Is a PSYD from CSU worthwhile if not leading to licensing?

Well, OK. You've made your position clear. I guess I'd just want to point out that your position is in disagreement with most licensing boards and ethics commissions.

 

Maxwell_Smart: I'm saying that any school that offers a clinical degree and does not mandate clinical practice and allows one to earn the degree without that practice is acting unethically. I'm saying that any adult that decides to take said program with the full knowledge of that is acting unethically.

RESPONSE: Your statement above is grossly incorrect as follows:

1. CSU does offer a practicum and clinical component to students who are eligible for licensing in states such as California.

2. CSU originally offered the practicum and clinical component to other states, such as New York, that would have allowed graduates to apply for licensing as a Psychologist, but the NYS Board of Psychology did not accept it.

3. Taking this very legitimate doctoral program without a practicum and clinical component does not lead to the fallacious conclusion that the student is acting unethically. One can take this curriculum for professional, personal growth and numerous other reasons that were expounded upon previously.

Maxwell_Smart: I'm saying that if this same situation were applied to any other health profession in which a degree is meant for clinical practice, it would be unethical.

RESPONSE: Your statement above is once again grossly incorrect as follows;

1. The majority of clinical practice doctoral degrees in other health professions such as the Doctor of Professional Nursing (DPN) and the Transitional Doctorate in Physical Therapy (t-DPT) do not require a practicum or internship BUT focus on higher level doctoral course work and a capstone project. While some DPN programs require a residency others don't. The fact that these doctoral level practice oriented health programs do not offer a clinical component does not imply that the student is unethical!

Maxwell_Smart: The general position that "because it's being offered and people are using it, that makes it right to do" is shown absurd by concepts like "since crack is being offered and people are using it, that makes it right to do."

RESPONSE: Once again you are making statements that are emanating from YOU, not from anyone else on this forum! It's not a matter of this degree "...being offered and people using it" and your inappropriate analogy with crack, but of a doctoral program that has been accredited in terms of the quality and focus of its curriculum by WASC, and is without question a legitimate credential.

Maxwell-Smart: In this case, it may be legal, it may be accepted by a specific audience, but that doesn't make it ethical. It drags us down a dangerous road. MD's who never took clinical training? Nurses who never took clinical training? How many unsuspecting people will be hurt by that irresponsibility? For some reason, people seem to think the magnitude of this sort of thing isn't as great because it's Psychology, but they're wrong. A poorly trained PsyD can do lots of damage to a person just like any other poorly trained health professional can.

RESPONSE: It's obvious that you haven't explored the issues involved in this discussion leading to fallacious conclusions as follows:

1. Using your example of Nursing, a Nurse who completes her/his Bachelors and Masters degree in Nursing, has in fact completed required clinical residency and externships as part of these degrees leading to licensing as a Nurse in their respective state. Pursing a DPN without a clinical residency component is legal and unquestionably ethical because they are already licensed and are solely seeking the DPN for whatever reasons that meet their career and personal goals.

2. You continue to harp on a "poorly trained Psychologist" doing "...lots of damage to a person", when in fact it is has been stated repeatedly that there is a practicum and clinical internship component is offered at CSU for those students who can use it for licensing purposes! Those students who are seeking this degree for other purposes than licensing are not engaging in any unethical conduct or in violation of professional behavior UNLESS their state board holds that using the degree title may result in a misrepresentation to the public.

Maxwell_Smart: To illustrate the position CSU is taking, I recall a conversation I had with an administrator there where I mentioned some issues with the program and he replied "Well, you get to legally call yourself Doctor." After shaking my head at that comment for a good 5 seconds I replied "Assuming I didn't already have a Doctorate, the purpose of me becoming a Doctor wouldn't be for the ego boost of calling myself "Doctor", it would be for the purpose of helping people." That brought on a long moment of silence and I said goodbye.

RESPONSE: Your anecdotal experience is irrelevant pertaining to the gist of this thread. Your personal experience does not in anyway impact on the legitimacy of the PsyD from CSU, on the ethical standard or motives of individuals obtaining this degree or on their ability to provide ethical clinical services to their clients.

Maxwell-Smart: Even legitimate schools make errors in judgment.

RESPONSE: As seen in your responses to this discussion, so do humans.

 

As an addendum to my previous post, Maxwell_Smart's contrasting CSU's PsyD with the MD, stating "MD's who never took clinical training"?, implying that individuals obtaining CSU's PsyD are practicing unethically, is once again making comparisons and assertions that have no association or relevance whatsoever!

OBVIOUSLY, there are no intermediate degrees, such as a masters degree along with clinical practicums and internships for students seeking the MD degree until they complete a lengthy core medical curriculum. This contrasts with many mental health professions,whereby a masters degree does include clinical practicums and internships leading to state licensing, and obtaining a PsyD for such licensed practitioners, such as the one offered at CSU, is not analogous whatsoever to the degree requirements for attaining an MD credential.

Therefore, this analogy is just another example of a lack of understanding of what conduct and behavior constitutes a lack of ethics.

 

I think that Cal Southern's PsyD program is a relatively inexpensive (compared to some of the alternatives) way of getting the minimum education necessary to qualify for a California clinical psychology license. It probably serves graduates who want to qualify for clinical psychology licenses in an unknown (to me) number of other states as well. (I don't know very much about that.)

So I'm kind of inclined to like it.

Here in California, there are two main considerations in qualifying for a psychology license. First, there's the Educational Requirement. California Southern appears to satisfy that. And second, there's a Supervised Professional Experience Requirement. This mandates 3,000 hours of supervised experience over two years. At least 1,500 of these hours have to be completed after graduation. The Psych Board notes that the details of these requirements and the kind of supervision necessary are complex. I'm not up to speed on all the detailed regulations regarding Supervised Professional Experience (they can be found in the links below), but it appears that they can't be satisfied remotely by a DL program. So while I most emphatically agree that nobody should be licensed as a clinical psychologist without actual clinical experience, it's also hard to see why a university would require clinical practicums (by DL?) that the licensing bodies won't accept.

So somebody graduating with a PsyD from Cal Southern will apparently still have to do the 3,000 Supervised Professional Experience hours before getting a license. (A graduate of a B&M program might get away with 1,500 hours if their PsyD program included 1,500 hours prior to graduation.)

https://www.psychology.ca.gov/applicants/license.shtml

https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/IA6D71CC5CE8A451FB61368D5FC587F7F?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with the program. If one chooses to complete the practicum and internship, it'll meet licensing requirements in more states than California's non-ABA-accredited J.D. programs. For those who don't want to complete the practicum and internship, then it gives them the doctor title, which is a good marketing tool. It might even help them get a teaching job at a community college or bottom tier university. There's just the reality that, in some settings, it's considered inappropriate for people who aren't physicians or psychologists to call themselves doctors. When you're in a hospital or behavioral hospital, you're usually not in the position to research your caretakers' credentials or read and sign some informed consent form. In the states where psychologists can prescribe medications, this is an even more important distinction.

The EVMS DHSc program I posted about in another thread is a non-research, non-clinical doctorate. Most of their students are in the program for the doctor title; to make themselves more attractive for executive positions; and to get full-time, clinical professor jobs.

 

sanantone: There's just the reality that, in some settings, it's considered inappropriate for people who aren't physicians or psychologists to call themselves doctors. When you're in a hospital or behavioral hospital, you're usually not in the position to research your caretakers' credentials or read and sign some informed consent form. In the states where psychologists can prescribe medications, this is an even more important distinction.

RESPONSE: The issue you raise does not only apply to Psychologists but to other licensed health professionals who possess doctoral degrees and who frequently introduce themselves to patients in hospitals. clinics and private practices as "Dr" so and so, including Nurses, Physical Therapists, Audiologists, and others. In fact, if a patient does not ask, which many don't, they frequently believe that these professionals are Physicians!

 

That may be true, and scary. But at least some of them see the problem, like New York who won't license CSU PsyDs.

 

That's pretty much what I said. I threw physicians in there because this is a problem with nurse practitioners and other mid-level providers with doctoral degrees who can be confused for physicians. Physical therapists and audiologists usually have doctoral degrees, though, and their duties don't overlap with physicians' as much as NPs and physician assistants do. In behavioral health hospitals, the people practicing with doctoral-level licenses are psychiatrists and psychologists. Their duties overlap with those of LPCs or LMHCs, social workers, and marriage and family therapists.

 

That pretty well summarizes it. Clinical experience, to a significant degree, occurs in the in supervised settings, and much of which can be done beyond the university.

 

I don't know why New York won't accept California Southern University's PsyD, even when students choose to do the internship. However, clinicals done outside of a program may not be accepted for licensing. My state requires 1,750 internship hours completed as a part of a doctoral program. The other 1,750 hours can come after graduating, but they have to be done while you're provisionally licensed as a psychologist or a trainee. Finding an internship as a student in an APA-accredited program is hard enough; it's even harder to do it in a non-APA-accredited program or as a non-student.

 

Neuhaus went a little off the rails in terms of who the program is aimed at (at least in terms of those featured earning the degree). It appears to be mainly Mental Health Counselors of one sort or another and a few wanting to be Psychologists.

It is Regionally accredited and if it meets your needs for licensure as a Psychologist or to add "Dr." to your name then it is an affordable and convenient option.

It it prestigious? No.

It it going to get you respect in the Psych Community? Probably not (perhaps even some snickers or disdain). But then programs like Argosy (which may have APA) results in similar snickers.

If you are a 40 or 50 (or more) year old who cannot leave their job, go to a residential program, or accumulate debt, this might be a viable way to meet your goals. That is why there are places like University of Phoenix. Is your UP MBA going to earn awe? Nope. But it did check a box for the person.

 

Several months ago, I posted about an Ed.D in Sport and Performance Psychology at University of Western States. There's a track designed to meet LPC/LMHC requirements, but it might even meet psychology licensing requirements since the clinical internship is a year long. One can choose a culminating experience: dissertation, scholarly project, non-clinical practicum for sports psychologists, or a clinical internship. For someone who needs to use financial aid, it's an alternative to California Southern University.

https://www.uws.edu/sport-performance-psychology/doctor-education/curriculum-options/

They also have an Ed.D in Clinical Mental Health Counseling that allows students to replace the dissertation with a clinical internship.

https://www.uws.edu/edd-cmhc-curriculum/

 

That's exactly the proper counter point.

Hmmmmm. The same could said for MDs, like for instance ones who enroll at IUHS and do their clinicals anywhere in the world except at IUHS physically. But during their clinicals they are mandated by their schools to do them and they are tied to their schools, and no state will license them until that relationship is complete.

Heirophant said: "So while I most emphatically agree that nobody should be licensed as a clinical psychologist without actual clinical experience..."

Exactly!

Heirophant said: "it's also hard to see why a university would require clinical practicums (by DL?) that the licensing bodies won't accept."

That's the point. If there are state bodies that won't accept your program for licensure, you don't offer it in those states. Otherwise, people will simply abuse the title of PsyD and not disclose to people that they earned the clinical degree without doing clinicals. We know that given a choice a lot of people aren't going to do them, especially many who are already licensed at the Masters level.

 

They can either choose to not offer the program in those states or give a warning that the degree won't be accepted in those states. But, the reason why California Southern University does not require an internship is because California doesn't require pre-doc internship hours; it's not because other states won't accept it.

https://www.calsouthern.edu/online-psychology-degrees/psy-d-program-doctor-psychology-degree/internship

 

According to this review posted in August 2018, California Southern University is not accepting students from New York.

https://www.gradreports.com/colleges/california-southern-university

 

I know, but the problem I have with it is that they know the program is DL and being offered to the world outside of California. From what they told me, they didn't even appear to be certain of the hurdles in other states I brought up so that gave me even more reason for concern about how they're going about it.

 

Right before you posted, I found a review that said that they aren't accepting students from New York. They do have a list of states that will accept their degree and which ones will review schools on a case-by-case basis.

https://www.calsouthern.edu/online-psychology-degrees/psy-d-program-doctor-psychology-degree/psyd-licensure

 

According to the Web Archive, that list is a little less than a year old so it came some time after the conversations I had with them.

 

CSU is currently accepting students from NYS with the understanding that the PSYD will not be accepted for licensure as a Psychologist.