New Psychotherapy Accreditation System Considered
January 18th, 2010
Those in the mental health professions are able to rely on an accreditation system and rigorous academic and clinical training that work diligently to ensure that psychotherapists are well-qualified to deliver excellent care. But some suggest that the current American Psychological Association’s accreditation system is too heavily focused on clinical hours rather than in-depth research and the understanding of proven techniques, a concern that has led to a new system dubbed the Psychological Clinical Science Accreditation System. While support for the new system is present, some worry that it could restrict the number of new psychotherapy professionals entering the field at a time when access to care is a critical concern.
© Copyright 2010 by http://www.GoodTherapy.org Therapist Rolling Hills Estates Bureau - All Rights Reserved.
-
Find the Right Therapist
-
8 Comments | Click here to leave a comment.
Comments
Hmm…a tricky situation indeed…maybe they could keep both the systems going side by side so that the more experienced professionals could go ahead and acquire the accreditation of both the systems and the newer ones could start with one…?!
Any accreditation system is brought into practice after years of having it as a supplement to an older sytem and I am pretty sure that is how it should be in case of psychotherapy professionals as well.
You cannot just introduce a new system one fine day because that would affect a vast majority of the professionals, especially those who are new…
It seems that a both/and approach is more astute in both preparing clinicians and also ensuring client care. In many circles, practical experience trumps knowledge because often the knowledge component is gained in purely academic settings. That is one of the rationale’s for expanding a students ‘practicum’ experience so that they gain real world experience while integrating their academic head knowledge. To do one without the other is foolish and could open clients up to potential harm.
What would be more beneficial is a national accrediting system for licensure and supervision so that there is a continuity of best practices and care in the marketplace.
It makes sense that research and the quality of the research should be the detrmining factor of accreditation, and not just the hours that have been put into it. That makes no sense at all. Let the work itself reflect whether or not someone is worthy- when they have high quality of work then that is how I would want to know if I want someone working with me or not.
improvements in the accredutation system should be welcomed because it spells better quality service to the patients in whichever field it is… people definitely deserve the best possible quality of psychotherapy service possible so it would be right to ring in the new system.
it is very important to constantly improve the quality of service, but it is equally important to encourage new professionals. So it would make sense to have two different scales, thereby fulfilling both the requiements.
If this new practice keeps those out of performing professional services like therapy and counseling who are not up on the latest techniques and research in the field, then I say this is a great move!
well i just think the change,if brought into effect,needs to be very very gradual and not a hastened one.because if they rush through with the change,it will create a lot of problems for the professionals as well as those seeking treatment,it will be a chaotic situation…
Leave a Reply
By commenting on this blog you acknowledge acceptance of this Blog's Terms and Conditions of Use.