Tag Archives: Advocacy

Students at a #blacklivesmatter die-in. There is a planned die-in across the country on April 4. (Image source: Author).

National Graduate Student in Psychology Die-In on April 4

Students at a #blacklivesmatter die-in. There is a planned die-in across the country on April 4. (Image source: Author).

Med students at a #blacklivesmatter die-in at Stanford University. There is a planned die-in across the country on April 4. (Image source: David Purger, PhD, Stanford University. Used with permission.)

Editor’s Note: This post is submitted by Luciano Lima, a doctoral student at the Illinois School of Professional Psychology at Argosy University, in Chicago, Illinois. APAGS does not have an official position on this event, and takes no responsibility for any actions that may result from one’s independent decision to participate. 

Open Letter to Graduate Students in Psychology

Over the past few years this country has experienced an upwelling of racial strife resulting from the deaths of numerous black men, boys, and women at the hands of police officers. In response, medical students throughout the country staged a coordinated nationwide Die-In protest against racial bias and violence, which included over 90 medical schools and thousands of students. I observed their activities with admiration and thought to myself, “Why can’t we do that? The reasons provided by the medical students for their protest are just as applicable to graduate students in psychology:

“Racial bias and violence are not exclusively a problem of the criminal justice system. As we have seen in Ferguson, Mo., New York, and countless other places, bias kills, sickens, and results in inadequate healthcare. As medical students, we must take a stand against the oppression of our black and brown patients, colleagues, friends, and family. By standing together at medical schools nationwide, we hope to demonstrate that the medical student community views racial violence as a public health crisis. We are‪#‎whitecoats4blacklives.”

Racial bias causes damage not only to the physical, but also the mental health of our clients. We are intimate witnesses to the psychological harm that results from police violence and racial profiling—from the teenager who is unjustly stopped and searched on a routine basis merely for possessing the wrong skin color, to the families, loved ones, and communities traumatized by senseless killings.

In the APA Ethics Code, a guiding principle of our profession is promoting the welfare and protection of the individuals and groups with whom psychologists work. The code also calls on psychologists to “respect and protect the civil and human rights” of our clients. When the welfare of our clients is jeopardized by racial discrimination, we are called to stand up and seek justice on their behalf. Towards this end, we are calling for a coordinated nationwide Die-In demonstration of graduate psychology students and others who are passionate about this cause.

The nationwide Die-In of graduate psychology students will be on Monday, April 4, 2016, the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.

We call on fellow students to take up the torch and organize Die-ins on their respective campuses. The Chicago branch of the Die-in will be meeting at Daley Plaza (50 W Washington St, Chicago, IL 60602) at exactly 5 p.m., central time. We will lay together in silence for 16 minutes, each minute representing one of the bullets fired into Laquan McDonald. Please bring signs and dress for the weather!

We have created a Facebook event page to help coordinate our activities.

We call on student leaders to spread the word throughout their programs, so that we can make a powerful statement of our values and vision for the future. Also, please share this letter on social media and email your friends and colleagues to help get the word out.

Your Fellow Students,

‪#‎psychologists4blacklives

For additional questions please contact Luciano Lima and Keisha-Marie Alridge.

APAGS Dedicates Pages to Institutional Transparency

Transparency in government—in ensuring accountability, reducing barriers for involvement, and building institutional confidence—is perhaps one of the greatest assets a representative body can provide to its constituents. It can help ensure the dissemination of information, the empowerment of individuals to partake in their governing, and promote societal progress.

Volumes have been written on its importance, and many organizations espouse it as a tenet, including our federal government.  And yet, secrecy seems to be an insidious and ever-present danger in most all institutional settings, and examples of misuses of institutional secrecy abound (see Maret & Goldman’s 2011 Government Secrecy for a good review).

The extent to which transparency must be balanced with other elements of good governance—such as privacy, efficiency, and power—remains fervently contested. And yet, it is my belief that transparency is essential to both APA’s and APAGS’s missions.  APA’s mission, which emphasizes the broad dissemination and application of psychological principles and practices, mandates transparency to ensure that psychology is seen as a public science rather than a private interest.  APAGS’s mission, which emphasizes serving as a united voice to advocate for graduate student development, necessitates transparency in order to see itself as an inclusive enterprise.

Members of the APAGS staff and committee are working hard to improve transparency in our procedures.  As one step toward that aim, we are very eager to make our operations documents available online. There, you will find:

  • foundational aspects of our constitution and bylaws;
  • the proceedings of our meetings;
  • the ways we have spoken on behalf of graduate students through position statements;
  • our reports to other governing bodies; and
  • information outlining committee appointment and election procedures.

getinvolvedIt is indeed up to both our organization and to us, as members, to participate actively to promote institutional change. I strongly encourage you to peruse the documents listed on the page as a first step. If, in reading these sources, you’d like to get more involved in APAGS to ensure its success at all levels, please consider running for an elected position or subcommittee chair, applying to be a subcommittee member, serving as an APAGS Ambassador at Convention, writing a blog post, or joining the group I chair—the Advocacy Coordinating Team—as a Campus Representative.
We look forward to hearing your voice.

A Few Good Reasons Why the Internship Crisis Might Get (Slightly) Better

Internship is stressful, so let us bask in some good news for a moment.

For the past 18 years, APPIC has produced forward-looking best-case scenarios about the internship match for doctoral students in clinical, counseling, and school psychology using a point-in-time profile of applicants, doctoral internship sites, and open spots on New Year’s Eve.

APPIC predicts that the imbalance between the number of applicants and positions — what APAGS and others call a crisis — will continue to improve, as it has in 2015 and 2014.

Here is what APPIC shared recently* with the psychology education and training community:

  • There are currently only 148 more registered applicants than available positions (compared to a difference of 498 last year and 1,148 only four years ago)
  • Approximately 200 students withdraw from the Match each year after registering (for a variety of reasons, such as not having received any interview offers, deciding to delay their internship another year, seeking or obtaining a position outside the APPIC Match, etc). This suggests that the number of positions in the 2016 Match could equal, or even slightly exceed, the number of students who submit a Rank Order List. “Please note, however, that this does not mean that all applicants will get placed, nor will all positions get filled.”
  • As a result, the 2016 APPIC Match will likely show the closest balance between applicants and positions of any APPIC Match to date.
  • The number of accredited positions, while significantly improved this year, is far lower than the number of registered applicants. (APAGS reported on match rates using just data from the APA Commission on Accreditation on match day 2015).

APPIC reminds us that it has provided a snapshot as of December 31, 2015, and that numbers change each day.**

APPIC’s optimism is corroborated by Robert Hatcher’s new article in APPIC’s academic journal. Hatcher predicts that “even if the internship growth rate slowed to less than 1%, match rates would be in the mid-90% range by 2018” (2015). The article does paint some complications that we’ll be paying attention to.

Crave even more good news this week? APA just announced that “psychology graduate students now have access to 55 new APA-accredited internship slots, thanks to the accreditation of 11 internship programs that received funds from APA’s internship stimulus package. The new slots were created after APA’s Commission on Accreditation was able to accredit 17 internship programs in October. Eleven of those programs were internship stimulus grantees and the additional six programs will also provide a number of internship slots, but those numbers are not yet available.”

APAGS is well aware that while we have some optimistic news before us, not all qualified doctoral students who desire an internship will receive one, and not all doctoral programs and types are matching their students to accredited programs at comparable rates. APAGS has committed substantial resources to address these concerns, and we’ll continue to see that other groups do the same, until the crisis is effectively ended.

If you want to help address the internship crisis as an advocate, go to http://on.apa.org/internshipcrisis to learn how.


Notes:

*All APPIC information presented here, and much of the verbiage, was provided by APPIC in listserv announcements in January 2016.

**For numbers wonks: As of December 31, 2015, the total numbers of applicants and internship sites registered to participate in the 2016 APPIC Match were: 3,940 registered applicants, 3,792 positions offered by 786 registered internship sites (744 of these registered sites are APPIC members).  Compared to last year at this time, these numbers reflect a decrease of 223 applicants, an increase of 127 positions, and an increase of 14 internship sites.  Furthermore, the number of APA- and CPA-accredited positions has increased by 231. Compared to four years ago at this time, which was the year of the worst imbalance between applicants and positions: The number of registered applicants has decreased by 418 (4,358 to 3,940); The number of registered positions has increased by 582 (3,210 to 3,792); The difference between the numbers of registered positions and applicants has decreased by 1,000 (1,148 to 148); The number of registered APA- or CPA-accredited positions has increased by 590 (2,366 to 2,956); The number of registered internship sites has increased by 74 (712 to 786); The number of registered APPIC-member internship sites has increased by 77 (667 to 744).

 

Repost – The Choice No Parent Should Have to Make: The Case for Paid Family Leave

From Psychology Benefits Society, a blog from the APA Public Interest Hands of a familyDirectorate • January 13, 2016

By Sara Buckingham (PhD candidate in Clinical Psychology and Community & Applied Social Psychology at the University of Maryland,Baltimore County)

Like other American families, while Melissa and Rob eagerly anticipated the birth of their second child, they also had to decide how much time they could afford to take off work to care for their newborn. Physicians and psychologists recommend leave time of at least 6–8 weeks because:

Leave benefits children now and later in life. Leave increases the length of time a mother breastfeeds, which brings many benefitsnd is associated with lower rates of infant and child mortality. Having a parent at home during infancy is linked to better cognitive, social-emotional, and motor development, and fewer problem behaviors.

  • Leave benefits family relationships. Leave is associated with warmer parent-infant interactions, mothers better understanding child development, and fathers being more involved with their children – even after returning to work.
  • Leave benefits parents. Leave is linked to decreased maternal depression and anxiety, and parental mortality, and increased marriage satisfaction and fertility. Paid leave also benefits families financially by alleviating the expense of childcare (Gomby & Pei, 2009).

However, due to a lack of paid family leave, Rob took no leave and Melissa took only 3 weeks, returning to work well before her body had recovered and their infant was ready to be separated from his primary caregivers. Many American families cannot afford to take unpaid leave after the birth of a child. In fact, over one million American families face this choice annually: Roughly one in four American children are born into families who lack the assets to survive at the federal poverty level if the child’s provider(s) takes 3 months of unpaid leave (Wiedrich, Crawford, & Tivol, 2010). And many more struggle to make ends meet when they take off time to care for a loved one.

The U.S. is nearly unique in its failure to require paid family leave, as one of only two countries to not have any laws mandating paid family leave (Addati, Cassirer, & Gilchrist, 2014). The current Family and Medical Leave Act ensures that only employees of large businesses (i.e., those with more than 50 employees within a 75-mile radius) do not lose their jobs when they take time off to care for a newborn; however, employers are not required to pay workers during that time – and nearly 40% of U.S. workers receive no job-protected leave at all. Of a large survey of employers in 2008, only 1/2 offered partially paid leave for mothers, and less than 1/6 did so for fathers (Gomby & Pei, 2009). Lower income workers are even less likely to have access to paid leave (Phillips, 2004).

Read the full story and find out how you can get involved!

Integrated Healthcare and the Current State of Affairs

Experts from around the world met in November 2015, in Washington, D.C., to participate in a 2 ½-day summit,international “Global Approaches to Integrated Health Care: Translating Science and Best Practices into Patient-Centered Healthcare Delivery”.

Approximately 85 psychologists, physicians, public health workers and policy analysts met in person for the interdisciplinary summit as well as more than 400 virtual attendees from around the world, who viewed the proceedings via a live video simulcast. Two APAGS representatives, Justin Karr and Jerrold Yeo, attended the summit and provide their impressions and thoughts on this experience below.

Justin Karr

Dr. Tor Levin Hofgaard, the President of the Norwegian Psychological Association, spoke at the Summit and clarified a famous statement that he once made, in which he claimed that, “we should have psychologists at IKEA.” He meant that psychologist should be located where people are already going, decreasing stigma around mental health care and increasing the normality of seeing your psychologist. Integrated healthcare bears a special importance for health service psychologists, as we aim to collaborate with other medical professions by incorporating mental and behavioral health services into primary care. Ideally, psychological services can become as commonplace and de-stigmatized as a standard medical check-up, where people have a professional attend to their mental health within the same setting where they receive other medical services.

As a student, I saw the Summit as both awe-inspiring and daunting. The evidence promoting an integrated healthcare model is astounding. With cost-savings, improved health outcomes, and even higher clinician satisfaction ratings, there is an overwhelming amount of published research supporting the implementation of integrated healthcare. During a working group session of the Summit, one presenter actually stated, “We don’t need any more research,” clarifying that there is more than enough research to support moving forward with implementation. However, many barriers stand in the way of actualizing more widespread integrated services, including many changes that need to occur in funding structures, healthcare policies, current practices and educational standards.

Although the barriers are significant, the Summit left me with great optimism, as leaders across fields and occupational sectors came together to help make integrated healthcare a more common reality for the patients we serve. Dr. Arthur C. Evans, the Commissioner of Philadelphia’s Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Service (DBHIDS), shared one of his favorite sayings at the Summit, “Inherent in every community is the wisdom to solve its own problems.” As a community psychologist, he quoted this statement during a panel on special populations, emphasizing the involvement of local community members in the policy-making that directly affects their lives; however, I feel it also applies to our community as healthcare professionals. As Health Service Psychologists, we are members of the healthcare community, and with our colleagues across disciplines, we possess the wisdom to actualize integrated health care and support the well-being of the patients and clients that benefit from our services.

I look forward to seeing the continued integration of healthcare in my remaining time as a student, and over the course of my life as a psychologist. However, I do not see myself as merely an observer, but as a part of this change. As students, we will inherit many of the impending reforms coming to our clinical practice, and we must ensure that we voice both our support and concerns as these changes will surely impact our training and careers. Students must be actively engaged in the decision-making that determines training standards; not only during our graduate education, but also throughout our careers.

One discussion at the Summit emphasized the need to change patient expectations, where healthcare consumers expect access to integrated services every time they enter into a primary care facility. In the same light, we as students must expect effective training in collaborative practice that operates across disciplines. As consumers of graduate education, we are significant stakeholders in this enterprise, and we must have opportunities within our training to experience modern healthcare models in a way that best prepares us to work with other disciplines. In turn, I look forward to not only the changes that occur in practice following this Summit, but also the changes that will occur in education. As we prepare for an improved integration of care, I hope that we, as the next generation of psychologists, will become more appreciative of our fellow healthcare disciplines throughout our training; and in the same light, I hope that other disciplines will become more appreciative of health service psychology, understanding the unique and essential role of psychological services in the true integration of care.

Jerrold Yeo

Although the atmosphere of the summit was a little intimidating as it was well-attended by many key people in the field, I felt welcomed as a student representative attending the conference. I had never seen so many leaders of psychology from diverse cultures and backgrounds in the same room, and bouncing ideas and thoughts off them in addition to the networking experience felt surreal.

A number of points stuck with me as I listened to the many keynote speakers and panels throughout the summit. Listening to how different healthcare systems work in different countries and learning about the differences between them helped make me more aware of any challenges that I might face as a soon-to-be professional, (e.g., reimbursement, payment systems and Medicaid to aid lower-income families). It was also fascinating to hear a possibly controversial argument about not needing any more research on integrated care; but the take home message that I got from that was that we are doing good research on the topic, but have not been able to implement it as effectively as we would have liked.

It was also very interesting to hear the patient perspective at a professional summit like this. I think it provided a very real touch to the whole summit as we get reminded of why we do this: for the people. E-patient Dave, who is an activist for healthcare transformation through participatory medicine and personal health data rights, also reminded us that we should try to engage patients in their own treatment, to empower them to find out more about their own difficulties and make informed decisions.

Many times during the summit I questioned myself: “What am I doing here? As a student, what can I do?” These questions kept running through my mind as I attempted to socialize and network with these high-flying professionals. Only during the second part of each day did my question get answered. The second half of each day was devoted to small group discussion and brainstorming. Justin and I were split up into different groups so that we could provide a unique student perspective.  Personally, I advocated for the education of the general public from a young age to expect integrated care, which appeared to be well received. Where we shined was that we, as students, were able to provide a perspective that could complement the policy changes that the leaders in the field were proposing.

Through this summit, I think that I became inspired to become more involved in the advocacy of integrated care and provide more comprehensive services to my clients. As a student attending this summit, it became clear to me that, as future leaders in the field, we have to pave the way for psychology to be a part of the integrated care system by establishing important connections with other professions and advocating for psychology to be used more effectively and efficiently in the provision of health care services.

Editor’s Note: Justin Karr (University of Victoria) is the current APAGS Member-at-Large for Membership Recruitment/Retention and Jerrold Yeo (University of Denver) is a former member of the APAGS Convention Committee.