Questions about Psy.D and a University

[LovinPsych]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I haven't posted here in ages for "various" reasons. I have come to rekindled my interest in the law but I refuse to let go of psychology because it too is my passion. After countless hours and days of researching I have looked into various law/psych degree programs. But like any undergrad I have questions. Before I ask, I need "real" answers with anything that is relevant to these answers and not statements like "run away from this and that" or why you feel what I want to do is irrelevant. I just need to know a few things.

One: Has anyone attended or know much on Widener University or Drexel University?

Two: What can I get out of a Psy.D over Ph.D? I was considering the Ph.D for a while until I found this program at Widener University.

Three: Are there any law/psych programs around my area that I may have over-looked? Accreditation is a must for me as well. I am two years into my BA in Psychology and I am looking ahead. I live in Maryland.

Four: How do I search about financing these programs?

Five: What can I do now to prepare for these types of programs later?

 

[erg923]

Questions four and five have been answered in various threads. Do a search on here. Also, check the schools' websites for info about assistanships and fellowships. Obviously, Fed loans will be necessary if its an unfunded program and has tuition similar to professional schools.

Drexel is a pretty well respected program. Widener, I'm not sure about.

You might wanna think more about the actual functionality of a joint ph.d/J.D degree, rather than simply your desire or "passion" for both fields. It my experience, people either do one profession or the other. Not both. Steve Binke and Paul Kauffman are the only names in psychology that I can think of off the top of my head that are really enaged in both areas of practice. Law school at the same time as a doctorate is no picnic, and neither is studying for and passing the bar. Before I put myself through all that nonsense, I would want to make damn sure I absolutely had to do that in order to do what I wanted in my career.

Also, keep in mind that the philosophies of the two professions are often diametrically opposed to each other. This can be tough to reconcile and requires a person with extreme flexibility of thought. Lawyers on taught very early on in their education that the practice of law in this country is based on the adversarial process. It is NOT the search for the truth, it is about advocacy for their "client." Psychology is indeed quite the opposite. We don't advocate, we testify to the truth as is supported by the data. That is, we are not advocates for our "clients" if the truth (ie., our data) dont support it. Lawyers are taught to advocate for the client above all else, despite the truth. Psychologists, are trained to work for fairness, justice, and equity and to protect all parties to any endeavor, if at all possible. Lawyers are taught to argue in terms of black and white, right and wrong. Psychologisats are taught to see the world in many shades of grey. I think this is probably why there are not alot of people who practice both...😉

I dont think a Psy.D. will give you anything that Ph.D. wouldn't. Some will argue "more clinical experience/hours," however research using APPIC applicant profiles over the past 5 years demonstrates that to be bunk the majority of the time. This is probably due to the fact that the Ph.D. takes, on average, over a year longer. Thus, ph.d students have more time to build up/accumulate hours than the average Psy.D. Whatever the reason is, its largely moot anyway, as there is no empirical evidence to support the notion that more hours (at the grad school level) equals more competence.

 

[LovinPsych]

I have thought about the functionality of both. I have weighed it around for quite sometime. I know this is exactly what I want. Thank you for telling me about your experience and the advice. I am happy to hear Drexel is a respected program.

 

[paramour]

Two thoughts:

1. Limiting yourself to JD/PhD degrees is going to severely narrow your options as is. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your post, but are you only looking at programs in your area? If so, I hope you have a backup plan unless you have extremely impressive stats and know some people who know some people who can guarantee you entry. Not trying to be a smartass but admission into one program (JD or PhD) isn't a guarantee, much less a dual entry program.

I know this is exactly what I want.

2. I chuckled at this because I still don't know what I want, much less "exactly" what I want. It must be nice. 😛

[Please don't think I'm mocking you. I think that I'm just in a weird place right now, and I found the wording semi-amusing in my current state of mind.]

 

[erg923]

I'm not sure they were planning on only applying to those, but I agree, it would be foolish to limits ones options like that. I think there are only about 6 or 7 joint programs in the entire US. And the ones that arent in professional schools are super competitive (typically, only one spot out of the handful of open spots is designated for that track). You need stellar GREs and LSATs in addition to all the other criteria needed to be competive for any other clinical program.

I would think again on the "I know exactly what I want" thing. Odds are (assuming you about 21 or so), it will change. Even if it doesnt, life priorities might, so keep an open mind.

If I were you, I would identify what it is about the J.D/PH.D path is so appealing and how this might be accomplished alternatively. You need to do this for at least 2 reasons: 1.) Pragmatically, everyone needs a back up plan 2.) In your case, you are gonna need more options than the limited about of j.d/ph.d programs that you will realistically be competitive for. So for example, if you like the combined degree because it will allow you to better understand the admisability (Frye vs Daubert) of psychological evidence/opinion in criminal proceedings, then you might look at clinical and counseling psych programs that provide the opp for completing practicums within the court system. Conversely, if you were interested in psychology because of a general interest in how mental health issues are dealt with within the court system, then I would suggest going to law school and specializing in mental health law/advocacy. See what Im saying? Just because you are interested in something doesnt mean you necessarily need a degree in that field in order to do what you want to do.

 

[LovinPsych]

I am fine with having an open mind, if I didn't have one I wouldn't have considered as many majors as I have. I am going 24 for those who need to know.

Some people need to try a little of everything some don't. I never said that I was guarantee to get in or anything. I said it is something I have been considering. I know for a fact law and psychology is what I want to do.

I was asking about my area because the programs I have seen thus far are "outside" of Maryland.

I remember telling someone from this forum about this and I was told that it would be ideal for me to do this, now I am hearing different. I guess that is why I ask for advice then make a decision because I get conflicting information quite often???

 

[erg923]

It would be ideal if those were the degrees you need in order to do the job you want to do. What job is that, anyway? If you dont need one of them, then it would be a waste of tuition money and valuable portion of your late 20s. (Its hard enough to balance one doctorate and a healthy lifestyle, much less 2 at the same time).

Also, yes, it could be ideal, but dont forget that means you are having to do a competition within a competition (eg. the Ph.D. program takes 5 people out of 200..only one person out of those 5 is brought in for the J.D./ph.d track).Thus, dont be suprised if you dont make it the first time you apply. Many applicants dont. So I would get to work on making your CV Phat ASAP!!!

 

[LovinPsych]

I want to practice law and to practice psychology on a clinical level.

I know they are very,very competitive. I have heard how even some of the most qualified have been turned down. It is quite scary when you think about it. I do need to know, are there things besides the obvious exams that I need to do to be very competitive myself?

Because I want to do this, I do consider my health as I do already have pre-existing conditions. So that has crossed my mind. I do not want any children anytime soon because it would be impossible to do that AND have kids. So I am fine with no babies for quite a while.

What's CV PHAT?

 

[erg923]

I want to practice law and to practice psychology on a clinical level.

Well, that in no way answered the question, but nice try. I would operationalize this idea you have into an actual position/job description. Then people will be able to guide you in the right direction.

"Phat" was my attempt at ebonics 🙂. I meant, you should have an unusually impressive CV for these kinds of programs (e.g., stellar accomplishments and letters of rec and a track record of research involvement/accomplishments during undergrad or after undergrad). Although, you really need most of those things to be considered at any ph.d program.

The requirements to be competitive for admission to a clinical phd program have been discussed ad naseum in other threads on this forum.

 

[psychmama]

Also, keep in mind that the philosophies of the two professions are often diametrically opposed to each other. This can be tough to reconcile and requires a person with extreme flexibility of thought. Lawyers on taught very early on in their education that the practice of law in this country is based on the adversarial process. It is NOT the search for the truth, it is about advocacy for their "client." Psychology is indeed quite the opposite. We don't advocate, we testify to the truth as is supported by the data. That is, we are not advocates for our "clients" if the truth (ie., our data) dont support it. Lawyers are taught to advocate for the client above all else, despite the truth. Psychologists, are trained to work for fairness, justice, and equity and to protect all parties to any endeavor, if at all possible. Lawyers are taught to argue in terms of black and white, right and wrong. Psychologisats are taught to see the world in many shades of grey. I think this is probably why there are not alot of people who practice both...

Oh yeah, this is very true. Law and psychology are different belief systems in some ways. I was never happy as a lawyer because my personal belief system is more aligned with psychology than with law. Having said this, if one wants to specialize in forensic psychology I think the dual degrees can be helpful. It's just very important to know what you want before pursuing this path -- there's too much work and $$ that goes into getting both the JD and the PsyD/PhD. I'd suggest doing some reading about careers in forensic psychologiy to better understand your options.

P.S. - I have no first-hand experience, but I've heard Widener's dual degree program is well respected. I think it would cost a lot though...

 

[AcronymAllergy]

"Phat" was my attempt at ebonics 🙂. I meant, you should have an unusually impressive CV for these kinds of programs (e.g., stellar accomplishments and letters of rec and a track record of research involvement/accomplishments during undergrad or after undergrad). Although, you really need most of those things to be considered at any ph.d program.

The requirements to be competitive for admission to a clinical phd program have been discussed ad naseum in other threads on this forum.

I'd imagine that the interview and personal statement can be particularly important for dual-degree Ph.D/J.D. programs as well, especially for two professions which are--as you've said--so often quite disparate from one another. I would think the admissions committees will want to know that you have some first-hand experience in both legal and clinical settings so that you do, in fact, understand what you're getting yourself into.

Personally, I think it would be very, very difficult to maintain dual-practices in both psychological and legal work. Those who hold dual degrees definitely tend to practice in one arena or the other, and use their second degree mainly as a source of expertise to inform their primary occupational field.

 

[Existenz]

I haven't posted here in ages for "various" reasons. I have come to rekindled my interest in the law but I refuse to let go of psychology because it too is my passion. After countless hours and days of researching I have looked into various law/psych degree programs. But like any undergrad I have questions. Before I ask, I need "real" answers with anything that is relevant to these answers and not statements like "run away from this and that" or why you feel what I want to do is irrelevant. I just need to know a few things.

One: Has anyone attended or know much on Widener University or Drexel University?

Two: What can I get out of a Psy.D over Ph.D? I was considering the Ph.D for a while until I found this program at Widener University.

Three: Are there any law/psych programs around my area that I may have over-looked? Accreditation is a must for me as well. I am two years into my BA in Psychology and I am looking ahead. I live in Maryland.

Four: How do I search about financing these programs?

Five: What can I do now to prepare for these types of programs later?

one tenent that gets lost on these forums is the important notion that it's not where one is, but what one does.

 

[Ollie123]

What job is that, anyway?

I want to practice law and to practice psychology on a clinical level.

It will be difficult for us to answer #5 without more information on what you plan to do, as there are a huge number of different "paths" that one can take within any subfield and the path to being a competitive candidate may differ significantly depending on your plans. The above is not a real answer to erg's question, just a restatement of it (I'm not sure if it was supposed to be an answer n or not) so again, what is the particular end-goal here? Our recommendations will be very different if you see yourself fulfilling a very particular role working with a forensic population versus an expert consultant on juror selection, etc. So more details on what you would like your ideal "job description" to look like would be helpful. There are a lot of potentially valuable intersections - part of why these programs are so competitive - and a multitude of options. You seem set on it, so I assume you have given it some thought and have something in mind beyond what you stated (as I assume you weren't just picturing spending your mornings lawyer-ing in a courtroom and your afternoons seeing patients ). I think one of the best ways to be successful for more competitive programs like those is to have a very clear goal you are working towards that allows you to make the case for why the program is a good fit. If we know what the specific intersection of those topics is that you want to focus on, that makes you interested in both, we may be able to give more concrete advice on things to do to help out your application.

 

[erg923]

I think thats a good point, Ollie123. Ph.D admission committees want to see committed and driven people who are also focused and know why they want what they want. It probably is even more important to have a very specific focus and rationale for pursuing this highly specialized track.

AcronymAllergy, it is certainly possible to do both, but as I said before, the majority simply do one or the other. The exceptions to this are people such as Steve Benke, who is currently the head of the APA ethics office. He is actively involved in clinical work as well as legal consulting. I have met him on several occasions due to my role in my state's Ethics committee and he is a great guy. No one is going to be doing trials and depositions during the week and then seeing clients in a PP on the weekends, but I do know that he is definitely putting both of his licenses to work in his daily life.

Perhaps a unique thing one could do to prepare for such a path is to get actively involved (if thats even possible at the UG level) with your state psych association's Ethics Committee. This would give you a really good glimpse into the world of legal/ethical consultation and it would probably look great on your CV when you apply to grad school. Would definitely set you apart from the hordes of other undergrad applicants. As I mentioned before, I am currently the graduate student member of my state's ethics committee and I can honestly say that it his been one of the most educative experiences of my entire grad school career. I was even asked about my experience during my internship interviews with the BOP. The intersection between the law, the APA ethic code, and the practice of professional psychology is indeed fascinating, confusing, and scary...all at the same time. 🙂

 

[PsychScience]

it is certainly possible to do both, but as I said before, the majority simply do one or the other. The exceptions to this are people such as Steve Benke, who is currently the head of the APA ethics office. He is actively involved in clinical work as well as legal consulting. I have met him on several occasions due to my role in my state's Ethics committee and he is a great guy. No one is going to be doing trials and depositions during the week and then seeing clients in a PP on the weekends, but I do know that he is definitely putting both of his licenses to work in his daily life.

Agreed, unless you are absolutely set on doing the above (i.e. having an active clinical practice AND an active law practice) you can save yourself a lot of time, stress, and money by operationalizing what it is you want your future career to look like. Once you can describe this, it will make it easier to choose a path that will fit these interests (JD, PhD, or JD/PhD). Like erg923 already mentioned, there are a lot of options for pursuing your interest in both law and psychology without pursuing a degree in both fields. Depending on your desired job description, you could find a good home in one of the fields without ignoring your interest in the other. I know you mentioned that you wanted to "practice law and to practice psychology on a clinical level". However, this can still be done without pursuing a joint degree. There, are however, certain things you can not do without a joint degree. So I would recommend figuring out specifically what you want to do, and go from there.

To respond to your original questions:
1) I have heard positive things about Drexel's program as well
2) In terms of PsyD versus PhD, I think you again have to be more specific about your desired training, but in general I think that erg addressed this nicely. Many will say that you get more clinical training in a PsyD, but in the end, the supervised clinical hours tend to be about the same.
3) There are really only a handful of joint PhD/JD programs in the whole country. If you are more flexible with how you study law and psychology your options will open up considerably, for example, in the Maryland area I know that Catholic University in DC has joint JD/MA program so you could get your law degree and a masters in psychology. Marymount also offers a forensic psychology MA.
4) This will depend on the type of program you apply to. Some will require loans, many university PhD programs offer funding from various sources (RA, TA, grant, fellow etc...)
5) Be very specific about what you want to do, and design your experiences around it. I also used to be interested in law and psychology, ultimately I took the clinical psychology route instead. However, to prepare for pursuing forensic psychology work, as an undergrad, I worked as an intern in a county court in the psychology clinic. In the clinic I was trained to do intakes for court referred psychological assessments. I did this on a volunteer basis (but eventually got paid, once they realized I was awesome 😉 ). This is something you might want to look into. You also want to find a university mentor who has similar interests to yours. My undergrad had a prof with both a JD and a PhD. If this is true at your university, get involved in this persons research, do an honors or senior thesis on the topic.

 

[CharmedDiamond]

If you're interested in psych and law, why not try a JD/MA program? Those are probably a lot less competitive. I don't specifically know of any in your area (never looked), but I know that Valparaiso University in Indiana has one, JD and MA in Counseling Psych. If you're doing a career with an intersection, extra training will be impressive, but might not be quite necessary at the doctoral level in psychology.

I'd also try to get more of a feel of what SPECIFICS you want to do, should you choose the PhD/JD route. For any PhD in psych, you're going to need to know what kind of population you want to work with, and what kind of research you're going to do. Then that's going to need to match with one of the professors on the PhD part of the school. Restricting yourself by location and joint degrees, while adding in the "fit" factor is going to make it very difficult to find a program, regardless of credentials.