To be amazed anybody can call themselves a pyscologist?

[ComposHatComesBack]

I was half-watching a trashy Channel 5 programme called 'Bent Coppers' (yes it was every bit as well made, researched and rigorous as the title makes it sound)

Anyway throughout the programme 'Emma Kenny: psychologist' popped up offering analysis of the motives in these cases in which she she had no involvement and commenting on the motivation behind the crimes committed by corrupt Police Officers.

Now I am a complete layperson, but it struck me as odd that a medical professional was prepared to make such authoritative comment on people or cases she's had no direct involvement with and her analysis seemed a bit cod, even to my uneducated ears.

So I googled her: she has been described as an 'expert child psychologist' on a netmums webchat and was advising on potty training and speaking on children's safety on the internet conference arranged by the Safe Network.

I was beginning either she was some sort of renaissance woman, ranging across specialisms or something was amiss. Turns out that she only has an undergrad degree in psychology and a masters in counselling. A BBC website even goes to describe her as a a 'qualified physiologist' on a BBC website.

What really shocked me is that anyone can call themselves a psychologist! That only the profession of Practitioner psychologist is protected by law.

www.hcpc-uk.org/aboutregistration/professions/index.asp?id=14#profDetails

So she's even perfectly legally able to use the description 'qualified psychologist' as she has some qualifications (as does anyone who's paseed a GCSE) and anyone can use the title psychologist.

AIBU to think more legal protection ought to be given to the title 'psychologist' to stop the misrepresentation/misinterpretation of people's qualifications and experiences and that organisations should be rather more careful about vetting people's qualifications before setting them up as 'experts' on sensitive topics?

Counselling is a branch of psychology you know. Is she qualified to practice as a counsellor or is it just a MSc in counselling. There is a difference. It says somewhere that she is a psychoanalyst which would cover all sorts of people surely? You can, after all, psychoanalyse anybody.

Chartered psychologist is protected I think but I am not sure the general public know what that is.

I have an MSc in psychology but I am not a practising psychologist and wouldn't ever call myself that outside of an academic situation. I am a psychologist because I study psychology, no more than that.

For the purposes of a television programme the title psychologist is fine.

If you were going to consult somebody then you would be more picky about titles and qualifications surely? Don't go to a counsellor who is not BACP or UKCP registered for example.

Emma Kenny is BACP registered.

Haven't RTFT but a clinical psychologist is someone who can call themselves a psychologist (years if postgraduate training). She was wrongly describing herself.

Anyone in training (on accredited courses) can be a member of the BACP or UKCP

To receive accreditation you need 350+ hours clinical work under supervision (and have passed certain level of training)

You can have the training in counselling/psychotherapy but have little experience in working with clients

psychoanalyst training is very intense daily psychoanalysis on most courses and you will see clients a few times a week

Amazing of she is able to do this along with all her other work

That's a registration for counselling and her qualification and registration is in counselling, regardless of the legalities of the situation would it not be more accurate and honest to describe herself as a counsellor?

On a trashy TV programme about corrupt Police officers this is just annoying , but once you start offering advice on the basis of your 'expert' status it becomes, in my opinion, a bit more worrying.

You cannot call yourself a psychologist if you only have a degree in psychology- loads of people have psychology degrees and go on to be bankers or accountants or whatever!

You need to belong to the British Psychological Society to be regarded as a psychologist. This means you will have done some further study and had work experience (professional placements in a controlled setting for some years) after graduating.

If she has a degree (Masters or Bachelors) in counselling psychology, then she may - again if she has done enough hours of practical work- be a qualified counsellor and be able to be a member of the BACP- British Association of Counsellors and Psychotherapists. I have several friends who are BAPS members- some with masters degrees in counselling and psychotherapy.

I suspect it is the media who have hyped up her qualifications to give some credibility to using her in the programme. If the BPS knew what she was calling herself she'd be in trouble.

I'm with Compost here. Those who know psychology will know the distinction between a Psychologist who specialises in clinical research and a Clinical Psychologist, but this distinction is lost on the lay person.

I'm of the opinion that the title Psychologist should be protected in the UK, but still distinctive from a Chartered Psychologist (which has a further applied component). Therefore those who work in Psychology who have demonstrated skills and knowledge capable of a higher degree and crucially adhere to the British Psychological Society code of ethics can call themselves Psychologists. This title would then be meaningful to someone who is not overly familiar with psychology, but has cause to call on the services of a Psychologist.

But psychology is not per se a clinical discipline. It's an academic discipline, and plenty of people study it but never "practice" it with/on patients. They will have still studied the subject.

I agree it's odd that anyone can call themselves a psychologist. The woman in question however can reasonably call herself a psychologist IMO. Organisations that provide additional accreditation and training presumably exist precisely to highlight the difference between those who merely have a degree and those who have undergone the additional training (including clinical).

Plenty of people confuse psychologists with psychiatrist, but that's hardly the fault of those who study either discipline.

Actually pinkfrocks you can call yourself a Psychologist even if you have had no format training in psychology - that title isn't protected but "Clinical Psychologist" is. You can also be a student member and a graduate member of the BPS.

And just to add, REAL psychologists are allowed to use the word Chartered- which means they are fully trained and have reached a certain level- just like chartered physiotherapists, chartered engineers, chartered accountants.

But I'm a real psychologist. I have a PhD in psychology, I work in a psychological capacity, but my particular profession is not chartered.

Veg you cannot call yourself 'chartered psychologist' because that is protected. If anyone wants to use a psychologist for advice and support they need to look for the BPS accreditation and the chartered label.

A 'clinical' psychologist is a different type of psychologist. There are educational psychologists who carry out assessments of children who are also chartered, but they do not use the term 'clinical'- that is a different branch of psychology.

Then I'd not view you as a psychologist veg! I'd say you were a doctor of psychology (PhD) which is not the same as someone who has also undertaken further on-the-job training. Yours is an academic title, not necessarily one that is vocational and includes practising.

Yes but I am real psychologist, just not a Chartered Psychologist. The protected titles as I said above are Clinical, Educational, Counselling, Sport and Exercise, Health, Occupational, and Forensic. What I'm trying to say (possibly not very well) is that someone can be a "real" psychologist without being Chartered. But as far as titles are concerned my next door neighbour who has had no education or inclination to study psychology could as legitimately (well perhaps not legitimately - but legally) call himself a psychologist as I can.

There should be a distinction between Psychologist with higher qualifications, and Chartered Psychologist with higher qualifications and applied knowledge.

This is from Emma's website. It clearly shows she is a therapist- that is what her website says. She has a degree in psychology but her accreditations are with the BAPS as a counsellor.

Emma has over 20 years experience working within her field. Working with private clients and groups alike. Her therapy has helped thousands of people overcome many obstacles and life challenges. Please see portfolio for images of certificates. She is BACP registered and holds all relevant qualifications to practice including an advanced diploma in Counselling, a masters in Counselling and a degree in Psychology. She also holds many more relevant qualifications and regularly lectures on the psychology Phd at The Manchester University. BACP registration number 044672.

so veg how do you apply your psychology training? If you are an academic and do research and lecture, I'd still call you an academic, or a research psychologist - possibly- but I'd not come along to see you with my problems, IYSWIM!

Pinfrocks but that doesn't make veg less of a psychologist.

You'd be looking for a counsellor.

What do you call the person who came last in his undergraduate medical school class?

Doctor.

Yes I'm an academic and research psychologist. Psychology is the study of mind and behaviour, not limited to the treatment of "abnormal" behaviour. Not all psychologists deal with people with problems. There are so many different sections covered by the BPS including Cognitive, Forensic, Developmental, Neuro and Psychobiology, Social, Clinical, Counselling - not all of these deal with treating people and not all are Chartered.

You'd be looking for a counsellor.

No- not if I wanted a DC assessed for dyslexia or Aspergers- then I'd need an ed psych.

The BPS has all kinds of psychologists available- I've dealt with their press office many times and asked for the 'right' one for my needs ( work- not personal.)

Which is an excellent way of going about accessing a psychologist who can help you - and usually these psychologists would be chartered, but not all psychologists are.

This is a v interesting discussion! Veg you missed clinical neuropsychologist, which I'm training in (so, brain injury). Clinical doctorate, plus another 2 years at least of exams, case studies etc before the QiCN. Ten years plus in total. I try not to let it, but I do get a bit cheesed with the whole 'not a psychiatrist' thing, painting us as quasi phrenologists/astrologists! We do joint clinics with psychiatrists for a start!

I know there's a campaign to get Royal College status for the BPS; do people think that might help in terms of protection for both patients and practitioners?

It's a bit like teaching- there are many lecturers who work in FE who call themselves 'teachers' but the fact is that to be a recognised teacher with QTS and be registered with a DFE reference number, you have to have the right paper qualifications AND a year on the job training. Not all training at post grad level gives QTS- there is an gap in the system and some PGCEs do not confer QTS at the end ( though most do.)

I did miss Clinical Neuro - the hardcore psychs ;) (I missed a lot more too).

I think protection is crucial, yes. Obviously this is so important in an applied setting, where the potential for harm is great (and also the psychologist may need protection too - two way process), but there is also a need in a research setting.

As a research psychologist I use human participants, I am bound by my institution's ethical code, together with the BPS's code. If my institution does not grant me ethical approval I cannot conduct my research - rightly so. However independent researchers (and generally the media, but this is improving) are not bound by such a stringent code, but there is still capacity for harm or distress (obviously dependant on the intervention/experiment etc.). If I were to carry out research that was either unethical or if I falsified data I could be brought before the Ethics Committee of the BPS and my membership could be terminated. If I wasn't a member (and psychologists don't have to register with the society), there would be no redress for my participants or beyond.

Even if you sort of know there's two different levels of training or profession standing, but you never heard of the phrase Chartered Psychologist (whichis new to me, but I am new to the UK), you would think she must be the more highly trained sort, because of the adjective.

It not that OP thinks the presenter isnt qualified for what she does (all purpose televisual psychology talking head), just that the title Psychologist is vague and catchall for a number of related careers in the first place, and adding 'qualified' implies a slightly higher standing to those who know nothing about how the various degrees and qualifications work.