Will Only Non-Regionally Accredited MFT Program Be a Bad Idea?

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

In my case (please skim bkgrnd info), would a non-regionally accredited MFT program be a bad idea?

  • Total voters
    17
neutralpalatte said:
I know many people in California (both the Bay Area and LA) with thriving practices. I will have a strong niche, so I know I will be fine.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, lake woebegone reasoning. That could never disappoint. ;)

The poster in that thread practices in LA.
 
neutralpalatte said:
I know many people in California (both the Bay Area and LA) with thriving practices. I will have a strong niche, so I know I will be fine. Also, the link you posted, the person states they live in NY.

Funny how that link mentions "Meanwhile, one of my colleagues has hired a hot chick he just wants to be around as a "sober coach" in his office." because I am a young attractive female and make a living off my looks, so looks like a win/win for me lol.
Click to expand...

You said you didn't want to go to Argosy for another 15 years, correct? So you will be older then. But you will have a degree from Argosy. Sounds like a lose-lose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Members don't see this ad :)
neutralpalatte I am not talking to directly you because you said you will be ignoring me.

You know, someone mentioned he was a troll, but I don't think he is. Due to his reportedly successful business, I feel like he has just become pretentious on top of his already defensive and narcissistic personality. Basically, he is an arrogant assh@le in his 20s - though I can relate to this. If he would listen to me I would tell him that psychologist is not something you can try work around, there is a reason people on an "online" forum are suggesting he should go to a decent and in-ground university. Oh well... I wish I he was reading this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This is a very attractive young woman, haven't you been paying attention? Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
K nothing else for me to write here lol. I am indeed a young attractive female, indeed in Los Angeles, and this has definitely shown me that I will clearly have an advantage being a self-employed LMFT. Will proceed with my original plans and it likely won't affect the outcome of any future program(s) I decide to do, but likely don't HAVE to do a longer one (PsyD) with the rate things are going in the MFT/PsyD directions and with the way insurance reimburses.

Thank you to all the helpful posters :)
 
PsychBiker said:
neutralpalatte I am not talking to directly you because you said you will be ignoring me.

You know, someone mentioned he was a troll, but I don't think he is. Due to his reportedly successful business, I feel like he has just become pretentious on top of his already defensive and narcissistic personality. Basically, he is an arrogant assh@le in his 20s - though I can relate to this. If he would listen to me I would tell him that psychologist is not something you can try work around, there is a reason people on an "online" forum are suggesting he should go to a decent and in-ground university. Oh well... I wish I he was reading this.
Click to expand...

I was one of the people that called her a troll, and I now rescind that. After reading more of her posts, I completely agree with you. When I lived in LA, narcissistic assh@les like this were ubiquitous. But oh well, she is ignoring you, probably too busy looking in the mirror.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
As I tell students, make sure you see a therapist of your own for at least a year before you become a therapist yourself.

My bad, sorry I called you a "he." Initially, I almost said he or she, but the amount of arrogance i've seen in you is not as common in women - well, at least I can admit when I am wrong.
 
In California there are no "bros"...only "bras." This is important to the people in this strange land.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
siamesekitten said:
I was one of the people that called her a troll, and I now rescind that. After reading more of her posts, I completely agree with you. When I lived in LA, narcissistic assh@les like this were ubiquitous. But oh well, she is ignoring you, probably too busy looking in the mirror.
Click to expand...

Its no secret that attraction/"sex" rules the world. This is the basis of being human, and anyone who denies this is in for a big reality check. So yes, lets imply that the girl that has a job making a good living off her looks is dumb. Beauty and intelligence are not opposite ends of the spectrum, and I suppose they are actually more often clustered together than opposing. Having these attributes and being honest about making a living from it doesn't make someone narcissistic. Its called honesty, reality, and how the cards were dealt. Facts of life. You can hate the players of a game, but its pointless and you're better off hating the actual game (which will also do you no good). I didn't invent the game, I just play using what I was given lol. I can't be faulted for that and any advancements that the cards dealt have or will give me. This is just life.

Just my thoughts.
 
Last edited:
Why be a fraud though?

Why not replace the bookshelf picture with a vag one?
 
psych84 said:
Why be a fraud though?

Why not replace the bookshelf picture with a vag one?
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with anything. First, "sex sells" doesn't even mean vadge. Mainstream modeling is still selling sex. Lets think here. The entire backbone of the advertising or even the music industry, for example, is sex. In my case, my looks are my job, but its not like I should just ignore or deny it in order to not appear narcissistic. I'm not narcissistic. I'm just honest about my occupation and how life works. So yes, lets tear down conventionally attractive women and reduce them down to a vadge in order to make ourselves feel better. If you're conventionally pretty, you most certainly can't like books or have attended college. /Sarcasm.

Thanks again to those who were helpful :)
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
neutralpalatte said:
K nothing else for me to write here lol. I am indeed a young attractive female, indeed in Los Angeles, and this has definitely shown me that I will clearly have an advantage being a self-employed LMFT. Will proceed with my original plans and it likely won't affect the outcome of any future program(s) I decide to do, but likely don't HAVE to do a longer one (PsyD) with the rate things are going in the MFT/PsyD directions and with the way insurance reimburses.

Thank you to all the helpful posters :)
Click to expand...

I hate to tell you this, but the field is mostly young women and many of them are very attractive. Attractiveness may give you an edge, but I doubt it will make you really stand out. Especially when you work with people who doubt your competence because you're an attractive young woman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Anyone else just want the people who start these threads to stay away from vulnerable patients? :(:confused:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
neutralpalatte said:
That has nothing to do with anything. First, "sex sells" doesn't even mean vadge. Mainstream modeling is still selling sex. Lets think here. The entire backbone of the advertising or even the music industry, for example, is sex. In my case, my looks are my job, but its not like I should just ignore or deny it in order to not appear narcissistic. I'm not narcissistic. I'm just honest about my occupation and how life works. So yes, lets tear down conventionally attractive women and reduce them down to a vadge in order to make ourselves feel better. If you're conventionally pretty, you most certainly can't like books or have attended college. /Sarcasm.

Thanks again to those who were helpful :)
Click to expand...

Look, this is a psychology forum. It's a field filled with gorgeous women, nobody is tearing them down. Let me repeat that, it's a field filled with gorgeous women. If you're going to do well then you're going to have to supply something other than sex appeal and technically being qualified for your job. When you're looking for a job, you won't be competing with adequately trained Freud lookalikes, you'll be competing with well trained individuals who are also beautiful.

Also, I've been lurking for a while and this thread hurts me (an attractive woman) so much that I had to join and reply. Hooray for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Considering this is a forum full of attractive young women, I have ask where is all the evidence? Pics?

Sorry, I had to say that, this is an "online" forum after all.

Misogyny aside, 80% of my current colleagues are women and a great deal are overtly attractive (40%?), so saying you are an attractive woman is nothing special.
 
I think some of this posters comments are great examples of how environment, and dare I say geography, influence beliefs about the world. The superficial belief/view that "sex rules the world" and that one's looks will serve them in ALL professions because people are focused on YOU is consistent with being emersed/raised in a culture that both implicitly and explicitly teaches and reinforces this. Believe it or not, this is not a universal belief and many people in other areas of this country are raised on values other than sex. Trust me, this is 12 years of Catholic school talking here. :)

I would probably be a little bit more open to the original posters goals if we were hearing less about "me, me, me" and more about a desire to become a well trained, compassionate, scientifically oriented, ethical therapist or psychologist. However, all I have heard thus far is that you are only interested in learning what you want to learn (not the way grad school works and not an attitude appealing to professors) and "business," "entrepreneur" "niche" and that your attractiveness will give you an edge. These are are very ME oriented. A little too much so at this point. You are having a conversation with practicing psychologists in this thread. Psychologists who sit on admissions committees. Psychologists who run internship and practicum training programs. Trust in our experience when we say that your attitude will need to change here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
neutralpalatte said:
I've been a lurker here for a number of years, and have read majority of threads on MFT and PsyD programs, but haven't seen this topic really covered:

If I were to complete a non-regionally accredited MFT program (nationally accredited only) and get my MFT license, would that hinder my future ability to get into a PsyD or PHD program in clinical psych, down the line? I know they can be competitive, but I would probably end up going to a professional school like Argosy if I did end up getting a PsyD. So would this, in any way, hinder my ability to do so?


Background: I'm really interested in Jungian and transpersonal psychology, and would like to complete a MS in counseling psych eligible for licensing. I previously attended the Institute Of Transpersonal Psychology (now called Sofia University), but didn't really care for the Masters program I was in, and the distance MFT program is 4 years long (too long). The program was just full of busy work, and I would have rather done it more as independent study (read a lot & then reflect) rather than be forced to do busywork with my cohort. Tuition is also high there. I have about a year worth of transferable credits (since ITP/Sofia is regionally accredited) as electives, so theres that.

I live in California, so World University in Ojai (happens to be a distance program, which I want) covers both my interests, and also means I'm eligible for LMFT after completion + hours in the state of California despite it only being nationally accredited.

I could attend Pacifica Graduate Institute, but the tuition seems insane ~$50k versus ~$12k at World U. Pacifica is regionally accredited, however, which means maybe in the future I could transfer some of the credits should I enter an advanced-standing PsyD program for those who already have an MFT degree.

However, I still can't really justify the cost for Pacifica because most other states don't have reciprocity laws for MFTs. I don't think I'll leave California, but I guess you never know.

I don't want to do a MSW program because a.) I don't like the coursework, and b.) I plan to stay self-employed forever so it won't matter if I opt for MFT. I'm self-employed right now in a really lucrative field, and the only thing I'd leave it for down the line is to be a therapist (MFT) or psychologist (PsyD). I feel like, as an entrepreneur, an MFT license or even just the MS in counseling will be really marketable for me. So the MFT program is more of a hobby than something I *HAVE* to have right this moment, and I know a lot of other people are not in that boat.


Thoughts?
Click to expand...
After re-reading through this, it strikes me that you have no idea of what it means to be any type of licensed mental health professional. Regardless of our level of training and career path in the field, we all bear an awesome amount of responsibility to our patients and the general public. I don't know if you really do have such a cavalier attitude about this, but it definitely comes across as such in your post. Since you are not reading this board anymore, I am posting this so that other students coming here to post their questions will understand why the criticisms for this type of thinking are often so harsh.
 
But you don't seem very serious about attaining the proper knowledge and competency if you want to take these shortcuts and get a second rate education.
cara susanna said:
I hate to tell you this, but the field is mostly young women and many of them are very attractive. Attractiveness may give you an edge, but I doubt it will make you really stand out. Especially when you work with people who doubt your competence because you're an attractive young woman.
Click to expand...

And attractive young men. I have a phat ass. Don't think I won't be using it to my advantage, neutralpalatte. :D
 
Wow, I was totally joking. I'm not surprised that she created this thread with her decision already made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
CaliMac said:
Poll? Clue in the clueless, please.
Click to expand...

The OP put a poll at the beginning of the thread, "do you think I need an accredited program" or something. Nine people said yes, one person said no. T4C asked who the dissenter was, and I was explaining if you click on the "nine" next to "yes", it will show you all the posters who voted "yes", and if you click on the "one" next to "no", it will show the one poster who voted "no," which happened to be the OP, lol.

PsychBiker said:
Wow, I was totally joking. I'm not surprised that she created this thread with her decision already made.
Click to expand...

not surprised either...I bet she voted right after she put up the poll, before anybody even responded, lol.
 
1. I often want to speak up when I see my patients sucked into these no name, dime a dozen, often online, for profit degree mills. Veterans seem particularly vulnerable to the marketing given their level of unemployment/underemployment. I don't think most of them understand that education in the civilian sector is viewed much differently than it is in the military and is generally only one of a dozen variables that employers are looking at. In my experience, the military simply cares that you have it (the degree). Most civilian jobs need to see evidence of actual skill application/achievement and/or work experience. Not mention the fact that in the civilian sector you are often competing with other highly educated individuals, thus the degree/education itself caries less weight than personality and relevant work experience.

2. Blind refusal or ignorance (whichever it is) to acknowledge the inequities in higher education that have resulted from catering to "working professionals" and/or "nontraditional students" is demonstrative that the functional end goal is now becoming secondary to the "idea" of simply having a degree.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Interestingly, I noticed a lack of demands to "be nice" or to let the OP's heart guide her, or whatever, on this thread.

I suppose everyone has their limits, though. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
siamesekitten said:
The OP put a poll at the beginning of the thread, "do you think I need an accredited program" or something. Nine people said yes, one person said no.
Click to expand...

Thanks- it doesn't show on the app version so I missed it until I changed views.

It's like there's another world of SDN waiting, invisible, in the background but if I login from my desktop I will simply never work!
 
MCParent said:
Interestingly, I noticed a lack of demands to "be nice" or to let the OP's heart guide her, or whatever, on this thread.

I suppose everyone has their limits, though. ;)
Click to expand...

Good point. Whenever there are these debates about online schools or FSPS or whatever, I feel that there is no need to be rude, and I am rarely snarky on this board, but her posts really brought out my bad side!!
 
Just thought I would check in since so many of you keep posting non-stop lol.

1.) Ended up talking to my old research/psychologist/mentor who was a university professor, independently practicing psychologist, and researcher. She definitely confirmed that it does NOT matter where you attend as long as its accredited, but that regional accreditation doesn't matter if its a terminal degree that leads to licensing (MFT, which is what I'm after). It still leads to licensing, and that is the only thing that matters if you want to go into private practice. As far as PsyD goes (something, like I said, I'm NOT pursuing anytime soon), she said the only thing that matters is that it is APA accredited (which lots of professional schools are, like Argosy) regardless of other accreditation. Many of the students that studied or practiced under her, as I mentioned before, did indeed attend Argosy and now have flourishing private practices. Hefty price tag, but they could pay for it and got what they wanted out of the program.
2.) Ended up emailing with several graduates of the program I was looking at, who are also successful and happy with their choice. Many people have attended the three schools I listed. They don't only have online coursework. And if you have a problem with it, go talk to the regional accreditation board, the APA, and the license-granting board for LMFTs.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but distance learning IS the new norm. I once had a professor that refused to accept anything via email and said we had to call him with questions or schedule a meeting after class. He was just... outdated and refused to keep with the times. Distance learning is the new norm. Of course distance coursework limits networking opportunities (the #1 job factor in today's economy), but that's irrelevant for someone who is really driven and will do that kind of thing anyway. And doesn't even matter if you want to go into private practice because you're your own boss, and you can still network on your own.

Even USC, basically a west coast ivy (<--- can't wait for people to bitch at that comment lol), just started offering a MSW program 100% online (which I'd love if it had MFT coursework instead). This is the future and the way things are headed. And remember, just because a program offers coursework online, it doesn't mean they don't also offer coursework in person.

Lastly, the article posted above about Everest college or whatever being just as marketable as non-degree holders... That article has nothing to do with me. My program will 100% lead to me licensing (LMFT), which will lead me to my goal of private practice. I know I can always make way more money, have way more input, and more autonomy as someone that is self-employed, so there isn't any "employer" who would be hiring me. And I will have a license like any other LMFT. Its irrelevant. Your articles and posts having nothing to do with my path lol, but thank you to those that actually were helpful.

My attitude will not change, as I have done nothing wrong, and its not my fault if others care lol. Other people's opinions of me are not my business, not my problem. I am just stating the facts, and am confident in all my choices and abilities, and this will not change. I don't know why you guys filled up a whole page with comments stating that what I look like will hurt my practice? You care way too much lol. You guys, in the first place, started saying "its a flooded industry, here is the current state!" and linked to that post of a guy with a wilting practice talking about how his hot coworker gets all this business just for being hot. All I was doing was commenting on that, I didn't just pull that comment out of my ass. And I could care less what others think. My confidence, ambition, interests, and great business sense will take me wherever I want to go, and I won't change that just because 3 people on the internet ~*have a problem with it*~.

I'm very happy with my choice, as the three schools I listed (one of which I already physically attended) are basically the ONLY schools that offer coursework in transpersonal, depth, and jungian psychology. There are a couple other schools, but they are on the same wavelength (small, private, etc) and focus more on other areas than I'd like to focus on.
 
Last edited:
You've completely missed the point. It's not about accreditation, its about the likelihood of you being a "good" psychologist. Let me explain it in some random numbers:

If you go to professional school (like Argosy) which is APA accredited, you have a 75% chance of being a "good" psychologist.

If you go to public university (for example) which is APA accredited, you have a 90% chance of being a "good" psychologist.

Think of it as an investment; if we assume everything is the same (and just assume this for now), you can decide between an interest rate of 3.2% or 3.6% for your retirement. Why would you choose 3.2% if everything else is the same? Yes, in the end, you will still have a decent amount saved for retirement, but with 3.6% you will be much better off.

This is what decades of combined experience is trying to explain to you - you have a much better chance of being an amazing psychologist if you go to a public university.

Make a smart investment for your future.
 
PsychBiker said:
You've completely missed the point. It's not about accreditation, its about the likelihood of you being a "good" psychologist. Let me explain it in some random numbers:

If you go to professional school (like Argosy) which is APA accredited, you have a 75% chance of being a "good" psychologist.

If you go to public university (for example) which is APA accredited, you have a 90% chance of being a "good" psychologist.

Think of it as an investment; if we assume everything is the same (and just assume this for now), you can decide between an interest rate of 3.2% or 3.6% for your retirement. Why would you choose 3.2% if everything else is the same? Yes, in the end, you will still have a decent amount saved for retirement, but with 3.6% you will be much better off.

This is what decades of combined experience is trying to explain to you - you have a much better chance of being an amazing psychologist if you go to a public university.

Make a smart investment for your future.
Click to expand...

No, you have completely missed the point. I want to go into a MFT (therapist) program (NOT PsyD, psychologist), which means NO Argosy. I never even once stated I was enrolling in Argosy for MFT. And anyway, using your logic, there are ZERO PsyD programs in California at public schools. But I'm not here to talk about PsyDs.

For MFT, I want to focus on transpersonal, depth, and Jungian psychology. There are no other schools besides the 3 I listed + Sonoma State and Saybrook that offer this. Sonoma State IS public, and a lot of their faculty also concurrently or previously taught at the other colleges I listed.

Also, where you go to school is, in NO way correlated to how good of a therapist you will be. If you're going to say that, you may as well throw in where you received your Bachelors degree too HIGHLY matters (and it doesn't), and how about your high school diploma also? No. It has to do with personality, aptitude, personal interests, resources (money + time) to explore with, ability to run a business (self-employment), marketing (self-employment), compassion, previous experiences, and effort. Sure, school matters a small bit, but in reality (and in the long run), not so much.

I'm done replying to you personally as you don't read and then just make weird comments.
 
Last edited:
neutralpalatte said:
And I could care less what others think. My confidence, ambition, interests, and great business sense will take me wherever I want to go
Click to expand...

When I have a plan that I'm really, truly confident will "take me wherever I want to go," I create an Internet poll about it.

When a landslide vote and dozens of written opinions say that it could hinder my entry into a profession, I explain that I don't care what anyone else thinks anyway.

neutral, we've all made decisions based on wishful thinking; I certainly have. I believe going to an unaccredited state-approved school for an MFT master's, hoping to potentially go on to an APA doctorate in psychology, would be based on wishful thinking as you describe it here.

By the way, you're wrong to describe California state approval to grant degrees as "accreditation" but not regional accreditation. State approval ≠ accreditation. The Illinois Board of Higher Education explains it well and succinctly; the same is true in California:

Illinois Board of Higher Education said:
People are often confused between accreditation and state approval. Quite simply, accreditation is a function that is voluntary. State approval is a different matter.
Click to expand...
Consumer Information: State Approval, Accreditation & Licensure
 
Last edited:
Have fun with your unaccredited MFT program or your incredible expensive psyd program. Enjoy being in debt while I'll graduate with zero debt. Live and learn, right? Best of luck.
 
chartero said:
When I have a plan that I'm really, truly confident will "take me wherever I want to go," I create an Internet poll about it.

When a landslide vote and dozens of written opinions say that it could hinder my entry into a profession, I explain that I don't care what anyone else thinks anyway.

neutral, we've all made decisions based on wishful thinking; I certainly have. I believe going to an unaccredited state-approved school for an MFT master's, hoping to potentially go on to an APA doctorate in psychology, would be based on wishful thinking as you describe it here.

By the way, you're wrong to describe California state approval to grant degrees as "accreditation" but not regional accreditation. State approval ≠ accreditation. The Illinois Board of Higher Education explains it well and succinctly; the same is true in California:


Consumer Information: State Approval, Accreditation & Licensure
Click to expand...

I came here looking for people who had personally done this before. I didn't come here for validation that what I'm doing is a good or bad idea. I was hoping people would use their brains a little and only respond if they had done the same, or personally knew someone who had done the same. Not just throwing out random holier-than-thou opinions based on the schools I have and will attend. I asked, the entire time, for hard links and data.

Since I ended up getting nothing of substance out of this thread, I went on and looked on LinkedIn as well as tapped my personal contacts from the regionally-accredited MFT program I did attend and my prior research position. I contacted people who had attended, and many actually DID go on to receive PhDs and PsyDs. Many did not, but many also obviously wanted a terminal MFT program. And that's all I wanted to know. Case closed. :)

The program I posted is accredited. Its nationally accredited. But it still allows you sit for your MFT license in the state of California (where I live) upon completion + the 3,000 required supervised hours. And just so you know, I already attended ITP/Sofia and it IS regionally accredited. That coursework transfers, and PsyD programs typically only allow 30 credits to transfer anyway, so it works out perfect. I'm not in debt, the program is only 9k for the credits I still need, I have money in the bank, and like I said before, I don't know why you are all making snide comments about PsyD programs because I'm NOT applying for that LOL.

Anyway, just wanted to report back in case anyone else digs and discovers this thread with the same question!
 
neutralpalatte said:
I contacted people who had attended, and many actually DID go on to receive PhDs and PsyDs.
Click to expand...
From APA programs? The source you trust above "said the only thing that matters is that it is APA accredited."

neutralpalatte said:
The program I posted is accredited. Its nationally accredited.
Click to expand...
This is false and materially so. "Nationally accredited" means accredited by an accrediting agency "of national scope" that isn't a regional, that is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education [their FAQs about accreditation] and/or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). An example of a national accreditation agency is the Distance Education and Training Council (DETC); an example of a school it accredits is Cal Southern.

A simple test of your proposition that World University in Ojai is accredited: By whom? Can you name the national accreditor? Is it a recognized accreditation agency with DOED or CHEA?

In fact, no recognized regional or national accreditor accredits World University in Ojai as far as I can tell.
 
This thread is now about Pudding, a resident Fox at the National Fox Welfare Society - he's too friendly to be released back to the wild.

902x600xpu-1.jpg.pagespeed.ic.IgO_h9z3Qw.jpg


http://www.viralspell.com/say-hello...welfare-society-wait-til-you-see-his-friends/
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
neutralpalatte said:
Just thought I would check in since so many of you keep posting non-stop lol.

As far as PsyD goes (something, like I said, I'm NOT pursuing anytime soon), she said the only thing that matters is that it is APA accredited (which lots of professional schools are, like Argosy) regardless of other accreditation. Many of the students that studied or practiced under her, as I mentioned before, did indeed attend Argosy and now have flourishing private practices. Hefty price tag, but they could pay for it and got what they wanted out of the program.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming that this professor completed her training before the internship crisis.
 
cara susanna said:
I'm assuming that this professor completed her training before the internship crisis.
Click to expand...

Again, it does not matter, AT ALL honestly if you plan to go straight into private practice like I do. You can also go to a non-professional school and not get a good internship match. I have seen that happen to people who went to a non-professional school, and I have read posts on that even on this board.

Also, surprise surprise, that is completely irrelevant because I'm not applying for a PsyD for the millionth time. I'm finishing MFT and may not even choose to ever do a PsyD. Who knows.
 
neutralpalatte said:
Again, it does not matter, AT ALL honestly if you plan to go straight into private practice like I do.
Click to expand...

1. How will you get your 3,000 supervised hours and 104wk worth of supervision?
Hint: Few if any businesses want to hire an unlicensed clinician because they cannot bill for the time. Some places may let them volunteer or work for peanuts, but they have the advantage because you need them much more than they need you.

2. How long will that take?
Hint: 2-3+ years.

3. Will you end up paying someone for those hours?
Hint: Mostly like yes. An hour of supervision can be quite pricey too.

4. Will there be a line out the door once you hang a shingle, or will you have to market and promote yourself for months/years to build up your practice?
Hint: It often takes people 1-2+ years to build a sustainable practice, assuming they avoid bankruptcy during the first year. Saturated markets like CA will have thousands of different types of providers fighting for the same pool of people.
 
chartero said:
From APA programs? The source you trust above "said the only thing that matters is that it is APA accredited."


This is false and materially so. "Nationally accredited" means accredited by an accrediting agency "of national scope" that isn't a regional, that is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education [their FAQs about accreditation] and/or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). An example of a national accreditation agency is the Distance Education and Training Council (DETC); an example of a school it accredits is Cal Southern.

A simple test of your proposition that World University in Ojai is accredited: By whom? Can you name the national accreditor? Is it a recognized accreditation agency with DOED or CHEA?

In fact, no recognized regional or national accreditor accredits World University in Ojai as far as I can tell.
Click to expand...

First of all, it doesn't matter if its accredited or not. It 100% for a fact leads to LMFT licensing in the state of California, upon completion + 3,000 supervised hours. I talked to people who did that exact program who did in fact become licensed.

Second, cntrl + f "world university"
http://www.cpec.ca.gov/Links/LinksSubPage.ASP?LinkType=C

Third, cntrl + f "world university"
http://www.bbs.ca.gov/app-reg/mft_appr_schools.shtml

"The U.S. Department of Education does not accredit educational institutions and/or programs. However, the Secretary of Education is required by law to publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies that the Secretary determines to be reliable authorities as to the quality of education or training provided by the institutions of higher education and the higher education programs they accredit. The U.S. Secretary of Education also recognizes State agencies for the approval of public postsecondary vocational education and nurse education. "

Fourth, I don't know why you care about such trivial things in other people's lives.

I think its good to have this information out there for people who may come looking for it via google, so I felt like replying.
 
Last edited:
Therapist4Chnge said:
1. How will you get your 3,000 supervised hours and 104wk worth of supervision?
Hint: Few if any businesses want to hire an unlicensed clinician because they cannot bill for the time. Some places may let them volunteer or work for peanuts, but they have the advantage because you need them much more than they need you.

2. How long will that take?
Hint: 2-3+ years.

3. Will you end up paying someone for those hours?
Hint: Mostly like yes. An hour of supervision can be quite pricey too.

4. Will there be a line out the door once you hang a shingle, or will you have to market and promote yourself for months/years to build up your practice?
Hint: It often takes people 1-2+ years to build a sustainable practice, assuming they avoid bankruptcy during the first year. Saturated markets like CA will have thousands of different types of providers fighting for the same pool of people.
Click to expand...

1.) EVERY MFT program in existance requires this! This is not something specific to this school. This is what is required in the state of California in order to get your MFT license. You intern. That's what you do. You can even do it while in school. I know other practicing therapists as well, though not as many in LA as in the Bay Area.

2.) Duh

3.) Likely no. And if yes, who cares? I have $$$. Also, EVERY person in existence who wants an MFT license no matter what program or school they attend, has to go through this exact process. So why is this an issue?

4.) I have a good niche. I'm not going into detail here, but I know it will work out well for me. I also have connections here, as I am good at networking.
Additionally, I can continue running my small businesses while I am building a practice so I will still have steady income coming in. I would just have less time to focus on those businesses. They are already successful.
And, I live in Los Angeles where the $$$ keeps flowing lol. There are a lot of wealthy people (and also in the Bay Area where I used to live), so I think I will be fine. Its not like I'm in some small rural midwestern city or something. Though quite saturated with practitioners, it is not a poor area at all, and I am good at marketing.
Lastly, this experience won't be unique to ME just because of the school I went to. This is something EVERY LMFT would go through.
...And why are you trying to talk someone out of their passions/skills again...?
 
neutralpalatte said:
There are a lot of wealthy people (and also in the Bay Area where I used to live), so I think I will be fine.
Click to expand...

So...why would they go to you with 0 yrs of experience when they can go to someone else with 20+ yrs experience? Maybe you plan on billing through insurance, though it sounds like you want to have cash pay clients lining up outside of your door willing to pay $$ for your services. I can appreciate aiming high, but this is not a very realistic goal for anyone coming out of school and planning for their first paid employment as a licensed professional. You can take or leave this feedback, but it comes from someone who has spoken/presented professionally on the topic and consulted with a range of different types of private practice/offices (in medicine and also mental health).

neutralpalatte said:
...And why are you trying to talk someone out of their passions/skills again...?
Click to expand...

Everything I have read thus far in your comments comes off as very naive and dismissive of some very real training and ethical considerations brought up by a number of posters. Developing personal and professional insight and awareness are important aspects to ethical practice and frankly I don't get that feeling when I read your posts. I hope if you do choose to go down this path that you work with supervisors who are well grounded in the ethical and training standards, which are required to avoid doing harm when working with patients.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

psychstudentgrad2024
Questions about MFT programs and practicums in California
Replies
6
Views
467
R. Matey
R. Matey
P
MFT Job Outlook and Opportunities
Replies
4
Views
1K
psychstudentgrad2024
psychstudentgrad2024
jay73sun
View of the MFT field on the internet vs in reality
Replies
9
Views
2K
Lukewarm Counselor
Lukewarm Counselor
P
MSW Its only been 2 weeks and I'm considering dropping out of my MSW program
Replies
19
Views
4K
MrFahrenheit
M
P
Loma Linda MFT Program
Replies
0
Views
1K
postbacgeek
P
Top