Article archive / October 2018
Originally published: . Volume 9, No. 10. Source pages: 7.
For over hundred years, the profession of psychology has advocated an appropriate level of training necessary to independently, and ethically offer services to the public. Heretofore, the educational standard required was a doctorate degree in the related field of practice, in many states. However, some states offer licenses and certification, for the master level provider though the privileges and scope of practice is typically very limited, and usually conducted under close supervision.
As time has passed, and as a consequence of many events, our profession led by the American Psychological Association (APA), has proposed reframing this issue and is now emphasizing the need to franchise master level providers with a greater role in service delivery.
This change in orientation by the APA was necessitated by a United States Supreme Court ruling (North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 2015). In essence, there must be a balance between privileges and training. The ruling indicated that individuals cannot be prohibited from offering services to the public if they have appropriate training. Individual state board prohibitions that are representative of blanket restraint of trade, are now considered illegal. This ruling impacts all professions where mid-level providers are under supervision or are prohibited from practicing.
Several states, such as Texas, have responded to this wind of change. At this moment, Texas is considering a restructuring of its master’s level licensing statutes including independent conduct of psychotherapy and some psychological testing. At this time, to qualify for such privilege’s individuals must complete a more structured training program which is currently under investigation. Those already licensed, and practicing must retake the EPPP and pass with a score of 70 percent to qualify for the new privileges.
The object of contention that must be addressed by each state centers on the scope of practice and the credentials necessary to participate. Doctoral level psychologists are not in agreement with one another on just how extensive privileges should be and how to integrate master level practitioners into the professional environment.
APA is seeking to contribute to this situation by establishing a model training program that will ensure master level individuals will achieve competency. Preliminary work by APA seems to favor a 3- year, 60-hour training program with a rigorous curriculum including practicum and internship. Additionally, there would be a post- graduation supervision requirement with a licensed psychologist. APA is considering accrediting master level programs to ensure consistency of training.
This movement is quickly gaining momentum and each state must seek to define the responsibilities and the degree of independence to be awarded. Louisiana Psychological Association has formed an investigative committee, which is now evaluating how Louisiana will address this issue in the future.
**** [Editor’s Note: Last issue we reported on APA actions, which included: The Board of Educational Affairs (BEA) had formed a task force. The task force shall be charged to outline a plan by which APA could pursue development of an accreditation system for master's programs in health service areas (clinical, counseling, school) of psychology.”
Goals are: 1) Developing a statement that broadly delineates the scope of accreditation for training at the master’s level as contrasted with the current scope at the doctoral level; 2) Prioritizing possible pathways for APA to establish accreditation of master’s programs in psychology; and 3) Identifying the necessary expertise for the accreditation decision-making body.]
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.