quickest path to a funded Psy.D. w/HPSP

[pysker]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So here's my situation.

32 year old male
B.A., Philosophy, USC
M.A., with Merit, University of Essex, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis
Want to do HSPS program with any of the three branches that offer it for a Psy.D.

I've been working as an Intellectual Property Practitioner / Patent Agent for the past 1.5 years. I will need to be in school for at least 7+ more years to really start making good money at it. I like the intellectual challenge of the job, and I like fighting for people's rights. However, I have always wanted to work in clinical psychology, and I have also wanted to join the military. There are also a lot of deep reasons why I don't want to continue on the path that I'm on -- if someone pries, I might be inclined to offer them, but I'm probably best served saving them for my own analyst.

Overall GPA between grad school and undergrad is somewhere around 3.4/3.5. I also have 12 units of undergrad psychology. I got A's in all of these. One course was in abnormal. I do NOT have stats; however, I could conceivably complete this requirement in a DANTES exam with the help of a military recruiter.

The question is basically this, then: what reasonably decent Psy.D. programs might be recommended for me to apply to ASAP, and even gain acceptance for this coming Spring if possible?

I know some require "research methods" instead of introductory stats. I am particularly interested in programs that don't require anything more than what I've got -- I understand that many of these may be expensive and not of the highest quality, but if there are some that don't fit this description, I'd like to know about them. I also live an active outdoorsy lifestyle, so I don't want to end up somewhere where I can't do things like hunt, fish, dive, etc.

What I'd like from this thread, then, are your suggestions about schools/programs that, in order of priority:

1) Accept the HSPS without a hitch
2) Offer a reasonably good quality of education, with psychoanalytic leanings at least
3) Not require anything more than what I already have, academically speaking
4) Be located in desirable enough places to where I can have an outdoorsy lifestyle.

I realize this may be a tall order, but thanks to all for your time.

 

[PsychPhDone]

So here's my situation.

32 year old male
B.A., Philosophy, USC
M.A., with Merit, University of Essex, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis
Want to do HSPS program with any of the three branches that offer it for a Psy.D.

I've been working as an Intellectual Property Practitioner / Patent Agent for the past 1.5 years. I will need to be in school for at least 7+ more years to really start making good money at it. I like the intellectual challenge of the job, and I like fighting for people's rights. However, I have always wanted to work in clinical psychology, and I have also wanted to join the military. There are also a lot of deep reasons why I don't want to continue on the path that I'm on -- if someone pries, I might be inclined to offer them, but I'm probably best served saving them for my own analyst.

Overall GPA between grad school and undergrad is somewhere around 3.4/3.5. I also have 12 units of undergrad psychology. I got A's in all of these. One course was in abnormal. I do NOT have stats; however, I could conceivably complete this requirement in a DANTES exam with the help of a military recruiter.

The question is basically this, then: what reasonably decent Psy.D. programs might be recommended for me to apply to ASAP, and even gain acceptance for this coming Spring if possible?

I know some require "research methods" instead of introductory stats. I am particularly interested in programs that don't require anything more than what I've got -- I understand that many of these may be expensive and not of the highest quality, but if there are some that don't fit this description, I'd like to know about them. I also live an active outdoorsy lifestyle, so I don't want to end up somewhere where I can't do things like hunt, fish, dive, etc.

What I'd like from this thread, then, are your suggestions about schools/programs that, in order of priority:

1) Accept the HSPS without a hitch
2) Offer a reasonably good quality of education, with psychoanalytic leanings at least
3) Not require anything more than what I already have, academically speaking
4) Be located in desirable enough places to where I can have an outdoorsy lifestyle.

I realize this may be a tall order, but thanks to all for your time.

This is not what you asked, but I hope your goal isn't to provide psychoanalysis in the military.

 

[CobraMedic]

You have to apply for and be selected for HSPS after you have been accepted into an APA accredited PhD/PsyD program. HSPS tends to be fairly competitive and many great candidates do not get selected.

 

[forcefive17]

So here's my situation.

32 year old male
B.A., Philosophy, USC
M.A., with Merit, University of Essex, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis
Want to do HSPS program with any of the three branches that offer it for a Psy.D.

I've been working as an Intellectual Property Practitioner / Patent Agent for the past 1.5 years. I will need to be in school for at least 7+ more years to really start making good money at it. I like the intellectual challenge of the job, and I like fighting for people's rights. However, I have always wanted to work in clinical psychology, and I have also wanted to join the military. There are also a lot of deep reasons why I don't want to continue on the path that I'm on -- if someone pries, I might be inclined to offer them, but I'm probably best served saving them for my own analyst.

Overall GPA between grad school and undergrad is somewhere around 3.4/3.5. I also have 12 units of undergrad psychology. I got A's in all of these. One course was in abnormal. I do NOT have stats; however, I could conceivably complete this requirement in a DANTES exam with the help of a military recruiter.

The question is basically this, then: what reasonably decent Psy.D. programs might be recommended for me to apply to ASAP, and even gain acceptance for this coming Spring if possible?

I know some require "research methods" instead of introductory stats. I am particularly interested in programs that don't require anything more than what I've got -- I understand that many of these may be expensive and not of the highest quality, but if there are some that don't fit this description, I'd like to know about them. I also live an active outdoorsy lifestyle, so I don't want to end up somewhere where I can't do things like hunt, fish, dive, etc.

What I'd like from this thread, then, are your suggestions about schools/programs that, in order of priority:

1) Accept the HSPS without a hitch
2) Offer a reasonably good quality of education, with psychoanalytic leanings at least
3) Not require anything more than what I already have, academically speaking
4) Be located in desirable enough places to where I can have an outdoorsy lifestyle.

I realize this may be a tall order, but thanks to all for your time.

This is a lot to cover so I'll try my best. I'll echo what those above had stated. Psychoanalysis/analytic techniques are not generally used within a military environment. Generally, interventions are solution focused/CBT-realm. Additionally, the Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP) is officer selection program and isextremely competitive. It's not just that you apply and you're in. You fill out a lot of paperwork, essays, interviews and all of this will go in front of a selection board. This year the Navy offered a hand full of scholarships, the Army offered upwards of 8 (two year and one year combined, nationwide) and the Air Force shut their program down and are not accepting students. Bottom line is that there will always be more than enough applicants to fill these slots. .

To be accepted, you must attend a university with a solid reputation and be near the best of your class to have a shot. You also should also have a demonstrated track record of leadership, which can be in community service or other endeavors. The reason behind this is that you are considered and officer first, psychologist second within a military environment. Unclear if you mean DSST, but I'm thinking that's only open to folks with prior military service and not civilians.

The whole application process takes nearly a year and you must be attending school when you apply. Additionally, for clinical psychology, applicants full tuition will not be covered. For the Army, Only the last two didactic years are covered under this scholarship. This means that if you are in a 4+1 (internship year) program, you're not eligible to even begin applying until your second year and you will have to front the bill. If selected your third and fourth year will be paid for.

With the above presented information, I'm curious as to the reasons you would like to go apply for graduate school. Additionally, I would like to know more about the reasons for selecting a military psychologist career. It seems as though your background and experiences may be counter to what is required of a psychologist in the military, but I'm unsure.

 

[pysker]

This is a lot to cover so I'll try my best. I'll echo what those above had stated. Psychoanalysis/analytic techniques are not generally used within a military environment. Generally, interventions are solution focused/CBT-realm. Additionally, the Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP) is officer selection program and isextremely competitive. It's not just that you apply and you're in. You fill out a lot of paperwork, essays, interviews and all of this will go in front of a selection board. This year the Navy offered a hand full of scholarships, the Army offered upwards of 8 (two year and one year combined, nationwide) and the Air Force shut their program down and are not accepting students. Bottom line is that there will always be more than enough applicants to fill these slots. .

To be accepted, you must attend a university with a solid reputation and be near the best of your class to have a shot. You also should also have a demonstrated track record of leadership, which can be in community service or other endeavors. The reason behind this is that you are considered and officer first, psychologist second within a military environment. Unclear if you mean DSST, but I'm thinking that's only open to folks with prior military service and not civilians.

The whole application process takes nearly a year and you must be attending school when you apply. Additionally, for clinical psychology, applicants full tuition will not be covered. Only the last two didactic years are covered under this scholarship. This means that if you are in a 4+1 (internship year) program, you're not eligible to even begin applying until your second year and you will have to front the bill. If selected your third and fourth year will be paid for.

With the above presented information, I'm curious as to the reasons you would like to go apply for graduate school. Additionally, I would like to know more about the reasons for selecting a military psychologist career. It seems as though your background and experiences may be counter to what is required of a psychologist in the military, but I'm unsure.

Thanks for the thorough reply and the reality check. I think you may have already dissuaded me, at least for now. CBT is something that I would never be comfortable administering to just about any patient population; there are deep reasons for this, but I'll save that for another post.

My reasons for wanting a military career run a wide gamut, but have alot to do, at this point, from how much I've grown to love working in that type of environment over the years. To elaborate, for about six or seven years, I worked as a security guard in some of the most volatile and "popping" night clubs in my area. Some nights we'd break up six or seven fights, some involving capable combatants. I quickly learned a lot of things about chain of command, following orders (it is sometimes simply necessary to stop thinking and do what you're told -- a hard lesson for me), and being a part of something.

Obviously, being paid $15-20 an hour for this gradually began to grate on me, especially as my superiors seemed to be growing more and more relaxed, and less and less willing to pay me more in accordance with the increases in responsibility they were putting on my head as I moved into managerial positions.

By the time I'd gotten out of that, I'd completed all the coursework necessary in bioscience to apply for the USPTO registration examination. When I passed the exam, I began working at a friend of mine's patent law firm. However, in the 1.5 years I've been doing this, the work has been up and down. I don't have anything steady to rely on per se, and have to hound my boss for work on a weekly basis. When I've complained about this lack of stability, his response has been that I need to hurry up and get an advanced science degree. He may very well be right, but with the amount of money that I know comes in and out of firm coffers, it is major source of frustration that I can't get a steady paycheck or salary and be able to live on my own.

It wouldn't be so bad if I didn't live with my parents and two severely mentally ill older siblings -- as it stands, trying to focus on difficult and still somewhat remedial STEM coursework while living in this environment proved very trying last semester. Lastly, I look at how self-satisfied the whole enterprise of being a patent professional is, and I don't know that it's the right fit for me. I have this need, however laughably idealistic it may seem, to put myself on the line, to sacrifice, and to suffer with people, to help them with their most painful and intimate difficulties. A lot of this comes from having an acute understanding of the factors, within the context of my family life, that have led to the disorderliness that seems to pervade the lives of my family members, and even my own to some real extent. Lacking the power to do anything about this, within the context of family politics, is what makes me imagine that working as a clinician will be gratifying -- not to mention the extent to which my own experiences in therapy have helped me to make sense of my life. Lawyering for the property rights of inventors can on occasion feel like an exciting fight, but more often than not, it's a procedural sort of thing. Not that it's not exciting in its own right -- I just don't know, now, that it really fits my disposition.

I know that's a lot, and that there is a lot of disclosure in their that might be imprudent for me to actually give to either a military recruiter, an officer board, or a psychology graduate school admissions committee. However, I wasn't sure if I could really give you a good glimpse of just what's gnawing at me to make such a radical shift of direction right now. Anyhow, thank you for the opportunity to get clearer on all of this.

In terms of resolution, it's for all these reasons that I'm currently considering a position as a Security Forces Officer with the Air Force. I suppose this may be a good place for me to start a new life for myself, and see what comes of things -- I can always consider the HSPS thing later, but may opt to try and move, should I make leap, into a different career field. It's as much a question of finding some necessary structure, stability and independence for myself right now as anything. Questions of attaining an ideal vocation can wait, and from what everyone seems to be saying, I may be best suited doing a lengthy stint of service, saving up my own funds, and financing things at a graduate school of my choice down the road.

 

[erg923]

Thanks for the thorough reply and the reality check. I think you may have already dissuaded me, at least for now. CBT is something that I would never be comfortable administering to just about any patient population

Then your employability as a "psychologist" is going to be severely limited.

 

[CheetahGirl]

CBT is something that I would never be comfortable administering to just about any patient population; there are deep reasons for this, but I'll save that for another post.

Yeah, I was going to say something about this statement also.

Some personal background, I come from a 'balanced' psychodynamic program and work in the VA system. Psychodynamics/core-psychoanalytic theories are sprinkled all throughout my training and conceptualizations, but the majority of what I do now is CBT.

In order to effectively use psychoanalysis in practice, you must go for psychoanalytic post-doctoral training, and that is a minimum 4-years postgraduate work. First, you must undergo your own analysis (which is usually 3-years minimum, 2-4 sessions per week....and again, this is your own therapy...not what you will be doing with your own patients), in addition to more course work. It is very intense, and unless you are practicing in big cities (San Francisco, NYC, Chicago), it does not make much economic sense. (Just peruse some of the post-doctoral programs in psychoanalysis: http://www.nypsi.org/; http://www.wawhite.org/; http://postdocpsychoanalytic.as.nyu.edu/page/home) FYI: Psychoanalytic thought is based on psychodynamic theories which encompasses the totality of the human experience. CBT does this too, it just labels these factors in different terms, but the concepts remain the same, for one example: Look at Schema therapy (psychodynamic concept but packaged in CBT terms).

In my VA work now, I am part of ONE clinical research study (among 4-5 studies) that involves ONE psychodynamic construct, among many other factors. My own clinical research project is based on a psychodynamic theme (object relations) but it involves a construct that is best interpreted by memory, psychotherapy research, and integration from trauma (not really psychodynamics).

So @pysker I would learn more about psychoanalysis, psychodynamics, cognitive-behavioral, (just) cognitive, (just) behavioral, and evidenced-based therapies before you discriminate against these different types of treatments. Therapy is never in a vacuum, and there is never a 'one-size fits all' approach. It is vital for the clinician to be well-trained in what they do know (what they specialize it) and those specializations may encompass many viewpoints and many skills, which are hopefully backed up with empirical research. Otherwise, (if you search some of our older discussions about the topic, when I used to poo-poo CBT and pump-up analysis), you have the potential of harming the patients by selling "snake-oil' therapies that "feel good" (placebo effect) and "they worked last time" but have no basis in science.

No worries though. All of this will be taught to you during graduate school, but you could do with a little more self-study. And the "deep reasons" that you speak of...well, you'll have to sort that out because if a personal bias will get in the way of doing what is most appropriate for the patient, then maybe the field is not right for you.

One idea, what about social work? Like an MSW. It takes less time, and there are MSWs who also go through analytic training, if your heart remains set on it. But, again, the use of these theories is often limited because you have the potential of breaking open old wounds that cannot effectively be closed or healed through the course of some time-limited work.

Regardless, SDN is a great place to do field research on all of the above. Good luck!

Edit: psysker, I just saw that you have an MA in philosophy and psychoanalysis (was it online?)...so you know most of what I've said above, but we're factoring in something else...feasibility of a long-standing career, and in the U.S., psychoanalysis is a dying breed of service providers who either 1) have extremely wealthy clients, who have the pathology, commitment, and money needed for this treatment, 2) you figure out how you can use the basis of the education to effectively deliver the empirically-based treatments available (which is what I do), or 3) develop a unique path to combine your strengths, interests, and whatever is already out there (heck, maybe you could be the one to open the first low-cost clinic that offers to psychoanalysis to those who would never be able to afford it but would benefit from the support and focused concentration on understanding and working towards change, rather than cyclical dysfunction; which BTW, post-doc psychoanalytic training clinics usually offer an affordable, sliding-scale if one is ever in need of this info).

 

[pysker]

Yeah, I was going to say something about this statement also.

Some personal background, I come from a 'balanced' psychodynamic program and work in the VA system. Psychodynamics/core-psychoanalytic theories are sprinkled all throughout my training and conceptualizations, but the majority of what I do now is CBT.

In order to effectively use psychoanalysis in practice, you must go for psychoanalytic post-doctoral training, and that is a minimum 4-years postgraduate work. First, you must undergo your own analysis (which is usually 3-years minimum, 2-4 sessions per week....and again, this is your own therapy...not what you will be doing with your own patients), in addition to more course work. It is very intense, and unless you are practicing in big cities (San Francisco, NYC, Chicago), it does not make much economic sense. (Just peruse some of the post-doctoral programs in psychoanalysis: http://www.nypsi.org/; http://www.wawhite.org/; http://postdocpsychoanalytic.as.nyu.edu/page/home) FYI: Psychoanalytic thought is based on psychodynamic theories which encompasses the totality of the human experience. CBT does this too, it just labels these factors in different terms, but the concepts remain the same, for one example: Look at Schema therapy (psychodynamic concept but packaged in CBT terms).

In my VA work now, I am part of ONE clinical research study (among 4-5 studies) that involves ONE psychodynamic construct, among many other factors. My own clinical research project is based on a psychodynamic theme (object relations) but it involves a construct that is best interpreted by memory, psychotherapy research, and integration from trauma (not really psychodynamics).

So @pysker I would learn more about psychoanalysis, psychodynamics, cognitive-behavioral, (just) cognitive, (just) behavioral, and evidenced-based therapies before you discriminate against these different types of treatments. Therapy is never in a vacuum, and there is never a 'one-size fits all' approach. It is vital for the clinician to be well-trained in what they do know (what they specialize it) and those specializations may encompass many viewpoints and many skills, which are hopefully backed up with empirical research. Otherwise, (if you search some of our older discussions about the topic, when I used to poo-poo CBT and pump-up analysis), you have the potential of harming the patients by selling "snake-oil' therapies that "feel good" (placebo effect) and "they worked last time" but have no basis in science.

No worries though. All of this will be taught to you during graduate school, but you could do with a little more self-study. And the "deep reasons" that you speak of...well, you'll have to sort that out because if a personal bias will get in the way of doing what is most appropriate for the patient, then maybe the field is not right for you.

One idea, what about social work? Like an MSW. It takes less time, and there are MSWs who also go through analytic training, if your heart remains set on it. But, again, the use of these theories is often limited because you have the potential of breaking open old wounds that cannot effectively be closed or healed through the course of some time-limited work.

Regardless, SDN is a great place to do field research on all of the above. Good luck!

Edit: psysker, I just saw that you have an MA in philosophy and psychoanalysis (was it online?)...so you know most of what I've said above, but we're factoring in something else...feasibility of a long-standing career, and in the U.S., psychoanalysis is a dying breed of service providers who either 1) have extremely wealthy clients, who have the pathology, commitment, and money needed for this treatment, 2) you figure out how you can use the basis of the education to effectively deliver the empirically-based treatments available (which is what I do), or 3) develop a unique path to combine your strengths, interests, and whatever is already out there (heck, maybe you could be the one to open the first low-cost clinic that offers to psychoanalysis to those who would never be able to afford it but would benefit from the support and focused concentration on understanding and working towards change, rather than cyclical dysfunction; which BTW, post-doc psychoanalytic training clinics usually offer an affordable, sliding-scale if one is ever in need of this info).

Hey Cheetahgirl, thanks for the thorough reply. My degree was actually taken from the University of Essex. The philosophy department there is top-notch, but the Center for Psychoanalytic Studies left a little wanting IMO. Regardless, I've made an abiding and ongoing self-study of Jacques Lacan, and in particular Bruce Fink's take on this thinker, since I was 19 years old. The one paper I wrote and received a 1st / mark of distinction on, while taking my M.A., was for the year long seminar we did in psychoanalysis, which covered mostly British / object relations theorists.

In regards to what you and the other VA psychologist above point out, I understand the "practicalities" of the matter; however, it is just the provision of undue weight to "practicalities", IMO, that makes the institution of psychotherapy in this country generally crappy. This is not intended to insult you or anyone else who practices CBT. It is to say that CBT's framework, and consequently its practitioners, strongly tend to deny wholesale certain psychological realities that make its administration, in terms of a long-term therapeutic method that creates for lasting change, unsuitable. These include the transference, the unconscious, repetition compulsion, and so many other fundamental things.

I'd be happy to open up to further debate on this -- it is an area of intense interest for me.

FYI, I have somewhere around 200 sessions of psychoanalytic psychotherapy that I've already been through, on a 1-2x weekly basis, over the course of probably about 2 years total (1.5 continuous some years ago, back to nearly .5 in the past year at this point). I'm aware that it's not quite what is required for a personal analysis under most formal schemes, but I'd reckon to say I'm close to half way there. I would have no problem repeating it, but if I do go down this professional path, I've already promised myself that I'll be doing the work (i.e. my own analysis) while in school. In my estimation, however, and under the council I keep, the training analysis is in some sense never quite finished, for the simple reason that no analyst should ever be working without supervision, and for the further reason that supervision, on my thinking, simply is analysis (albeit perhaps tailored to talking about one's interactions with one's patients/analysands). The caveat seems almost unnecessary to me, however, because if you're good at what you're doing and concerned with your work, the difficulties you experience with your clients will be first and foremost on your mind when you lay down on the couch.

Anyhow, maybe it is time for me to look into other funding opportunities besides the military -- alternatively, I might just take a military MOS I would enjoy for a time, save up money, and fund my own education after some years. I suppose we'll see where the chips fall in the next couple of months.

Then your employability as a "psychologist" is going to be severely limited.