Certification, licensing, and the movement of psychologists from state to state.

"The licensing or certification of psychologists… exists to protect the consumer from dangerous or inferior commodities. As an alternative to legislation creating certifying and licensing laws, some states have established nonstatuatory certifying boards." Generally these boards are corporations. A table titled "Some Characteristics of Psychology Laws" lists 26 states and 4 Canadian provinces, the coverage of each law, education requirements, experience requirements, whether examinations are mandatory, whether there is reciprocity, and whether residence is required. A 2nd table titled "Some Characteristics of Nonstatuatory Psychology Provisions" incorporates information under the same major headings. "A study of the laws indicates that with few exceptions the doctorate is required after the initial grand fathering." 2 or more years of experience are required in the majority of states. "An overwhelming majority of statutes requires an examination. Most of the laws cover the use of the title 'Psychologist' and restrict the use of the title to those who hold themselves out to the public as psychologists and request a fee for their services." (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Board certification in psychology: Is it really necessary?

This article poses the question of whether specialty board certification in psychology is truly necessary. The article reviews the basic tenets of board certification and why it should become a requirement beyond the level of independent state or provincial licensing. In addition, the article presents some of the reasons why psychologists may have been reluctant to pursue board certification, as well as some of the pitfalls encountered in the process of becoming certified. Further discussion illuminates the need for psychologists to adhere to rigid requirements for credentialing and not to become prey to ersatz or so-called vanity boards. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Professional mobility for psychologists: Multiple choices, multiple opportunities.

This article details the roots of the mobility movement, including frequent difficulties psychologists encounter when applying for additional licenses and how these obstacles led credentialing organizations to encourage licensing boards to extend a mobility privilege to psychologists who meet certain national standards. The National Register of Health Service Providers in Psychology advocates an inclusive approach to licensure mobility by encouraging psychological organizations and licensing boards to support and adopt multiple mobility mechanisms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Specialty" Licenses in Psychology.

The author discusses his concerns over the consequences of the licensing of psychologists trained in nonclinical academic specialties who present themselves to the public as licensed psychologists with the specific intention of practicing clinical psychology. Wiens and Menne (April 1981) address this issue and dismiss it by reference to a false analogy. The author states that until we face the issue of non-qualified licensed psychologists, we will be justifiably vulnerable to both consumer groups and non-psychological clinicians. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The psychologist as an expert witness in court.

"An important problem in psychology today is the legal status of the psychologist and his relationship to the courts; and of special importance in the position of the psychologist as an expert witness… . There is considerable evidence of the use of psychologists in court cases in the federal courts… " as well as in state courts. "There is… conflicting evidence as to state court opinions on the expertness of testimony given by psychologists… . Once an adequate definition of a psychologist is established by legal authorities… [the problem of the position of the psychologist as an expert witness]… will be much nearer to a solution." Certification or licensing legislation seems to be desirable. 29 references. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Some Comments on "After Legislation".

Comments on Deutsch's article "After Legislation: What Price Psychology?" (see record 1960-00289-001). The current authors suggest that Deutsch places disproportionate emphasis on legislation as a mechanism for enhancing the position of the psychological profession. While coincidental benefits like these are not to be slighted, the primary purpose of such legislation is necessarily the promotion of the public good. Therefore, Deutsch's criticism that certification laws do not really improve the lot of clinical psychologists vis-a-vis the medical profession is, in addition to being debatable, quite beside the major point. Deutsch properly states that it is necessary to balance the debits against the credits in evaluating legislation. The current authors believe that, as far as can now be ascertained, the credits heavily outweigh the debits--provided that the scale employed is one calibrated in terms of the common weal. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychology in the States.

Presents briefs regarding the activities of state psychological associations in the US. Particular attention is paid to the certification and licensing of psychologists by a selection of individual states, and the relevant legislative processes involved. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Licensing and Professional Function.

It is shocking to summarize the ongoing debates on licensing of psychologists and on the relations between psychologists and psychiatrists. We psychologists seem chiefly to place the blame on the psychiatrists for the slow progress in gaining recognition of the professional function of psychologists. I offer a dissent which declares that a restrictive block must be removed from the thinking of psychologists before we are going to get anywhere on the problems of licensing and recognition of professional function. The block is manifested by the efforts of psychologists to imitate psychiatrists and beat them at their own game. This game is the diagnosis and treatment of mental and emotional disorders, illnesses, aberrations, etc. Such diagnosis and treatment involves a mechanistic and concretistic thinking which is proving itself powerless to deal with the behavioral functioning of human individuals in interactive contexts. I am tempted to say "has proven," but there is a sad lack of experimental evidence, for which psychologists must shoulder their share of the blame. For my part, I don't blame psychiatrists for opposing the licensing of psychologists to treat "mental and emotional illnesses." Without realizing it, the psychiatrists are doing us a big favor in warning us away from this fruitless endeavor in which they are themselves experiencing so much heartbreak. We are wasting our time in seeking to crowd with them into a theoretical structure which will not support intense scientific effort. No psychologist should discuss with any citizen the relief of symptoms which are now manifest in the citizen's organic functioning. The psychologist's function should be to teach his interested fellow human beings how to perceive an interpersonal world and interact within that social realm on a more efficient and harmonious basis. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Licensure anachronisms: Is it time for a change?

Practicing independently as a psychologist in the United States requires licensure in each of the 50 states in which one wishes to practice as well as the District of Columbia. Although attempts to establish interstate reciprocity have met with some level of success, psychologists licensed to practice independently in one state have no assurance that other states will recognize and grant equal status. The author's experience of applying for licensure in 3 states is discussed as a way of identifying areas of difficulty encountered by psychologists in this process. Suggestions are made to improve the process so that licensing board activity might be more in line with its designated function, which is the protection of the consumer. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Special Licensing in Psychology.

Licensure is primarily designed to protect the public from unfit practitioners. However, most licensing laws in psychology are generic. Generic licensure assumes that there is a core of knowledge that all professional psychologists should possess and be able to document. In 1977 the New York State Board of Regents, which has jurisdiction over the licensed professions, addressed the issue of identification of specialties in the health professions. The current rules (Licensing of Psychologists in New York State, 1978) state that it is unprofessional conduct to make "claims of professional superiority which cannot be substantiated by the licensee" (p. 17). In effect, since there are no standards, psychologists can list any specialty they wish. Specialty licensing becomes important as advertising among professionals becomes a reality. The public has the right to know which psychologists are telling the truth when they list themselves as having a given specialty. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A note on the registration of psychologists in Canada.

In regards to psychologist certification laws, notes that six provinces in Canada have acts which provide for the registration of psychologists. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Infighting in Psychology: An In-House Proposal.

Currently, many psychologists are experiencing an "embarrassing moment." As a result of licensing, psychologists with master's degrees cannot achieve full guild status (except for "grandfathering") and have been given titles such as "assistant." What is needed is some resolution of the PhD-MA schism, coupled with licensing legislation that delineates what psychologists can do that sister professions are ill equipped to provide and are unlikely to protest. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Certification of psychologists.

During the past year, in discussions of the question of certification of psychologists, I have found that many are not familiar with two important problems associated with the trend of certification of the whole title. One consequence of such certification is that an academic psychologist cannot consult as a psychologist for a fee in his own specialty, however remote from contact with individual patients, without being certified or without in some way circumventing the law. This is a restriction that does not exist for nuclear physicists, physiologists, chemists, or others in any academic area. It stands, as such, as a limitation on traditional academic privileges. A second consequence is that restriction of the whole title creates a situation in which misunderstandings arise with sister disciplines that share subject matter or titles. For example, sociologists have trained persons in and claim competence in social psychology. It is concluded that aside from the issues involved and whether or not there have indeed been blunders, the implication is that the profession would not want to change, right or wrong; it would not be possible to rouse any action that would imply an alteration rather than a compromise with the current situation. What is disturbing is that considering the self-conscious concern with ethics in psychology, this seems to be a rather cynical view of the profession. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Recognizing concerns about how some licensing boards are treating psychologists.

This article posits that practitioners in some geographical jurisdictions may be at greater risk for losing their livelihood, savings, and health because of the practices of their licensing boards. Several examples of questionable actions by licensing boards are cited, and a rationale for greater compassion, support, and advocacy for colleagues is offered. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Responses of psychologists to complaints filed against them with a state licensing board.

Psychologists are well aware of the possibility of complaints to licensing boards by clients, interns, employees, and others. As many as 11% of psychologists may have to respond to a complaint during their careers. Data collected by a licensing board from psychologists who had complaints filed against them were analyzed. Those who were found to have committed a violation were compared with those who were found to have committed no violation. The violation group (a) reported many more sequelae, including the expenditure of more time and money and the occurrence of more medical and psychological problems and (b) perceived the process and outcome as less fair. These findings suggest that review and modification of the complaint process are needed and that psychological and professional services may be helpful during and after complaint adjudication. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Psychology Licensing Board Disciplinary Actions: The Realities.

Our increasingly litigious society leaves many professional psychologists with a sense of vulnerability. This article presents survey information about disciplinary complaints against psychologists and about psychology licensing board actions. The data collected support an alternative perspective to the view that licensing boards are overzealous in their disciplinary procedures and actions against licensees or that they are lax in their protection of the public. In fact, few complaints are filed and most do not lead to discipline. Recommendations are offered that would permit clearer interpretation of the complaints of misconduct, the outcomes of those complaints, and the risk of adverse actions by boards. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Changes in training and practice of psychologists: Current challenges for licensing boards.

Psychology licensing laws have a short history and were created to regulate the professional interactions between a psychologist and a client within a single jurisdiction. Societal and technological changes in the way psychologists are trained and practice challenge licensing boards to provide new mechanisms to regulate professional behavior that recognize these changes yet still offer adequate protection of the public. This article describes the problems psychologists encounter related to professional mobility, temporary practice across jurisdictional boundaries, distance learning, and consistency in the handling and reporting of disciplinary actions. The article also describes the efforts of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards to help its licensing board members to address these challenges. Finally, the article raises some potentially dramatic changes being considered in the way psychologists are admitted to professional practice using a competency assessment approach to complement the traditional use of course credits, supervised experience hours, and performance on a knowledge-based exam. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The question of psychologists' maltreatment by state licensing boards: Overcoming denial and seeking remedies.

The state and provincial boards that regulate the practice of psychology may regularly engage in a variety of investigative and enforcement practices that fail to provide due-process protection for accused psychologists. Because psychology regulatory boards operate under administrative law, rather than under civil or criminal law, familiar due-process protections may be considered unnecessary, or they may be perceived to be antithetical to the mandate of these boards to protect the public. Examples of board practices that bypass due-process protection are provided. An agenda is offered to state psychological associations to monitor the actions of their state psychology boards, to independently investigate complaints by members of unfair board practices, to offer support to members facing licensing complaints, and to propose appropriate legislative remedies for unfair board practices in their respective states and provinces. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Why Teacher Certification for School Psychologists?

In 1954 the Thayer Conference took a look at school psychology and attempted to give better definition to its functions, levels, and training. Many issues could not be completely settled and still remain as controversies; but, in universities where special training is being carried on, it becomes necessary to take a stand on some of these issues. The present statement will attempt to take a position on one aspect of the problem: namely, the matter of requiring teacher certification for school psychologists. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Benjamin Shimberg (1918-2003).

Presents an obituary for Benjamin Shimberg, who died on September 25, 2003, in Trenton after suffering a stroke at the age of 85. Ben was best known for his contributions to professional licensing and certification, but his work encompassed many other personnel and measurement areas, from aircrew classification to public health, and vocational education to school testing and guidance. In all of his endeavors, professional and private, a driving force of his life was helping people. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)