State of Psychology- Bad Forecast or Bad Decisions?

[O Gurl]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi all,

There has been a ton of discussion about all the negatives/barriers facing psychologists these days... from the saturated job market, internship imbalance, professional school explosion, mid-level infringement, strained research funds, and devalued services in terms of insurance and reimbursements. While all of these issues are complex and concerning to me as late stage trainee, I am also left wondering how much of the bind a psychologist finds him/herself in is due to decisions made in the process? How many times do we hear people say they want to pursue a doctorate to "help people" and provide therapy only? Or hearing someone say I want to be a neuropsychologist-- should I attend a counseling PhD program? Or I want to be a tenure track professor someday, but I was accepted to a clinical PsyD- should I attend? Or I'm a non-traditional student (later life, kids, ailing parent, homeowner, etc) or I'm from NYC or CA (sorry, it is true) and I don't want to move--should I attend a professional school or complete studies online? Or (again) I don't want to move-- will a regionally accredited internship or informal postdoc affect my job prospects? And so on...

Perhaps I am just trying to shield myself from the true doom and gloom out there, but I feel like we (aspiring/training psychologists) sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot for the sake of making it work. What are you guys' thoughts?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Perhaps I am just trying to shield myself from the true doom and gloom out there, but I feel like we (aspiring/training psychologists) sometimes shoot ourselves in the foot for the sake of making it work. What are you guys' thoughts?

Yes.

I cringe when I read some posts on here because it is either an unrealistic goal and/or a road to ruin. If it was easy everyone would do it. I've gotten flack for telling people that if they aren't willing to sacrifice for their training, they should look elsewhere. The vast majority of people have to move multiple times (grad school, internship, and often post-doc), spend a majority of their mid-twenties to early-thirties getting paid in peanuts, and then fight for good jobs.

There are way easier paths that take less time/money/effort. If people don't have a strong affinity for something that is directly related to doctoral training in psych (teaching, researching, assessment/niche work), it really is a poor decision to pursue doctoral training in psychology. Go to med school, get through residency, and guarentee yourself 6-figures and more flexibility. I still sometimes regret declining med school to go to psych, but then I remind myself my career goals are not in medicine.

Many trainees definitely do not help themselves. Maybe I'm just a bit more cynical now, but it is a tough field and even at the top it can be rough (for different reasons). I still love my job, and I think I'll have a good career, but I sure as heck didn't do it for the money (left a 6 figure job), the experience (60+ hr is normal), or the prestige (still have to fight for reimbursement stuff). Though, at the end of the day...I enjoy what I do, I contribute something back, and I can continue to learn and be challenged.

All that being said, it'd be easier if I just won the lottery.

 

[UhOh]

👍

All that being said, it'd be easier if I just won the lottery.

 

[erg923]

I'd say there is a balance between posting "doom and gloom" and posting reality. This board posts alot of doom and gloom, too much probably. But it also posts invaluable facts and realties that bring people back to earth and dispel any wild fantasies or frank misconceptions.

Understanding the difference between potential (best possible outcome) and modal outcome is very, very important for all of us. Epecially newbie grad students, or those thinking about applying. Npsych faces many real challenges right now. Although potential is still there. Clinical psychology in general faces many problematic issues right now. But again, potential, at the individual level, is still very much there.

 

[Nog]

All that being said, it'd be easier if I just won the lottery.

👍

 

[ThirdLittleBird]

I haven't been around long enough to know, but I wonder if the "doom and gloom" attitude has a seasonal relationship (i.e., tends to show up during the app/match process).

 

[Jegg]

Isn't the world supposed to end in 2012 anyway? 😀

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1loyjm4SOa0[/YOUTUBE]

 

[O Gurl]

There are way easier paths that take less time/money/effort. If people don't have a strong affinity for something that is directly related to doctoral training in psych (teaching, researching, assessment/niche work), it really is a poor decision to pursue doctoral training in psychology. Go to med school, get through residency, and guarentee yourself 6-figures and more flexibility. I still sometimes regret declining med school to go to psych, but then I remind myself my career goals are not in medicine.

I agree. There are other paths, that for me, you (it sounds like) and other psychologists, would just be less fulfilling. Medicine, investment banking, and corporate law, for example, can be easier and more lucrative paths. My other potential career path was real estate (although, given the current climate, I'd still be up the creek). However, the always-on-the-job element, ass-kissing/smoozing, and fickle market would have rendered me miserable. I can honestly say that I love what I do. I love behavioral medicine and rehab psychology. It is interesting work and I love the setting in which I am training (VA med center). The work is fulfilling and the work:lifestyle ratio is great. Esp. in comparison to friends I know who work insane hours, are buried in paperwork, or work in cutthroat environments.

I'd say there is a balance between posting "doom and gloom" and posting reality. This board posts alot of doom and gloom, too much probably. But it also posts invaluable facts and realties that bring people back to earth and dispel any wild fantasies or frank misconceptions.

Understanding the difference between potential (best possible outcome) and modal outcome is very, very important for all of us. Epecially newbie grad students, or those thinking about applying. Npsych faces many real challenges right now. Although potential is still there. Clinical psychology in general faces many problematic issues right now. But again, potential, at the individual level, is still very much there.

I certainly don't want to act like there aren't serious problems facing the field and this certainly is the place to speak openly and honestly about the issues. Your thread on clinical neuropsych, for example, is spot on in pointing out the larger trend of the field. I just posted this thread to focus on those individual factors that often play a part in the problem for psychologists. For example, the internship imbalance is VERY real. There are far too many applicants for too few spots. However, this has been an issue for a while. So I am always taken aback when grad school applicants post things here like: "This university is a great fit, but it is unaccredited or on probation. Should I still go?" Cmon now. People who are still CHOOSING professional schools, online programs, or schools with shaky accreditation are not blameless for their impending misery. Also, (and I will tread lightly here) even traditional, university based trainees who have severe issues with matching (2 and 3 attempts) likely have made some decisions that caused them trouble--whether it is being TOO research focused and thus neglecting to seek diverse clinical contact, limiting their search geographically, dragging their butts getting pubs, or applying to a bunch of super competitive sites with only 2-3 slots.

Anecdotally, for the last 3 years, my program has had 1 student not match from each cohort (ranging from 4-7 total in each cohort). I am personally aware of red-flag issues with all 3 of them. For instance, one applied strictly West Coast and NEVER attended a single workshop session that our program provides where the TD from our affiliated VA and one other staff psychologist provide tips and review materials.

I only say this to point out that while larger systemic issues are certainly at hand and lots of hardworking/well-qualified people get caught in the cross-fire, there are some individual choices that often hinder people.

I haven't been around long enough to know, but I wonder if the "doom and gloom" attitude has a seasonal relationship (i.e., tends to show up during the app/match process).

Hmm... interesting. Perhaps. I am still a relative SDN newbie, so this is my first full season. 😉

 

[berlin81]

I'd say there is a balance between posting "doom and gloom" and posting reality. This board posts alot of doom and gloom, too much probably. But it also posts invaluable facts and realties that bring people back to earth and dispel any wild fantasies or frank misconceptions.

Understanding the difference between potential (best possible outcome) and modal outcome is very, very important for all of us. Epecially newbie grad students, or those thinking about applying. Npsych faces many real challenges right now. Although potential is still there. Clinical psychology in general faces many problematic issues right now. But again, potential, at the individual level, is still very much there.

First off, let me say that I have much appreciation for those expressing their opinion and experiences on this forum. As much as certain topics can be "doom and gloom", it actually serves a purpose in that it gives many (such as myself) something to ponder.

Second, its very clear that the field of psychology is in some degree of trouble. I will freely admit that due to the so-called diploma mills, insurance reimbursement issues, and the influx of MSW's and master psychologists have contributed to the shrinking of opportunities for PsyD/PhDs. However, and in reference to erg923, individual potential still remains paramount for those who truly want to make a difference this field.

On a personal level, I am fully aware that once I get done with my PsyD (with a neuropsych concentration) that employment opportunities might still be in the decline. Furthermore, I know that the program that I am going to in the fall does not have the level of recognition that most traditional programs possess (and yes, it is a professional school but has been APA accredited for a long time). Nevertheless, my own ambitions towards helping others basically trumps whatever difficult environment I might face in the next 5-6 years. For me, the opportunity to learn as much as I can in order to help others in a genuine and productive fashion is what matters. Do I think that what I am doing is best for everyone?? Absolutely not. One must evaluate their personal circumstances and make a choice that is right for them and others (if applicable) .

I was a master's level psychologist within a state health system for almost two years. I learned and achieved a lot of things in my short time, but where I was and what I was doing was not the long-term goal. So for me, sacrificing the income I had and the so-called stability I obtained was not worth it. In essence, I find my life experience and my dedication will somehow serve my practice as a psychologist now and in the future.

To be clear, we should all be aware of the current and future concerns of our field. To be oblivious to what is going on with the job-market and with state regulations is irresponsible. However, the potential to help others in their utmost time of distress and need I think increases the job satisfaction that we are fully capable of having despite individual and/or communal career challenges.

 

[Slarterbartfast]

The biggest issue we face today is the bigoted attitude some people perpetuate towards those who do things differently. The "my way or the highway" attitudes that people sometimes display in this field are not conducive to healthcare in the long term.

 

[rocketdog83]

The biggest issue we face today is the bigoted attitude some people perpetuate towards those who do things differently. The "my way or the highway" attitudes that people sometimes display in this field are not conducive to healthcare in the long term.

What specifically are you speaking of?

 

[stigmata]

How is this an issue for psychologists and the future of our field?

 

[O Gurl]

How is this an issue for psychologists and the future of our field?

Do you mean me or Starterbartfast? Sorry, things have gotten vague.

 

[erg923]

The biggest issue we face today is the bigoted attitude some people perpetuate towards those who do things differently. The "my way or the highway" attitudes that people sometimes display in this field are not conducive to healthcare in the long term.

I would think its pretty obvious that many people are going to quibble with that, as we have had debate after debate about the importance of high standards for entry and licensing in the field. (ie., just because you want to, or think you can do it, doesn't mean you should be allowed to. You have to meet a high bar), as well as the importance in good scientific training. Thus, I'm not going to rehash that debate, yet again, here.

However, I am curious to know why you have labeled that as the BIGGEST issue we face today. Is this issue responsible for our lack of marketing of the value of our services, our failure to stop midlevel practitioner encroachment, market flooding, the internship imbalance, plunging reimbursement rates and salaries? Why are those who hold tightly (admittedly too tightly in some cases though) to high standards for the practice of this profession the BIGGEST issue here?

 

[O Gurl]

However, I am curious to know why you have labeled that as the BIGGEST issue we face today. Is this issue responsible for our lack of marketing of the value of our services, our failure to stop midlevel practitioner encroachment, market flooding, the internship imbalance, plunging reimbursement rates and salaries? Why are those who hold tightly (admittedly too tightly in some cases though) for the practice of this profession the BIGGEST issue here?

I view Slarterbartfast's response as symbolic of how so many people entering the field now are self-focused versus science/practice-focused. Which I suppose is why people make questionable training decisions (online, Argosy, CAPIC internships, and such) in the first place--it is about getting the degree they want while avoiding minor inconveniences like prepping for the GRE or having to relocate 🙄. Why else has there been nearly a 2-fold increase in the number of graduating psychologists since the 90's. There certainly hasn't been that dramatic of an increase in market demand. At any rate, "bigotry" (interesting use of that term) against the people flooding our field and lowering the standard of our profession is not the biggest problem. It is the flood in the first place that is problematic.

 

[erg923]

I view Slarterbartfast's response as symbolic of how so many people entering the field now are self-focused versus science/practice-focused. Which I suppose is why people make questionable training decisions (online, Argosy, CAPIC internships, and such) in the first place--it is about getting the degree they want while avoiding minor inconveniences like prepping for the GRE or having to relocate 🙄. Why else has there been nearly a 2-fold increase in the number of graduating psychologists since the 90's. There certainly hasn't been that dramatic of an increase in market demand. At any rate, "bigotry" (interesting use of that term) against the people flooding our field and lowering the standard of our profession is not the biggest problem. It is the flood in the first place that is problematic.

I agree. This isn't all about YOU. Thats a very Americanized attitude that I (even as full-blooded american) find quite annoying. But, again, its a sign of the times and of the culture (following MY dreams, MY personal choices trumps everything else). Got news for ya folks, when you chose graduate school in psychology, you are becoming part of a club that you have to genuinely care about. Attending professional schools, at this time, might be ok for YOU, but perpetuating that model (which you ARE doing if you attend one) is like giving the middle finger to the internship imbalance and high admission standards. You are saying "YES" to institutions that vastly overcharge for education (exploitation), generally speaking, do not develop ones scientific skills (only the practitioner skills), and often give the field a bad reputation amongst our physician colleagues. Not many of them care about Psy.D vs. Ph.D, but I have heard several joke about Alliant.

Now, all that said, I do believe that some of that has to relax at some point. My argument is once you have been trained, met those criteria (proved yourself competent, and received that Ph.D.), this hyper-focus on whats good for the profession has to be balanced by a "whats good my career" aspect too. For example, I don't think we are are gonna see much increase in boarding for neuropsychologists until we see more direct, tangible benefits to jumping through all the damn hoops. As of now, its a small pay raise at the VAs, along with a "for the good/advancement of the profession" mantra. Sorry, but as one gets older, and I have a family to support/spend time with, I need more benefit to ME in order to spend hours and hours (and thousands of dollars) preparing for optional board cert.

Edieb has also made a few comments that I agree with (at least in part) regarding, that, at some point, we have to relax this model we have towards more and more training/education is always better. It might be good theoretically, or even scientifically in some cases, but it has done nothing to increase our prominence, protect our turf, or our increase reimbursement rates with insurance companies, They simply do not care. I am very much in favor of getting rid of the post-doc requirement for licensure. Period. You go on internship and after its completion you take the EPPP and your are licensable. If you choose post-doc for further specialization (eg., neuropsych), fine, but you will be licenced during it.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I agree. This isn't all about YOU. Thats a very Americanized attitude that I (even as full-blooded american) find quite annoying. But, again, its a sign of the times and of the culture (following MY dreams, MY personal choices trumps everyone else). Got news for ya folks, when you chose graduate school in psychology, you are becoming part of a club that you have to genuinely care about. Attending professional schools, at this time, might be ok for YOU, but perpetuating that model (which you ARE doing if you attend one) is like giving the middle finger to the internship imbalance and high admission standards. You are saying "YES" to institutions that vast overcharge for education (exploitation), generally do not develop ones scientific skills (only the practitioner skills), and often give the field a bad reputation amongst our physician colleagues. Not many of them care about Psy.D vs. Ph.D, but I have heard several joke about Alliant.

Now, all that said, I do believe that some of that has to relax at some point. My argument is once you have been trained, met those criteria (proved yourself competent, and received that Ph.D., this hyper-focus on whats good for the profession has to be balanced by a "whats good my career" aspect too. For example, I don't think we are are gonna see much increase in boarding for neuropsychologists until we see more direct, tangible benefits to jumping through all the damn hoops. As of now, its a small pay raise at the VAs, along with a "for the good/advancement of the profession" mantra. Sorry, but as one get older, and I have a family to support/spend time with, I need more benefit to ME in order to spend hour and hours (and thousands of dollars) preparing for board cert.

Edieb has also made a few comments that I agree with (at least in part) regarding, that, at some point, we have to relax this model we have towards more and more training/education is always better. It might be good theoretically, or even scientifically in some cases, but it has done nothing to increase our prominence, protect our turf, or our increase reimbursement rates with insurance companies, They simply do not care. I am very much in favor of getting rid of the post-doc requirement for licensure. Period. You go on internship and after its completion you take the EPPP and your are licensable. If you choose post-doc for further specialization (eg., neuropsych), fine, but you will be licenced during it.

I would think that some of the recent push for specialty boarding (e.g., neuropsych) may be because of the varying level of admissions criteria and training quality that you mention. Once these areas become more standardized nationwide, then boarding for the sake of boarding may not see as much support. However, given the significant discrepancies between programs, in my opinion boarding can be seen as a quantitative and tangible way to ensure competency.

I'd definitely like things to be taken a few step further in various respects (e.g., acceptance of a single accrediting body, use of boarding as a means to protect against unqualified and unjustified practice infringement). Despite its current limitations, though, boarding may be one of the more viable short-term solutions to ensuring that someone is actually qualified to do what it is they say they can do, given that it would appear (in the current climate) simply having a degree may no longer be necessary and sufficient criteria in this regard.

 

[O Gurl]

Now, all that said, I do believe that some of that has to relax at some point. My argument is once you have been trained, met those criteria (proved yourself competent, and received that Ph.D., this hyper-focus on whats good for the profession has to be balanced by a "whats good my career" aspect too. For example, I don't think we are are gonna see much increase in boarding for neuropsychologists until we see more direct, tangible benefits to jumping through all the damn hoops. As of now, its a small pay raise at the VAs, along with a "for the good/advancement of the profession" mantra. Sorry, but as one get older, and I have a family to support/spend time with, I need more benefit to ME in order to spend hour and hours (and thousands of dollars) preparing for board cert.

I am very much in favor of getting rid of the post-doc requirement for licensure period. You go on internship and after its completion you take the EPPP and your are licensable. If you chose post-doc for further specialization (eg., neuropsych), fine, but you will be licenced during it.

I go back and forth with boarding and postdocs. I agree that postdocs should be optional for those who seek additional training or plan to board in a certain area. If someone is keeping it general, then a year of internship should suffice. I also agree that neuropsych boarding may be a a bit of an empty gesture because by that point, a person has already met the Houston Conference Guidelines (including a 2-yr postdoc). Similarly child and school psychologists have already sought specialized training in that area that is pretty unmistakeable (did their internship and postdoc at a children's hospital, school district, or autism clinic). In those 3 cases, someone's training and resume should speak to their competency in that area. However, when it comes to other specialties that can co-exist in the same areas like health, trauma, or rehab, I think boarding can be a useful tool for distinguishing the experts from those who are just practicing in the settings. Certain areas of practice require advanced training and, as of yet, we do not have a set criteria to gauge this.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

However, when it comes to other specialties that can co-exist in the same areas like health, trauma, or rehab, I think boarding can be a useful tool for distinguishing the experts from those who are just practicing in the settings. Certain areas of practice require advanced training and, as of yet, we do not have a set criteria to gauge this.

That is the biggest reason (for me) to support boarding. There are so many people who work as "neuropsychologists" and haven't remotely addressed the Houston Guidelines....but nothing stops them from practicing neuropsychology.