What if PSLF truly comes to fruition? Thoughts? Attitudes?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

BuckeyeLove

Forensic Psychologist
10+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2014
Messages
910
Reaction score
1,601
Hi All,
So I’m wondering what some of your thoughts, more globally, are on the idea of Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF). The reason I ask, is that in the past when it has come up, it seems that there has been a multilayered response. On the face of it, many of the sentiments expressed are of a doubtful nature (i.e., “I doubt it will stay around that long,” “Why would you trust the government?” “Administrations and congresses change all of the time and it is unlikely this will stick around.”) However, beneath these observed responses, there also seems to be an attitude (and maybe this is just me projecting) and almost a hope from some, that it does not actually come to fruition. I have hypotheses as to why folks would hope that this does not come to pass (i.e., taxpayers having to foot the bill, promulgating a generation of the already entitled to further entitlement and what that cost might be down the line, personal accountability with borrowing, further perpetuation of diploma mills, etc…) However, let’s say for the sake of discussion, the government actually goes through with it as it stands now, offering tax-free, loan forgiveness for 10 years of service and on time payments. And I know there has been a budget proposal to cap at approx 60 grand, but let’s still go with if it’s not capped. What are yall's thoughts on if this actual starts to happen? Would you be writing your senators and representatives in order to get it changed? Could it lead to the Argosys/Alliants becoming more prevalent and the field becoming further marginalized? It seems that this will be something that has the potential to be a HUGE issue come the next pres election.

Personally, I’ve always found it a bit paradoxical regarding psychologists and PSLF, with the idea that a public service job is a bad gig (and one in which MD's and psychologists alike could abuse and take advantage of PSLF). I think it is a fair assumption to state that many of the best jobs a clinical psychologist can have are within governmental bounds (usually including good salaries, not very high stress, excellent benefits, etc…). I am currently in talks for a government job myself, which will afford me the opportunity to pursue two forms of private practice work as well. However, I’ve got some debt, and if after 10 years’ time I still have some left to take care of (I‘m hopeful that’s not going to be the case), I can’t honestly say that I will be all up in arms to protest and say “Hey government don’t do that! It’s not fair to John Q Taxpayer!” Maybe that’s me being selfish/naïve…I don’t know. But at the same time, if I already have it paid off at that time, I probably won’t be happy about my taxes further perpetuating all of the bad that could potentially come with this kind of legislation. Either way, since it seems that many of the folks I’ve talked to that come out with massive amounts of debt from professional schools are hoping this comes to pass, I figured it might be worth discussing. Many of whom I’ve talked with this about are essentially BANKING on PSLF happening, which to me is irrational and potentially worrisome regarding judgment as a whole.
 
Last edited:
I'm not familiar with the program/legislation, but (at least on the surface) it seems that this would increase the number of students taking on excessive amounts of debt at FSPS programs. Since it's entirely feasible to receive graduate training in clinical psychology while incurring little to no debt, it seems like a waste of money to forgive the debt of people who knowingly attended graduate programs that required them to take out $$$.

If I understand correctly, this forgiveness would be contingent on having made minimum payments for ten years, so this would likely have the biggest effect on graduates of FSPS programs who have tens of thousands of dollars in debt. There is no shortage of psychologists coming from solid, funded programs who have minimal debt, so why bother forgiving the debt of people who paid a premium for sub-par training? Also, aren't there several loan forgiveness programs already in effect (NHSC comes to mind).
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind that this isn't just for psychology either, this will have the same effect on all of healthcare. If we can get more and more less qualified providers, then we can get them to work for less and less. It is all in the name of improving access to healthcare so it sounds great to the average person. Who doesn't want to improve access? Soon we will be able to get all of our health needs taken care of at Walmart by licensed professionals who get paid peanuts. I can't wait.
 
This is a hard position for me to take as I have a ridiculous amount in PsyD debt. However, I agree with the posters so far that there are enough good programs in existence without the need to 'give an out' for students who just want to be "doctors."
 
Last edited:
This seems pretty much the definition of the proverbial band-aid on a broken leg (the broken leg being crushing levels of student debt and often limited job prospects). I don't fault anyone for taking advantage of it when its there, but I think its a ridiculous idea. I'm a FAR cry from a fiscal conservative, but it drives me crazy to see funding going towards things like this when there are much better ways the funding could be used (like putting back much of the government support for universities that used to exist so state colleges won't have to charge for $25,000/year?).

I hate to see higher education just become a ROI analysis since there is far more to it than finances, but I think some semblance of realism is needed. We move further and further away from that in the interest of corporate profits and rather than fixing it, we're just working to throw the balance even more out of whack.
 
I also dont blame those who take advantage at the individual level. However, I think the culture of "a man pays his debts" is vastly preferable to one that promotes borrowing so grossly above ones means.
 
Last edited:
Just remember folks, the money comes from somewhere. As Ollie said, I'd rather it go to things that will actually spur the economy as a whole, public education, our crumbling infrastructure, reinvesting in public research, etc.
 
Typically what I see is a call to restrict supply of psychologist, which is assumed to create an increased or stabilized demand. This strategy will not be effective so long as MA level providers can provide the vast majority of services that doctoral level providers have in their quiver.

Compare the BLS number of counselors (n=~166,00), clinical social workers (n=~114,000), to the number of psychologist (n=~104,000).
 
Increasing supply and debt load when there is no shortage is not an effective strategy either. Our money and efforts are better spent in lobbying to keep certain services billable only by certain providers, as the npsych practice organization has been working on, with some states adopting billing rules that only board certified clinicians can bill for certain services.
 
It is my hypothesis that many people choose to pursue this profession as a means to get some unmet emotional need for themselves without having to actually seek treatment.

Usually people on here call me arrogant for suggesting this, which doesn't really address the hypothesis.
 
Top