on psychology and leave the expertise on the psychobiological to the psychiatrists and then team up with them to promote that midlevels should not be acting completely independently as though they had equivalent training would be a better plan for us and our patients. At least that is where my thinking is today.
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2015
  24. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    What is your opinion on Psychologists being able to prescribe? Do you think they should or shouldn't?
    If yes, do you think a specific specialty of psych should be restricted to do it such a Neuropsych?

    I know some of the arguments for theses rights are more comprehensive care for psychologists as they usually need to work along side a psychiatrist due to their lack of prescribing rights. Also is the argument that PA's and APRN's have prescriptive authority and they often have less pharmacology training than psychologists.

    On reason that I think would be good, and this might seem counterintuitive, is it's impact on society. There's such an issue with addiction in this country in part by doctors over prescribing. I think Psychologists modest approach and view on pharmacology due to their greater focus on psychotherapy would benefit society in that when a patient came to see them for comprehensive care and treatment, the psychologist would be restrictive and modest with medications and would reserve it for situations where it was really necessary and would try other approaches first.

    Also, people see it as infringing on psychologists approach. I don't see this as an issue because they would get psychotherapy training AFTER their phd, so they would still have the primary research, psychotherapeutic and testing training that is essential t psychology. Also, psychiatrists over the years have been allowed to get training and provide psychotherapy so why can't a psychologist get pharmacology training.
     
  25. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    Umm we have a sticky thread already made for this topic. There is a lot of opinions on that thread.
     
  26. AcronymAllergy

    AcronymAllergy Neuropsychologist SDN Moderator 7+ Year Member

    6,838
    1,140
    Jan 7, 2010
    Psychologist
    Mod Note: Merged into the Psychopharmacology/Advanced Practice sticky
     
  27. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus 10+ Year Member

    21,144
    2,024
    Oct 6, 2006
    The Beach
    Faculty
    Yes I think RxP for psychologists is possible, with solid additional training, and in collaboration w a physician. I'm conservative in my approach, though I think it offers the best balance between access and safety.
     
  28. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    Isn't the reason as to why RxP is being given to psychologists is because of the rural areas not having enough psychiatrists to provide medication?
     
  29. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    Yes, and no. It's a deeply complicated issue. Everyone uses the rural argument for a lot of things, but the truth of the matter is, almost every medical specialty faces a shortage of providers in rural areas. If anything, I'd just like to see it used to simplify some patient's pharma load and get them appropriate treatment. E.g., my elderly patients really do not need hydroxyzine to treat mild anxiety and sleep issues. Especially when you consider it's potent anticholinergic properties. Conversely though, that's likely not what insurers or medical centers will pay these provides to do. My worry is that they would just be used like psychiatrist's and APRN's to just push meds.
     
    Therapist4Chnge likes this.
  30. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    How could a great profession like psychiatry become a profession that pill pushes? What happened to the old psychiatry? Gosh our mental health care system is pretty screwed up
     
  31. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus 10+ Year Member

    21,144
    2,024
    Oct 6, 2006
    The Beach
    Faculty
    I trace it back to the advent and rise of HMOs. All of that fun "cost containment" really perversed the healthcare market.
     
    PsychMajorUndergrad18 likes this.
  32. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    But I feel as though they use APRN's just for that purpose largely in part because APRN's don't have a lot of training in psychotherapy so they can't really be utilized for that. Whereas a psychologist with pharmacology training would be training well in both, prescribing and psychotherapy.
     
  33. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    No, they use APRN's in that purpose largely because you can bill a lot more for med management than you can for psychotherapy. Our healthcare system is all about billable hours and how much those hours are worth, regardless of what the outcome is.
     
  34. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    OK so let's say we lived in a nation or society where Healthcare isn't all about billable hours and money. How would you then feel about psychologist prescribing right?
     
  35. Therapist4Chnge

    Therapist4Chnge Neuropsych Ninja Faculty Moderator Emeritus 10+ Year Member

    21,144
    2,024
    Oct 6, 2006
    The Beach
    Faculty
    It's all about RVUs (technically revenue generated from RVUs). Outcomes...I wish.
     
  36. smalltownpsych

    smalltownpsych 2+ Year Member

    Exactly. If I had RxP, this hospital would not want me to do psychotherapy, they would want me to crank out the med management visits to maximize the RVUs. Our APRN wants to do psychotherapy (even without training in it, of course) and the hospital won't let them only because of the financial reason.
     
  37. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    As long as they had adequate training, and coordinated care with a physician, I'd be all for it. I'm not a fan of the current online only RxP being propagated by some of the diploma mills.
     
  38. image187

    image187 7+ Year Member

    378
    45
    Mar 9, 2009
    Physician
    InfoNerd101, what level of training are you?

    In order to answer many of your questions you need to realize that the real world is not an ideal situation and healthcare will, unfortunately, never not be "all about billable hours and money". This is sad but true, any many important decisions are made, frankly, by politicians wearing nice suits that are lobbied with money. They are not made based solely on reason or a thorough calculation of risks/benefits to society or our mentally ill. Case in point: NPs practicing independently. If you look at PAs and NPs, NPs are able to practice independently solely because of the huge nursing lobby, while the actual medical training of a PA is of better quality.

    I think everyone here would agree that a clinical psychologist with adequate psychopharmacology training and physician supervision would be much more desirable and in general much more likely to be competent and safe than an NP plus adequate psychotherapy training. The problem is that there are many debatable points here. The vague terms "adequate", "safe", "supervision", etc... need to be defined. What is "adequate" psychopharmacology training? In medical school I spent 4 years studying anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, microbiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, each of which were separate classes followed by full-time clinical rotations in core medical specialties, after which I realized I had only learned the basics of medicine which were to be further refined through 4 more years of intense residency training. There is no substitute for suffering through all of these things in order to safely and competently practice (and understand) medicine. To me, online medical education for NPs is an absolute joke, and I can't even repeat some of the questions some NPs have asked me. Okay, okay, I'll repeat 2 things off the top of my head. Recently an NP asked me what oxycodone ER was... and recently during an ECT session, when asked why succinylcholine is given to the patient, one NP responded "so you get a good seizure?" These are not the people you want treating your family members. Back to the poorly definable terms: what is "adequate" psychotherapy training for NPs? Have you seen an NP skilled in practicing psychotherapy? Me neither. In my very opinionated and narrow point of view, these clinicians are solely used for "pushing meds" and making money for the system. They are good for boosting the income of hospitals, boosting the income of physicians/psychologists in a practice they work for, and basically nothing else. To have them practice independently is beyond me. By the way, "filling a rural gap", "provider shortage", yada yada, are all political buzz words and mean nothing, watch out for them.

    As for RxP, this is an interesting prospect, but first we need that definition of "adequate" psychopharm training. Recently, I think there were a bunch of politicians who shot themselves in the feet fighting for RxP legislation by getting a law passed basically requiring PA-level education, and setting precedent for future similar laws. I think this PA level education, while an inconvenient amount of further education for a group of professionals who just finished suffering through graduate school, externships, internships, post-docs, etc... may in the end be the only way to get an adequate level of actual clinical experience and generalized medical education needed to be able to do this thing safely and appropriately. I'm going to stop myself short before going on about the definitions of "safe" or "supervision" because this post may already be too long, but there are many many debatable things to be debated here.

    Also, we must point out that most of psychologists don't even want or support this.

    Sorry for the long post, my reading-to-posting ratio is usually a lot higher
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2015
  39. smalltownpsych

    smalltownpsych 2+ Year Member

    Let me guess, succhinylcholine is a paralytic agent that is administered to help prevent injury from the induced seizure? I am serious when I said guess because I don't do ECT and it is well outside my scope of practice so I don't devote too much time to studying it. I concur with your assessment of NPs and my biggest concern is their lack of awareness of what they don't know. I am comfortable enough with my own medical knowledge to know that I am little better than a well-educated amateur which prevents me from giving medical advice to patients.

    In contrast, our NP was giving child rearing advice to one of my patients today based on.....? Coincidentally, this is one of the few patients that the NP is treating for Bipolar Disorder that actually has it. Diagnostic reliability is clearly one area that psychologists seem superior to NPs based on my limited sample. It does make sense that this would be the case given our focus on assessment and knowledge of research and methods for improving diagnostic reliability.

    I really liked the way you framed the question about needing to determine the level of medical knowledge that is sufficient as I would not want to go from being a top-notch provider of psychological services to being a second-rate prescriber of psychotropic medications.

    Oh, and I am pretty sure that infonerd is in undergrad and is just trying to get a grasp of the field of mental health and all the different roles that the various people have. As more and more midlevels get their online alphabet soup degrees, it is getting more and more confusing for the public and many have a vested interest in making it so and it's not for the public's benefit, that's for sure.
     
    image187 and Therapist4Chnge like this.
  40. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    Yes, that is correct. I am an undergrad and currently work in the mental health field, love it, and want to advance. However, when I research on what avenue I should advance in within the mental health field, since there are so many different types of mental health providers (msw, Aprn, etc), I get so many different and conflicting responses, answers and just overall get confused and lost on what route to take or what would be best for me.

    For example, one person will say go the MSW route because clinical social workers are in demand, flexible, broad scope of practice, can get extensive psychotherapy training in many modalities and are utilized in so many different settings.. Others will say don't do that route because the pay is so horrible and I should go the psych APRN route because they can do therapy and diagnose, and can do whatever a social worker or psychologist can do and more.

    Others will say go the clinical psychologist route because they are the only ones that can perform psychological tests and evaluations and you can specialize in Neuro and potentially have prescription rights (which I happen to find Neuro interesting)

    Then others will say that psych APRN's don't have the greatest diagnostic and therapeutic skills compared to other professionals so I shouldn't go that route.

    And still others will say don't go the psychologist route as they are a dying profession, make no money in comparison to their education level and are slowly being replaced with master level clinicians (ie. MSW's and LPC's) who can do just about everything a psychologist can do.

    So you see, it's a very confusing situation especially when your recieve conflicting advice. After working with each type of professional and observing them I can honestly say I can see myself doing any one of those careers. I even find the mental health Occupational Therapist I work with fascinating and like their approach to mental health and can see myself doing that as well.

    Any feedback would be great. Thanks in advance!
     
  41. erg923

    erg923 Psychologist-Health Insurance Operations 10+ Year Member

    9,260
    2,748
    Apr 6, 2007
    None of this should be a surprise to you. Psychology 101: biases.

    You are not receiving conflicting "advice." You are receiving biases perceptions. Can I ARNP do psychotherapy? Sure. No one has a copyright on therapy right? Are they gonna be any good at it. Likely not, if you play the odds (the odds being they were never trained in therapy). Are psychologist being forced out in some setting? Probably. It doesnt happen where I am though. Is SW a flexible field? I suppose. It not like any of this information is wrong, or even conflicting really.
     
    PsychMajorUndergrad18 likes this.
  42. psych844

    psych844 2+ Year Member

    839
    122
    Apr 27, 2012
    And people don't want to make a mistake obviously. Nobody wants to invest x amount of years into something and then be out of a job. The idea that psychology is dying out though..not sure where that comes from. If psychology didn't die when psychology = psychoanalysis, not sure why it would now.
     
  43. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    Right but taking all of these "biases" into account, how do you know who's biased advice to follow lol.
     
  44. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    Right, but these people aren't talking about psychological theories being applied to other professions (ie, psychoanalysis training for MSW's), they are talking about the actual field of applied clinical psychology being replaced by those with less education such as clinical social workers and licensed practicing counselors.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2015
  45. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    And correct, as you also stated, I don't want to invest tons of time and money into schooling only to find out the opportunities in that particular field are scarce and/or it isn't for me. (I already made that mistake once. When I went off to school the first time after high school, I had no idea what I wanted to do at that young age, and this was before I realized I liked mental health and so I ended up majoring in elementary education which I HATED).
     
  46. psych844

    psych844 2+ Year Member

    839
    122
    Apr 27, 2012
    I think the general consensus from the forum has been that if you specialize, you will have job security (ie neuropsych, forensic, health psychology, rehab psych, etc) if you stay a generalist, then yes, you may face some issues in the future. (but again, not guaranteed that you will)
     
    Therapist4Chnge likes this.
  47. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    Infonerd,

    Being a undergrad myself, I know what it feels like to go through all of the conflicting biases that a lot of the mental health providers give here. I have gone through so many end-career changes (i.e. LCSW, LPC, Clinical Psychologist, Neuropsych, etc.) that I have not focused on what I am doing now. I think the best thing that you could do right now is shadow the many different providers, get research experience (if you are a undergrad psych major start contacting lab professors) and focus mostly on what you are accomplishing now while slowly thinking about the future. From my experience, if you worry about the future too much you are gonna lose track of what you are doing now and will become confused and depressed because you do not for sure what you will do

    PsychUndergrad18
     
  48. InfoNerd101

    InfoNerd101 Banned Banned 2+ Year Member

    228
    6
    May 19, 2015
    Thank you for the insight! I didn't think picking your forever job would be so difficult lol.
     
    PsychMajorUndergrad18 likes this.
  49. psych844

    psych844 2+ Year Member

    839
    122
    Apr 27, 2012
    To add to this point, some work is being lost by Family doctors in my neck of the woods, so wouldn't be shocking if it happened to Generalist Psychologist. In my province in Canada, pharmacists can now give flu shots, and there was talk that they may be allowed to prescribe. (at least some drugs)
     
    PsychMajorUndergrad18 likes this.
  50. PsychMajorUndergrad18

    PsychMajorUndergrad18 Future School Psychologist 2+ Year Member

    292
    56
    Jan 27, 2015
    But why a pharmacists? I understand that they have training in all things drug related but wouldn't it not be beneficial to them.
     
  51. WisNeuro

    WisNeuro Board Certified Neuropsychologist 7+ Year Member

    6,997
    4,707
    Feb 15, 2009
    Somewhere
    Psychologist
    To be fair, some of this work should be being lost. In the majority of people, there is no need for a physician to do simple things like flu shots. I'm all for making certain medical procedures and interventions available at a cheaper cost where it makes sense. Even in psychology, if a lower level provider can do things at a similar competence level with similar outcomes, all the better for the consumer.
     

Share This Page