[AVAPL Members] Re: licensure question as it related to supervision
- From: "Rubenstein, Jody" <Jody.Rubenstein@xxxxxx>
- To: <members1@xxxxxxxxx>, "VHA National Psychology Chiefs" <VHANationalPsychologyChiefs@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:58:42 -0600
I defer to my Florida colleagues, but we had a trainee from Florida who
returned there. She is trying to get licensed there and hit a roadblock because
some of her supervisors here are not licensed in Texas. She sent information
about the Florida licensing law and it appears that they allow members of the
military to have been supervised by psychologists licensed in states other than
Florida. This might be a precedent upon which we could use to approach at least
their board.
Jody
Jody A. Rubenstein, Ph.D.
Clinical Psychologist/Neuropsychologist
Medical Psychology Team, Mental Health Service, VANTHCS
Predoctoral Internship Director of Training
Postdoctoral/Fellowship Director of Training
Spinal Cord Injury Unit
Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
-----Original Message-----
From: avaplmembers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:avaplmembers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Zeiss, Antonette (SES
EQV)
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:26 AM
To: members1@xxxxxxxxx; VHA National Psychology Chiefs
Subject: [AVAPL Members] Re: licensure question as it related to supervision
Thanks, Ken - this issue increasingly appears to be ripe for attention
by VA. I know that the Executive Board of the VA Psychology Training
Council has put this on their agenda for discussion. We will all
benefit from continued ideas about how to proceed.
We also should reach out to APA quickly, to make sure we coordinate
their efforts regarding licensure law changes with whatever VA may
decide to support. The Board of the training Council also has good
linkages with APA at several levels and can discuss this.
Best, and a happy new year,
Toni
Antonette Zeiss, Ph.D.
202 461-7347
Antonette.Zeiss@xxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: avaplmembers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:avaplmembers-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kenneth Adams
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 7:53 PM
To: members1@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [AVAPL Members] Re: licensure question as it related to
supervision
Toni,
Just speaking for myself, I think that laying the foundation for an
ongoing liaison with ASPPB by starting this conversation is a great
idea. I know that some years ago Stan Berent was connected with ASPPB's
earlier incarnation before the addition of Provincial (ASPB). He started
a good conversation about the need for VA-ASPB collaboration, but it
kind of petered out after he left their Board. I don't know all of what
has happened since.
For some stations this set of issues becomes even more salient, since
the Local Professional Staff By-Laws at these VA's mirror the
affiliate's by-laws, which include Psychologists as Full Members of the
Medical/Professional Staff; and as such mandate current licensure in at
least one of the States served by that VA (at Ann Arbor, either a
Michigan or an Ohio license). Want privileges? Produce an MI or OH
license. If you want to stay licensed in AZ and British Columbia too?
That's fine with us.
The same is true for Physicians, Dentists, and Oral Surgeons. We have
never had a problem with this with our Psychology Faculty/Staff, but
greater understanding of Federal Psychology Practice would be very
welcome in both of our cognate State Boards.
I also realize that we in VA Psychology are far from all on the same
page with respect to privileging, staff membership, and scope of
practice. And that has little to do with the wishes of the Psychologist
Community as such in many cases. We need to press ever forward, and
cleaning up our license portability is part of that.
Yet having said that, one of the reasons to have a license in the state
where you practice is also to be true to a "community standard". It
looks bad for VA when something happens in a public way and it turns out
that the practitioner involved has a license halfway across the country;
whereas local community hospitals could never employ such a person.
Explaining that we are like the Defense Department falls flat, since few
Psychologists are suddenly "transferred" to a new duty station these
days involuntarily.
Increasingly too, APA Accreditation Reviews and Site Visit Reports
raise the question of why Dr. X has been practicing very well indeed in
(for example, the Fargo ND VA) for 25 years with a Georgia license.
Aside from the obvious good fact of the valid Georgia license and the
memory of the beautiful state warming your heart on these cold mornings
in January; it's increasingly hard to sell in this new century.
With respect and some real sympathy for the public protection mission,
the focus of some Psychology Boards seems to be exclusively on the
lowest common denominator (i.e., "aim low"); where the regulatory focus
is to avoid licensing the "sketchy" rather than looking upward towards
promoting and demanding accredited training, evidence-based
qualifications, and excellence in practice. And of course there are
always the eternal local state legislature politics. Here again VA is
the leader and can show them the way forward.
Some state legislative people/staffers whom I know essentially want us
Psychologists to give reasons for them to not cave in to lobbying
efforts; for what sometimes looks akin to granting nail technicians a
state-licensed sanction to do Family Therapy.
Licensure mobility, I concur with Steve, is really a great goal and
absolutely key. Some real progress has been made, and maybe we could
work with ASPPB to create a Federal Mobility Charter endorsed by ASPPB
and the states; which could encompass VA but also perhaps other Federal
Psychologists. Were I a Licensing Board official, I would rather have
another paying licensee, rather than to lose the opportunity and have
the Federal Psychologist give me the brush-off from afar because the
Federal Psychologist doesn't "have to" get that state's license. In the
current state-revenue-challenged environment, perhaps that may get the
hearing now it wouldn't have before. It could be a win-win-win for
everyone.
With best regards,
Ken
>>> "Zeiss, Antonette (SES EQV)" <Antonette.Zeiss@xxxxxx> 1/3/2011 6:25
PM >>>
Good points, Steve and Kathy. How do you and others see the VA
Psychology Training Council's role in this? It is not created to be an
advocacy group, per se, but working with APA and related organizations
on issues relevant to training seems exactly in line with hopes I have
had for the Council. Steve, as incoming Chair, you could play a most
valuable role on this.
Toni
________________________________
From: McCutcheon, Stephen R.
To: McNamara, Kathleen M.; VHA Psychology Internship Directors;
'members1@xxxxxxxxx' <'members1@xxxxxxxxx'>; VHA Psychology
Postdoctoral Training Directors; Zeiss, Robert A.; Zeiss, Antonette (SES
EQV)
Sent: Mon Jan 03 17:16:02 2011
Subject: RE: licensure question as it related to supervision
This discussion points to the importance of eventually obtaining some
form of national regulation of psychology, rather than the current
patch-work of individual state licensing laws. It*s a tricky issue to
balance state vs. federal interests, but Kathy makes a very good point
about communicating with ASPPB about the VA perspective. ASPPB has
largely existed in order to bring greater uniformity to state and
provincial regulations. As one of their most important stakeholders, the
VA has a particular national perspective that I think they*d
appreciate. While we have the advantage as VA psychologists to work in
the *federal* jurisdiction, I think all of us also appreciate the
importance of being knowledgeable about state and local requirements,
and of ensuring that our trainees become license-eligible regardless of
where they move. Any efforts by ASPPB to bring us closer to national
standards and/or to improve licensure mobility would be helpful. If we
can develop a consensus on this as a VA training community, I think
it*d be a good step.
Steve
Steve McCutcheon, PhD
Director, Psychology Training
VA Puget Sound, Seattle
From: McNamara, Kathleen M.
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2011 9:22 PM
To: VHA Psychology Internship Directors; 'members1@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: licensure question as it related to supervision
Aloha, All *
It would seem that this is an issue that we, who train the largest
number of interns in the nation, should submit for review by ASPPB. If
we cannot communicate with ASPPB as part of the VA, then perhaps AVAPL
or DIV 18*s VA Section could take up the cause. I realize that each
State can require whatever that Board decides, but some advocacy on our
part may allow them to submit to their membership a request to consider
the mobility of psychologists. At the Pacific Islands VAHCS , similar
to what Steve does in Washington, we advise the interns early in the
year to check the ASPPB web site to review the requirements in any State
where they think they MIGHT locate after completing the internship to be
sure that any documentation is in place that they may need later and/or
to be sure that they are going to meet the supervision guidelines. We
began this *advisory* after we had one of our Interns rejected by a
licensing board since one of our supervisors was not five years
post-licensure! It would be so much better if ASPPB could achieve some
standardization in this area among its members.
Kathleen M. McNamara, Ph.D., ABPP
Lead Professional, Psychology
Staff Psychologist, Maui VA CBOC
808-871-2454
From: McCutcheon, Stephen R.
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 8:53 AM
To: Hsu, Jeanette; Putnam, Katherine M.; Shaw, Keith; Siegel, Wayne;
Zeiss, Robert A.; Crema, Kathryn C.; VHA Psychology Internship
Directors; 'members1@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: licensure question as it related to supervision
My understanding of this requirement is similar to Jeanette*s. I*d
only add that this is one of those questions which it*s important to
directly ask your state licensing board, since there*s so much
variability in state laws and regulations. For example, in Washington,
there*s no provision to allow *primary* vs. *secondary*
supervision * a supervisor is either qualified or is not. Such hours
presumably wouldn*t count toward licensure here. Because of such
variability across jurisdictions, I make it a point at the beginning of
the training year that interns and fellows should familiarize themselves
with the licensure requirements of those states in which they might seek
licensure (by reviewing the regulations on the ASPPB website), and to
collaborate with me to ensure that their training year fulfills these
requirements. I make it my responsibility to be on top of WA state law,
but have to rely on them to keep informed about requirements in other
states. It*s been an easy thing to do and has given trainees peace of
mind.
Steve
Steve McCutcheon, PhD
Director, Psychology Training
VA Puget Sound, Seattle
From: Hsu, Jeanette
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:34 AM
To: Putnam, Katherine M.; Shaw, Keith; Siegel, Wayne; Zeiss, Robert A.;
Crema, Kathryn C.; VHA Psychology Internship Directors;
'members1@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: RE: licensure question as it related to supervision
Hello Kathy,
You are right that psychologists working within VA who are currently
licensed in any state are qualified and can be credentialed to practice
within VA. Such appropriately credentialed psychologists can also
supervise interns (e.g., be the designated provider for encounters and
co-signer of notes). APA Guidelines and Principles for accreditation
also allow supervisors within VA to be licensed in another state.
But when you state that WI law requires that primary supervisors have 3
years post-licensure experience, I assume that you mean that interns
need to be supervised by WI*s definition of supervision by an
appropriately qualified supervisor in order to receive their hours for
licensure in WI. Since each state has the right to regulate their state
licensure laws, this situation could pose problems for your interns
seeking future licensure within WI as the interns* supervised
experience may not meet WI*s requirements. Similarly, states like FL
and CA also require that pre-licensure hours be supervised by
psychologists licensed within the state the internship is located, no
matter that such psychologists are appropriately credentialed by VA to
practice within a federal system.
I hope this answers your question and helps you in considering the
hiring of your new psychologist. Others may have something else to add
to this discussion.
Jeanette
Jeanette Hsu, Ph.D.
Training Director, Psychology Service
VA Palo Alto Health Care System
From: Putnam, Katherine M.
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 10:00 AM
To: Shaw, Keith; Siegel, Wayne; Zeiss, Robert A.; Crema, Kathryn C.;
VHA Psychology Internship Directors; members1@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: licensure question as it related to supervision
Hello Internship Training Directors et al. ,
Please pardon me for this long-winded question. We are on a fast
time-line as we need to hire a new psychologist. We found someone who is
excellent, however, there may be a licensing/supervision glitch which I
will try to explain succinctly below.
I am aware that VA Psychologists can practice in any VA with any
current state license. I am also aware that we have to adhere to the
regulations of our own licensing boards per our state license. However,
I have a question concerning the state in which one practices in the VA.
WI (where our VA is located) requires that a primary psychology
supervisor must have 3 years post-licensure experience. A
*secondary* supervisor only needs to be licensed. However, the
*secondary* supervisor must be supervised by a primary. This means
that the primary supervisor must meet with the *secondary*
supervisor weekly *it also means that the interns and Veterans under
the *secondary* supervisors are the responsibility (legally and
training-wise) of the primary. This is a lot of responsibility, and our
program is new and it is small.
My hope is that since this gentleman is licensed in MD *the WI
statute would not apply *that the federal and MD law would override
the WI 3-year requirement and that he could then be a primary
supervisor.
Can anyone help with this issue? Thank you very much.
Kathy
Katherine M. Putnam, Ph. D.
PTSD / SUD Specialist
Director of Psychology Training
Wm. S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital
2500 Overlook Terrace
Madison, WI 53705-2286
Messages: (608) 280-7073
Fax: (608) 280-7296
**********************************************************
Electronic Mail is not secure, may not be read every day, and should not
be used for urgent or sensitive issues
Other related posts:
