Years of education before one can practice as a clinical (neuro)psychologist?

[DrGachet]

From what I gather, it takes four years to obtain a bachelor's degree, and on average six years to obtain a PhD--a small percentage obtain it in five while a larger percentage do so in seven years. I am also under the impression that unless one is planning to go the neuropsychology route in which case two years of postdoc are a necessity, there is no need for further education. On to licensing: when can you take the exam and how long does that take? Assuming you spent a combination of 4+6 or 10 yrs of study which would include the internship and that you have obtained you PhD in, say, April, can you apply for and obtain your license the very summer that you graduate?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

From what I gather, it takes four years to obtain a bachelor's degree, and on average six years to obtain a PhD--a small percentage obtain it in five while a larger percentage do so in seven years. I am also under the impression that unless one is planning to go the neuropsychology route in which case two years of postdoc are a necessity, there is no need for further education. On to licensing: when can you take the exam and how long does that take? Assuming you spent a combination of 4+6 or 10 yrs of study which would include the internship and that you have obtained you PhD in, say, April, can you apply for and obtain your license the very summer that you graduate?

It tends to vary from state to state. However, I believe that in nearly all cases, you would not be eligible to apply for a license immediately out of internship. In general, states require psychologists to have one year (or somewhere around 2000 hours) of "on-the-job" supervision before they're able to apply for a license.

Thus, for a non-neuropsychologist, it would typically look like this:

~4 years undergrad
+5-7 years grad (including internship)
+1 year post-doc (optional)
+1 year supervised practice

For neuro, you can substitute the 1 year post-doc with a two-year neuro post-doc, although this is not an absolute necessity as of yet (the post-doc is required to be boarded in neuropsych, but not necessarily to practice).

Also, I believe that hours accumulated on your post-doc can count towards the supervised practice criteria for licensure, so it likely would not be necessary to obtain one full additional year of supervision following completion of your fellowship.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

some people come straight from undergrad while others take 1-2+ years to gain research experience before applying to a doctoral program. from there you'll have a minimum of 4 years of schooling (more likely 5 or 6 to get your dissertation done), then you have a 1 yr internship. after internship you'll have to secure a 2yr post-doc, most likely through the neuro match. after internship some states aallow you to apply for full licensure if you passed the EPPP. A handful of states offer a limited licensure for 1 year and then you can get a full license as long as you pass the EPPP in a . Most states require 1 full post-doc year before licensure (including a certain number of hours). anyone wishing to do neuropsychology should complete the formal 2yr fellowship and meet the division 40/Houston conference guidelines.

 

[Existenz]

as of now, anyone can call themselves a neuropsychologist that can get a license as a psychologist. You do not need to get a post doc or get board certified.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

as of now, anyone can call themselves a neuropsychologist that can get a license as a psychologist. You do not need to get a post doc or get board certified.

This is generally true, although it depends on the state. In Louisiana, "neuropsychologist" is actually a protected term, much like "psychologist." I believe there may be one or two other states with similar clauses in their licensure laws, but as of now, there aren't many.

It also somewhat depends on where you work. I believe VAs (for the most part) tend to be a bit more stringent with their assigning of the neuropsychologist label to employees. They're also one of the few (only?) employers to offer their staff members a definite raise upon becoming board-certified.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

unfortunately it is not a fully protected title. there are some people out there that say they practice neuropsych but they couldn't even teach a neuroanatomy course....which is scary. i'm not at the point yet where i'd feel comfortable taking the written exam for ABPP-cn, but i'd hope that if someone is doing neuropsych assessment they'd have all of the appropiate training. I have a whole new appreciation of neuropsychologists now that I work in academic medicine. the neuropsychs give seminars to staff and they have to be on top of the subject because there are plenty of people asking really technical questions (mostly neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, etc). I have to give a couple presentations in the coming months so I'm starting to review things now. my best advice is if you know you want to do neuropsych, take as many related hard science classes as an undergrad, be a regular at brain cuttings in grad school, and be up on the latest research because it changes quickly.

 

[Existenz]

This is generally true, although it depends on the state. In Louisiana, "neuropsychologist" is actually a protected term, much like "psychologist." I believe there may be one or two other states with similar clauses in their licensure laws, but as of now, there aren't many.

It also somewhat depends on where you work. I believe VAs (for the most part) tend to be a bit more stringent with their assigning of the neuropsychologist label to employees. They're also one of the few (only?) employers to offer their staff members a definite raise upon becoming board-certified.

I'm working at a prominent VA for NeuroPsych, probably one of the most actually, and several neuropsychologists do no have specialized training beyond an internship and postdoc with neuropsych testing experience. I've asked the docs why they don't get board certified and a few said there is little financial incentive to do so. Also, I think they are kinda annoyed they cannot be grandfathered in since some of them have over 15 years experience lol.

 

[stigmata]

I'm working at a prominent VA for NeuroPsych, probably one of the most actually, and several neuropsychologists do no have specialized training beyond an internship and postdoc with neuropsych testing experience. I've asked the docs why they don't get board certified and a few said there is little financial incentive to do so. Also, I think they are kinda annoyed they cannot be grandfathered in since some of them have over 15 years experience lol.

We may not like it, but this is the reality. The VA is as screwed up as it could be.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

We may not like it, but this is the reality. The VA is as screwed up as it could be.

I really wish we can curb this type of degradation within the field in regard to neuropsychology, though without a stronger push for boarding, I'm not sure it will happen.

 

[erg923]

Below are the proposed permanent rules relating to outpatient mental health services from the October 11, 2010 issue of the Minnesota State Register.

D. The neuropsychological assessment must be conducted by a neuropsychologist with competence in the area of neuropsychological assessment as stated to the Minnesota Board of Psychology and be:

(1) validated by a diploma awarded to the neuropsychologist by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology,
(2) approved by the commissioner as an eligible provider of neuropsychological assessment prior to December 31, 2010;
(3) granted a provisional approval by the commissioner to an individual for up to two years pending validation by a diploma granted to the neuropsychologist by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology; or
(4) credentialed by another state which has equivalent diploma status requirements.

Sly power grab by ABCN? Wonder who made this recommendation to the Minnesota Dept. of Human Services?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Below are the proposed permanent rules relating to outpatient mental health services from the October 11, 2010 issue of the Minnesota State Register.

D. The neuropsychological assessment must be conducted by a neuropsychologist with competence in the area of neuropsychological assessment as stated to the Minnesota Board of Psychology and be:

(1) validated by a diploma awarded to the neuropsychologist by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology,
(2) approved by the commissioner as an eligible provider of neuropsychological assessment prior to December 31, 2010;
(3) granted a provisional approval by the commissioner to an individual for up to two years pending validation by a diploma granted to the neuropsychologist by the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology; or
(4) credentialed by another state which has equivalent diploma status requirements.

Sly power grab by ABCN? Wonder who made this recommendation to the Minnesota Dept. of Human Services?

Assuming we can get more agreement in the field as to what constitutes "proficiency in neuropsychology," I'm all for the requisite of boarding to be considered a neuropsychologist. If there's one thing that psychology, as a whole, has been terrible at doing (especially compared to the medical community, for example), it's defending our turf, so to speak.

 

[erg923]

And you think the best way to do this is to (suddenly) take away the livliehood of: 1.) boarded members of ABPN? 2.) The well trained but nonboarded neuropsychologist who has already been practicing for 30 years!? In other words, the best way to unite the profession and consolidate the boards is through threats?

The vast, vast majority of neuropsychologists I know would not be able top work in Minneseota, according to these guidelines. How in the world could cutting the availablity of neuropsycholgical services be good for the profession.... or our patients?

My personal opinion regarding the boarding process for neuropsychology is that, while its nice and all, it has no real functionality in the real world...especially when we have 3 seperate boards. Wake up people; very few people even know what a neuropsychologist is, much less whether board certification is necessary, or even which board is preferable. The facinating insight in all this is when you realize that no one cares about npsych boarding besides neuropsycholgists. I would think this would say something about the actual utility and importance of board certification in the real world.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The vast, vast majority of neuropsychologists I know would not be able top work in Minneseota, according to these guidelines. How in the world could cutting the availablity of neuropsycholgical services be good for the profession.... or our patients?

While I don't want to take away services from people who need them, I also don't want to allow untrained/poorly trained psychologists to promote themselves as neuropsychologists. Allowing this to happen will not only depress salaries, but it can also be damaging to the patients. I am sure there are some great neuropsychologists out there who did not complete neuro fellowships, but I don't want any psychologist to be able to claim to be a neuropsychologist.

My personal opinion regarding the boarding process for neuropsychology is that, while its nice and all, it has no real functionality in the real world...especially when we have 3 seperate boards. Wake up people; very few people even know what a neuropsychologist is, much less whether board certification is necessary, or even which board is preferable. The facinating insight in all this is when you realize that no one cares about npsych boarding besides neuropsycholgists. I would think this would say something about the actual utility and importance of board certification in the real world.

It is a very good idea if you ever get dragged into court and/or consult with cases that may land in court.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

And you think the best way to do this is to (suddenly) take away the livliehood of: 1.) boarded members of ABPN? 2.) The well trained but nonboarded neuropsychologist who has already been practicing for 30 years!? In other words, the best way to unite the profession and consolidate the boards is through threats?

The vast, vast majority of neuropsychologists I know would not be able top work in Minneseota, according to these guidelines. How in the world could cutting the availablity of neuropsycholgical services be good for the profession.... or our patients?

My personal opinion regarding the boarding process for neuropsychology is that, while its nice and all, it has no real functionality in the real world...especially when we have 3 seperate boards. Wake up people; very few people even know what a neuropsychologist is, much less whether board certification is necessary, or even which board is preferable. The facinating insight in all this is when you realize that no one cares about npsych boarding besides neuropsycholgists. I would think this would say something about the actual utility and importance of board certification in the real world.

Notice that I didn't explicitly say I support the provisions you posted, I simply stated that I agree with the premise of ensuring competence via board certification before one is able to call themselves a neuropsychologist. If I had to give an opinion on this specific example, I'd say that I'd personally be fine with allowing both ABCN and ABPN certification to "count."

I agree that there are many, many practicing and highly-qualified neuropsychologists who--for whatever reason--haven't gone through the boarding process (an advisor of mine being one). For those who've been in the fields for decades, I can definitely understand why.

However, some type of boarding process--for good or bad--is in most professions the accepted way of demonstrating competence. And with all of the professions and professionals attempting to make in roads into neuropsychological practice, the "easiest," or at least most straight-forward, way to prevent this is to develop a set of objective, agreed-upon standards that must be met. Otherwise, how is a state legislature, for example, supposed to know whether or not someone is qualified to practice neuropsychology? As you've said, the average person likely doesn't even know our sub-field exists, so we can't expect anyone other than ourselves to ensure that everyone billing themselves as a neuropsychologist has received the proper training.

Do I think that ABCN has the perfect set of standards for establishing competence? Probably not, but at least it's a start. And, in my opinion, rather than attacking the entire premise of boarding and/or pointing out its shortcomings, we--as a field--should be instead looking for ways to improve the existing processes so that the identified problems are addressed.

 

[erg923]

While I don't want to take away services from people who need them, I also don't want to allow untrained/poorly trained psychologists to promote themselves as neuropsychologists. Allowing this to happen will not only depress salaries, but it can also be damaging to the patients. I am sure there are some great neuropsychologists out there who did not complete neuro fellowships, but I don't want any psychologist to be able to claim to be a neuropsychologist.



It is a very good idea if you ever get dragged into court and/or consult with cases that may land in court.

Not to rehash the debate we already had about this, but, IMHO, the boarding process has to get to point where it has a direct benefit to the individual practitioner before it catches on. And no, the fact that it would look good to to some random judge is not on my list. If we were all into the forensic area of neuropsychology, that might be a substantial motivator, but since I am not specifically targeting or practicing in that area, I'm not too concerned about how the court system views my training. If I get dragged into court against my will, well...I am what I am.

Telling people that getting boarded is "in the best interest" of the profession (if that's even true) is great, but hopelessly inadequate as a motivator at the individual level. People do things because its in their self-interest to do so- They have to see a tangible benefit to the process. THIS is why boarding among eligible neuropsychologists hovers at around the 10-15%. Why should the neuropsyhologist who has been practicing for 30 years and will retire in the next 5 go through boarding? And frankly, after going through the application process for grad school, 5 years of stressful graduate-level training focused on neuropsych, the horribly outdated internship match debacle, applying for post-docs (of which there are too few), taking the EPPP, all on top of establishing my life and starting my family, requiring people to jump through yet another a largely arbitrary hoop (at least in its present form) that NOBODY outside this profession even knows exists seems like a silly waste of time, IMHO. At some point, you have to say "enough is enough." If I have gone through all the above why the heck am I still not qualified in neuropsych? If Im not, at least extend the fellowship to 3 or 4 years so I can actually get paid to be "certified" rather than paying thousands of dollars to fly to Chicago and take yet more tests to prove my worthiness to the neuropsych gods. My wife will thank you...