|
Division 13 reviews
licensure restrictions
(July 2005
Issue)
By Catherine Robertson Souter
Times have changed since state licensing boards first drew up laws
concerning interstate practice. When the boards of each state first
set forth the laws that control who may practice psychology and
what type of license they would need, the face of the profession
was a lot simpler. There was no Internet. No one did tele-video
consultations or face-to-monitor therapy.
As technology has gotten more sophisticated, psychology has branched
out. But, according to some, the laws have not kept up.
The American Psychological Association's Division 13, Society
of Consulting Psychology, has launched a program to address the
inequities it sees in those laws. According to Judith Blanton, Ph.D.,
a former president of Div. 13 and a senior consultant with consulting
firm RHR International in California, a whole arm of psychological
practice is often hindered by the strict interstate practice laws.
"Consulting psychologists can't be competitive with people who
have no license, no psychology degree," she says.
As a business consultant, a psychologist may use his training to
better present or gather the information, but one does not need
to be a psychologist to do the job. And, in some ways, having a
license can be detrimental to a consulting psychologist's business.
Many don't bother to obtain a psychological license at all. The
work that they do does not require a license, but certain state
laws about psychological licensing are broad enough that a consulting
psychologist may be open to penalties for taking a temporary job
in another state.
The laws are individual to each state. In New England, for example,
temporary work across state borders varies widely. In Maine, a psychologist
wishing to practice short-term must apply for a conditional license
and take an oral examination. In Massachusetts, a psychologist licensed
in another state may offer consulting services one day a month or
12 days per year. They do not need to apply for a temporary license
but the licensing board recommends that they notify the board of
the work they will be doing.
While the rule is designed for psychologists working in mental
health, it is unclear how it affects those working in a business
setting with, for instance, a human resources department on how
to motivate personnel.
"I'm not sure if that has ever come up," says Karen Schwartz, Ph.D.,
program coordinator for the Board of Registration of Psychologists
in Massachusetts. "If you are doing work that does not require a
license in one state and you are doing it in another, I would not
believe that it would be an issue with the board."
Neither Rhode Island, Connecticut, nor New Hampshire issue temporary
licenses to out-of-state psychologists.
"We don't have a temporary license," confirms Peggy Lynch, the
New Hampshire Licensing Board administrator. "Without a license,
you can't work in New Hampshire - not even for one hour."
To practice in Vermont, a psychologist would need to apply for
a temporary license, a process which could take as long as two months.
For someone working for a national corporation who may want to fly
them to Vermont for a quick consultation on Thursday, a two-month
wait for permission would be ludicrous. It's in this type of situation
that someone without a license would have a competitive edge.
Division 13 has teamed up with Division 14 (Society for Industrial
and Organizational Psychology) and Division 16 (School) to promote
a model licensing policy that would better address the needs of
their members.
"The model act will suggest allowing 60 to 90 days for mobility
across state borders for this type of practice," says Blanton. "There
is a motion on the table for the APA Council that states should
be paying more attention to the practice directorate."
It may be a long battle but it is one that can be won, says Blanton.
"What we are hoping for is either to be exempted or to have ways
to follow the laws that are appropriate and doable for people who
are non-health care providers."
|
