The V.A. and A.P.A. in collusion..

[Friend of Jung]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Did you know that if you have an APPIC Internship, you cannot work for the Veterans Administration as a psychologist... It does not matter if you are a psychology diplomate, have had an APA approved post-doc, or you are a well published psychologist and a recognised expert on the treatment of PTSD,, you cannot work for the VA unless you have an APA accredited Internship period! Because of this rule, hundreds of V.A. psychology jobs are going unfilled. If anyone doubts this all you have to do is get on the internet and look up psychology V.A. jobs in your state to see how many are going unfilled. As a result, it is very likely that the hundreds of men and women who have put their lives on the line for their country are not getting the treatment they need or deserve.. Oh, V.A. officials will give all kinds of reasons for the APA only rule, but the truth, as this Clinical Psychologist sees it, is that the V.A. and the A.P.A. are colluding in a discriminatory practice that needs to be changed.. Any comments?

 

[PsyDr]

not discriminatory. i can't see why it should be changed. changing the educational requirements offers no benefit to the VA. there are exactly 158 psychologist positions in the VA system right now. doesn't sound like "hundreds". sounds more like sour grapes.

setting educational requirements at a certain level is the right of any employer so long as it does not violate any laws. the federal gov't has set up their requirements because they feel it provides a certain face validity to the prospective employer's credentials. i can see why.

 

[FranklinR]

not discriminatory. i can't see why it should be changed. changing the educational requirements offers no benefit to the VA.

setting educational requirements at a certain level is the right of any employer so long as it does not violate any laws. the federal gov't has set up their requirements because they feel it provides a certain face validity to the prospective employer's credentials. i can see why.

Face validity is the right term, in every respect.

It's laziness on the VA's part. Since APA internships are harder to get than non-APA APPIC internships (and thus, in theory, the internships that get the best people), saying they'll only take people with APA internships allows them to piggyback on the candidate screening they believe has already taken place.

And it's probably effective, for 80% of the candidates. Most people do want the APA accredited internships, and if an internship is APPIC only and not APA, there's probably a reason.

But at root it is just laziness. They don't want to screen candidates more carefully, so they're willing to throw out the occasional baby with the bathwater. If they wanted to be more careful, they could specify their own internship criteria, or do other candidate assessments. But why bother?

Ethical? Eh. I think it's unseemly - much like some investment banks who would only hire from top tier schools, they're eliminating qualified candidates and possibly overweighting one criteria for selection. If it were me running the VA, I would try not to do it, but I'm not sure I'm willing to say it's unethical. If they were the only employer of psychologists, it certainly would be unethical. But they're not.

I'm also entirely sure it's legal.

 

[PsyDr]

if i had my own investment bank, i would only hire from top tier schools too.


i would also give bonus points for baked goods.

 

[FranklinR]

if i had my own investment bank, i would only hire from top tier schools too.

That's what the entire finance world has been doing for some time. Correlation != causation, but I'm just sayin'...

 

[deleted176373]

not discriminatory. i can't see why it should be changed. changing the educational requirements offers no benefit to the VA. there are exactly 158 psychologist positions in the VA system right now. doesn't sound like "hundreds". sounds more like sour grapes.

setting educational requirements at a certain level is the right of any employer so long as it does not violate any laws. the federal gov't has set up their requirements because they feel it provides a certain face validity to the prospective employer's credentials. i can see why.

And people wonder why I keep saying not to go to a program where the likelihood of getting an APA internship is low... It's important, critical even, to have the right credentials.

It is discriminatory, but it's not wrong to discriminate... we do it all the time. Some people like seafood, some don't... but we all discriminate on seafood and it affects our eating habits. We discriminate when we vote for our elected officials, question is are we discriminating legally or illegally?

This is an example of LEGAL discrimination. Sucks to be the victim of any discrimination, but doesn't necessarily make it unfair.

Mark

 

[Friend of Jung]

APA Internships are in short supply, so not getting one is not nessesarily a reflection of a candidate's quality. Also, state licensing boards that weight APA Internships heavily in the licensing process, such as New Mexico, have simply added extra stipulations in the licensing process for non APA Internship candidates. This is a relatively well thought out approach and one the V.A. could easily use to fill its vacant clinical psychology positions. Also, re: the "sour grapes" comment, I'll just bet that came from someone with an APA internship under his or her belt.. 🙂

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I don't see a problem. They chose a "standard" that is used in many other settings (academic medical settings, etc), so I don't see it as unfair. Many other jobs may not "require" it, but often will use that as a weed-out criteria, so the VA is at least up front about their hiring process.

The VA has been increasing their compensation packages to try and attract competitive applicants, though even with that it is sometimes hard to get people to move to the less populated areas where some VAs are located. With all of the cuts going on in other settings, I'm pretty sure many of those spots will be filled sooner than later.

 

[PsyDr]

wait... small supply, great demand doesn't equal good students. i bet yale is going to be pissed when they hear about this.

 

[FranklinR]

wait... small supply, great demand doesn't equal good students. i bet yale is going to be pissed when they hear about this.

I'm actually not entirely sure what you mean by this - are you being sarcastic? Saying that lots of students applying and few getting in really does mean better students?

I'm being genuine - I really can't tell which you mean.

If that's true, then we should only look at the # of applications to # of acceptances in deciding on a program, right?

 

[deleted176373]

wait... small supply, great demand doesn't equal good students. i bet yale is going to be pissed when they hear about this.

Right, because they pick the least qualified to go to the best programs. Don't you get it?

Mark

 

[deleted176373]

I'm actually not entirely sure what you mean by this - are you being sarcastic? Saying that lots of students applying and few getting in really does mean better students?

I'm being genuine - I really can't tell which you mean.

If that's true, then we should only look at the # of applications to # of acceptances in deciding on a program, right?

No, but you should look at the % getting accepted at APA/APPIC Internship sites.

 

[numbereight]

if this is true - that you CAN'T get a job at the VA UNLESS you have an APA internship, then this is a ridiculous precondition. Granted, getting an APA internship means you're very good and you're vetted. However, why should you automatically exclude everyone who has not met a single condition?

Are people arguing that the APA internship is one and only path to clinical psychology righteousness? Excuse me but sometimes it sounds a bit biblical.

Perhaps i am a jaded, jaded man and i certainly do not want to put this on the shoulders of the kind people here, but I sometimes feel like clinical psych has so many talented people that the people in the field, as a group, acquire an elitist mentality. this is an example. i guess I expect more because we all know about individual differences etc.. i guess we're satisfied being right most of the time? am i rambling?

>changing the educational requirements offers no benefit to the VA

if i am a hiring manager who comes across a qualified, talented candidate who did not for whatever reason have an APA internship, I should still be able to hire them. Why not?

 

[edieb]

I think at least half of the internships available are APA-accredited. Thus, I don't think they are as hard to acquire as you think. Although it is a restricted range, look at the people on this board -- most have gotten accepted at APA-accredited internships...

 

[FranklinR]

No, but you should look at the % getting accepted at APA/APPIC Internship sites.

My point isn't that getting in to an APA internship isn't a good measure of quality. It's that it's not a perfect measure of quality. Nobody would argue that it is. I'm not even saying that the VA is wrong to use it, just lazy, since nobody really knows how good a measure of quality it actually is. But it seems like it is one (and I agree, it very likely is), so they use it anyway, knowing that some qualified candidates are excluded and some unqualified candidates are included.

It's just like the GRE or GPA or anything else - an incomplete measure. We have no idea how good it actually is.

Right? I think the argument here is reflexive - I think we agree on the facts, and perhaps you just don't like my characterization of the decision to use APA internships as a basis for inclusion/exclusion as lazy. Or did I miss something?

There could a separate discussion of whether or not exclusivity per se is a measure of quality, on either the 'wisdom of crowds' theory or the 'there's so many applicants, they can pick the best' theory. But I don't think anyone is really making the argument that exclusivity in and of itself really does measure quality of final applicants, so again, I think there's really no argument there.

 

[cardamom]

My point isn't that getting in to an APA internship isn't a good measure of quality. It's that it's not a perfect measure of quality. Nobody would argue that it is. I'm not even saying that the VA is wrong to use it, just lazy, since nobody really knows how good a measure of quality it actually is. But it seems like it is one (and I agree, it very likely is), so they use it anyway, knowing that some qualified candidates are excluded and some unqualified candidates are included.

Lazy, or maybe cost-effective is a better way of looking at it, given how how difficult of a time the VA has taking care of all the people they need to. I'm not sure I'd recommend that they'd invest more resources into candidate evaluation when there's an available screening method to use. Seems like those funds could be better used in other ways.

 

[futureapppsy2]

or a California School of Professional Psychology graduate that is actually literate.

Ouch. I find it interesting that the assumption on this board is always that people are don't match are incompetent professional school students. While some may be, the truth is that every year, there is a sizeable number of university-based, funded, PhD students who don't match. In fact, ancedotally, a lot of the more research-focused ("best") schools have lower match rates than some more balanced schools, likely because there's a limited number of internships that hard-core researchers would be interested in.

 

[FranklinR]

Lazy, or maybe cost-effective is a better way of looking at it, given how how difficult of a time the VA has taking care of all the people they need to. I'm not sure I'd recommend that they'd invest more resources into candidate evaluation when there's an available screening method to use. Seems like those funds could be better used in other ways.

Lazy and cost effective are, in my limited experience, almost always synonyms. And I agree with you.

 

[futureapppsy2]

If you don't match, that doesn't mean you throw standards to the wind and accept a crap internship, even if you are a "hard-core researcher".



Further, empirically (not anecdotal), professional schools match to APA sites at a lower rate. But, the existence of the professional schools in the first place is already a lower standard.



I think it's a little bit of that and also less sites are interested in them because it becomes difficult to convince certain types of sites that you aren't using them as a safety site. It pigeon-holes you to a certain type of internship. It's boom or bust, basically (best or nothing).

I agree. My point was that "professional school student" and "unmatched applicant" are not synonyms.

 

[Cosmo75]

Oh boy, here comes the professional school student who is at an APA approved internship at a VA 😀

First to the OP, the VA isn't the only place that will limit job applicants to those with APA approved internships. Try applying for a post-doc or job at an academic medical center with an APPIC internship. Unless you have connections, you're not likely to get an interview. For people who are interested in private practice or other settings that don't have this standard, no problem.

It is up to the graduate student to know what it means to take a non-APA internship in terms of limitations. I knew that the VA and academic hospitals wouldn't look at me if I went the APPIC only route, so I ONLY applied to APA-approved internships. I was content with not matching and taking another year if I had to versus limiting myself later. My school's DCT tried to talk me out of this and I refused. So she helped me apply strategically to APA internship sites that were more likely to consider a PsyD student. Yes, there certainly is bias at the internship site level. If you read those match stats and see 3 big fat goose eggs for PsyD's the last 3 years, don't be too confident you're going to break that trend and only apply to those sites.

As for the VA limiting the # of psychologists to treat the increasing demands of veterans by limiting to only APA approved internship completers - that's ridiculous. The VA is hiring a lot recently. These jobs are posted for a grand total of 1 to 2 weeks and they receive several applications. If there's any delay in veterans receiving care it's not for lack of qualified individuals applying for these jobs, but the bureaucracy to get people hired (it takes months) and funding issues depending on the VA site. It has nothing to do with there not being enough clinicians with APA approved internships from what I can tell.

 

[PsyDGrrrl]

Try applying for a post-doc or job at an academic medical center with an APPIC internship. Unless you have connections, you're not likely to get an interview.

Not true.

Additionally, you can get ABPP certified with an APPIC internship, and ABPP trumps APA accredited internship in most cases.

 

[Cosmo75]

Not true.

Additionally, you can get ABPP certified with an APPIC internship, and ABPP trumps APA accredited internship in most cases.

I was going off of the post-doc listings I've been reading in medical centers in my city. So perhaps this is a geographic thing and there are places that won't put "APA internship required" in their job listings. Most of them don't even list the PsyD as an option, though don't exclude it either. So maybe that's just a matter of ad space 😀

 

[Friend of Jung]

The fact that someone with an APPIC Internship can become ABPP certified, a prestigious certification, but still not be eligeable for to work for the V.A. because of the APA Internship requirement illustrates my point, e.g. that the APA requirement is a discriminatory practice that likely eliminates some very well qualified applicants.

 

[psychmama]

Hello there! More of you professional school people should be seeking APA approved internships. Especially, those out in Cali, who seem to think location trumps standards all day long.

I couldn't not respond -- 21 students from my psyd program applied for internship this year, and 100% of us matched to APA approved internships. So you see, there's hope for us professional school people yet.😉

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Perhaps ABPP should adopt the VA criteria.

Of course, it's a discriminatory practice. We do that whenever we hire anyone. Is it an unfair practice? Not really.

ABPP isn't something that everyone should be able to get....as it is SUPPOSE to weed out people. While some see it as discriminatory, it is akin to an Ivy League picking and choosing who they want, as lowering their standard does not serve the institution in the long run.

Disclosure: I am coming from a University-based prof. program. I think the standard should be APA, and any program who can't meet that level should be reduced/cut completely.

 

[PsyDGrrrl]

ABPP isn't something that everyone should be able to get....as it is SUPPOSE to weed out people. While some see it as discriminatory, it is akin to an Ivy League picking and choosing who they want, as lowering their standard does not serve the institution in the long run.

And not everyone can get ABPP. It does weed out people, as it is supposed to.