psychologistpsychologistT E X A SpsychologistT E X A S

www.texaspsyc.org

Immigration Status and Mental Health Issues in Texas

A Legislative Agenda for 2007

WINTER 2006

Volume 57Issue 4

WINTER 2006 3

FEATURESUnique Needs of Early Career Psychologists. . . . . . . . . 10Marla C. Craig, PhD

Closing a Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Brian H. Stagner, PhD

Immigration Status and Mental Health Issues in Texas. . . . 16Richard M. McGraw, PhD

2006 Texas Psychological Association Distinguished Professional Contribution Awards . . . . . . . 18

Psychology as a Science and the Importance of the Doctoral Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . 26M. David Rudd, PhD, ABPP

Greetings Fellow Texas Psychologists!. . . . . . . . . . . . 28M. H. Wright, PhD

DEPARTMENTSFROM THE EDITOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Brian H. Stagner, PhD

FROM THE PRESIDENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6M. David Rudd, PhD, ABPP

PAST PRESIDENT’S COLUMN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Melba J.T. Vasquez, PhD, ABPP

TPF CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

2006 AAPT CONTRIBUTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

NEW MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Brian Stagner, PhDEditor

David White, CAEExecutive Director

Sherr y ReismanAssistant Executive Director

George ArredondoMarketing/CE Coordinator

TPA Board of Trustees

M. David Rudd, PhDPresident

Ron Cohorn, PhDPresident-Elect

Ollie J. Seay, PhDPresident-Elect Designate

Melba J.T. Vasquez, PhDPast President

Board MembersAlan Fisher, PhD

Bonnie Gardner, PhDStephen Loughhead, PhD

Randy Noblitt, PhDLane Ogden, PhD

Selia Ser vin-Lopez, PsyD Verlis Setne, PhD

Brian Stagner, PhDThomas Van Hoose, PhD

Alison Wilson, PhD

Ex-Officio Board MembersRob Mehl, PhD

Association for the Advancement of Psychology in Texas President

Sheila Jenkins, PhDTexas Psychology

Foundation President

Amanda HookStudent Division Director

Ollie J. Seay, PhDSherr y Reisman

Federal Advocacy Coordinators

The Texas Psychological AssociationIs located at 1005 Congress Avenue,

Suite 825, Austin, Texas 78701.

Texas Psychologist (ISSN 0749-3185)is the of ficial publication of TPA

and is published quar terly.

www.texaspsyc.org

4 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

A lot happened in 2006, mostly good. We had a terrific convention in Dallas, with informative continu-

ing education sessions, the installation of new officers, and many updates on the future of psychology as a profession. Our annual conference is a great value in so many ways,

not least of which is the chance to rub shoul-ders with so many excellent psychologists. In 2007 we’re in San Antonio, November 15-17, so mark your calendars early!

One of the features at our convention is the presentation of awards to the many peo-ple whose efforts have promoted psychology as a profession and as a discipline. We believe that psychology has much to offer the world, and this message has been carried forward in scholarship, practice, and public policy. The recipients are a stellar group that should make us all proud. They are cited again here as a recognition of their many contributions.

Another thing that happened at the con-vention is the presentation of TPA’s agenda for the upcoming legislative session. The last time the legislature was in session we were up to our eyeballs worrying about the sun-set of the Psychologists’ Licensing Act. That major issue has been settled, fortunately, but we should not rest on our laurels (nor should we). Our incoming president, Dr. Rudd, in-troduces a plan for the coming legislature.

An issue that has been troubling psy-chologist (in Texas and across the country) is the issue of the doctoral standard for psy-

chology. Most of us assume that psychology is indeed a doctoral profession. Indeed, this is the stated position of the APA. However there are several challenges to our certainty. The efforts of licensed psychological associ-ates in Texas to extend independent practice of psychology to master’s level clinicians are

by now familiar, and we will continue to monitor these activities. In addition, there are similar pressures from Europe and from our southern borders that would erode the doctoral standard. These are not easy chal-lenges, and it behooves us all to understand the reasoning that supports our position. To that end, Dr. Rudd has an article in this issue that reviews some of the rationale for view-ing the doctorate as definitive of professional autonomy.

The following story was related to me; similar incidents may occur in many com-munities. About fifteen years ago a vener-ated professional in the community passed away. He had not practiced for at least a decade, but he did attend meetings of the local area society well beyond his retirement and he was respected as one of the first psy-chologists to establish a professional pres-ence in the town, way back in the 1960s and 70s. A couple of months after the funeral, a psychologist received a call from the daughter of the departed colleague. “I thought I should ask somebody,” she said, “but I was talking to Mom about what hap-pened to the records from Dad’s practice.

She said they were stored in boxes in the ga-rage and that when former patients called to ask about their records she had been telling them to go out in the garage and look for their charts in those boxes. Is this allowed?” Well, uh, no. It is not surprising that there were no provisions made for the disposition

of his practice because there were no guide-lines for this at the time he retired. Such guidelines are emerging today. Much as we’d rather not do this, we all need to do some planning for closing our shop. Some of the important considerations are summarized in an article here.

Our colleague Rick McGraw presents an article on behalf of the Social Justice Task Force on the mental health issues raised by immigration. He describes legislation that we should all be following. It addresses a facet of immigration issues that will affect mental health services in Texas for years to come and we all have an interest in seeing it addressed properly.

Finally, TPA has moved! Same building, but up a few floors. Actually, the movers were David, Sherry, and the indefatigable troop-ers on the TPA staff who spent the week be-fore Christmas (when they should have been resting on their laurels from putting on the great convention) toting boxes and furniture upstairs. Want to send a housewarming? Volunteer for a TPA committee and sign a colleague up as a new member of TPA!!

Cheers.

FROM THE EDITOR Brian H. Stagner, PhD

Happy New Year from TPA!

In 2007 we’re in San Antonio, November 15-17, so mark your calendars early!

6 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

The coming year will undoubtedly be an eventful one, with the 80th version of the Texas Legislature set

to begin. As we approach the session, the mental health needs of Texans are profound. The number of children and adults identified as at-risk continues to grow, access to care is declining, and continuity of care across set-tings and providers is strained, with the con-sequences serious and sometimes tragic. Of children and adults recognized as at-risk in Texas, access to care is extremely limited. Available estimates indicate that TDMHMR (now the Department of State Health Ser-vices and the Department of Aging and Dis-ability Services) was able to serve only 26% of the children and 38% of the adults who should be eligible for services. In terms of total numbers, 2002 estimates indicate that 4.3 million Texans (3.1 million adults and 1.2 million children) suffered a diagnosable mental illness, with over 1.5 million suffering serious mental illness (defined as schizophre-nia, bipolar disorder, or major depression). There’s little question that the numbers are much greater today. It’s estimated that up to half of all Americans will suffer a mental illness at some point in their lives.

Despite the large number of Texans strug-gling with mental illness, Texas spent almost fifteen percent less on mental health servic-es in fiscal year 2002 than it did in 1981, standing at 49th nationally. Such a dramatic decline during a period of escalating need among the most vulnerable in our state is almost unthinkable. In 2003, the Texas Legislature cut health and human services

by approximately $1 billion, with mental health services absorbing a $50 million cut. Additional steps were taken to limit access to care, including redefining eligibility cri-teria and altering access to anti-psychotic medications. Consequences of under-fund-ing and restricting access to mental health care are substantial, serious and often tragic. In addition to the individual pain and suf-fering from either under-treatment or the complete absence of care, it’s estimated that the economic cost of mental illness in Texas in 2003 was in the neighborhood of $16.6 billion, including lost income and mortality costs. In the most extreme cases, untreated or under-treated mental illness is associated with suicide, with estimates suggesting that 90-95% of those taking their own lives suf-fered a mental illness at the time. Suicide is not only tragic but preventable. Treatment success rates for serious mental illness vary between 60-80 percent, far above compa-rable success rates for the treatment of com-mon physical ailments (e.g. heart disease treatment success rates range from 40-50%). There were a total of 2,214 suicides in Texas in 2001, an increase of 121 (6%) from the year 2000. Sadly, thirty-three children be-low the age of 14 took their own lives in Texas in 2000. In addition to the human and economic costs, it’s also important to recognize that the net outcome of such leg-islative moves simply shift mental health needs to other systems; most importantly, increased and longer psychiatric admissions, increased visits to emergency rooms and in-carceration.

As is evident, mental health needs won’t simply disappear, rather the problems will often escalate and emerge in dramatic and sometimes tragic fashion when care is de-nied or restricted. Consistent with our mission, and in recognition of the realities summarized above, the Texas Psychological Association is dedicated to improving the lives of Texans. Our agenda for the 2007 legislative year includes three interdepen-dent themes: improving access to care, improving continuity of care across inpa-tient, residential and outpatient settings, and improving the quality of psychologi-cal services. I think you will find that most, arguably all, of the issues relevant to mental health care in Texas will fall into one of these domains. Improving access to care for Texans will demand improved state support for those in greatest need and the most vulnerable in our state, including children and economically disadvantaged families. Access to care translates not only to increased Medicaid and Medicare fund-ing, but also increased staffing at both inpatient and outpatient public facilities around the state. There are also concerns about limitations in access to emergency services, including short-term hospitaliza-tion, for those in crisis. There continue to be problems in coordinating care across in-patient, residential and outpatient settings, with providers in each domain having lim-ited access to critical information about patients and the nature of care provided. The implications of limited communica-tion and shared information across set-

FROM THE PRESIDENT M. David Rudd, PhD, ABPP

Embracing Wellness and Improving the Lives of Texans: A Legislative Agenda for 2007

WINTER 2006 7

Texas Psychologist

tings and providers can be critical, in some cases, raising the risk for continued prob-lems and negative outcomes that result in increased healthcare costs, both inpatient and outpatient. Efforts need to be made to improve communication among provid-ers across settings in an effort to enhance treatment outcomes and reduce costs, all the while recognizing the need for privacy and confidentiality. Improving the quality of mental health care in Texas demands improved access (among others areas), but, ultimately, means that providers are appropriately trained, educated, and have applied clinical experience. Additionally, quality of care is influenced by regulatory issues, including continuing education re-quirements. Naturally, we’ll also be moni-toring and responding to proposed legis-lation that will influence psychology and mental health care in Texas.

As we approach the 80th Legislature, I’ll be reminding our board and members of the three “C’s” for 2007: collaboration, continuity, and compassion. We will be working collaboratively with a number of other groups on various projects, all geared toward reinvigorating compassion in our mental healthcare system. Similarly, we are thinking strategically about the con-tinuity of various projects, initiatives and relationships across sessions. We want the initiatives we pursue to have a long shelf life, recognizing that significant advances in mental health care are the outcome of carefully conceptualized, collaborative and deliberate efforts. In short, we’re thinking long-term with clear recognition that some of the things we want and need to accom-plish professionally will take time. We want to build relationships with legislators that endure for more than one session or a few meetings. We want to develop initiatives and propose legislation that has a natu-ral, productive, and meaningful course, all geared toward improving the lives of Tex-ans. As Margaret Meade said “A society is measured by how it treats its most vulner-

able citizens”. A quick review of the data suggest that we’re falling short and have some work to do not just in 2007, but for many years to come.

Let me invite you to get involved. For-ward your concerns and comments. Find time to meet your legislators; let them know your concerns as well. Professional psychology has but a fraction of the num-bers of other mental health providers in Texas, yet we can be the most visible and respected name in mental health care. The practice of psychology is varied and unique, with much of what we think of as professional practice taking place outside traditional settings like hospitals, clinics, group practices and the like. Accordingly, we need to hear from you. Let us know your concerns, particularly if you believe they fall outside routine and predictable

bounds. As a part of our increased efforts at collaboration, we’ll be participating in the Patient Coalition Legislative Day on Monday, February 5, 2006. Stay tuned for the announcement of the TPA Legislative Day. If you want to share your thoughts or concerns, you can reach me by email at david.rudd@ttu.edu. Be active, get in-volved and voice your concerns. If you’re not a member of TPA, join. If you’ve not already done so, please make a donation to Association for the Advancement of Psy-chology in Texas, formerly known as PSY-PAC. We need your voice, energy, effort, and support.

Acknowledgement I’m deeply indebted to Mental Health

America of Texas for the data cited in this piece.

8 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Gracias y Adios!

PAST PRESIDENT’S COLUMN Melba J.T. Vasquez, PhD, ABPP

Gracias a todos! I am incredibly grateful and honored for the op-portunity to serve as President of

Texas Psychological Association this year. It has been both a wonderful opportunity as well as an anxiety provoking responsibility.

The annual convention was a great suc-cess, with over 500 registrants who attended a broad range of very good programs. The invited guests lived up to our high expecta-tions, and the various celebratory events such as the luncheon and the Texas Psychological Foundation auction were highly enjoyable. Congratulations to all TPA and TPF award winners (see awards article, this issue).

One of my goals this year was to focus on the importance of psychologists’ attention to diversity in the broad sense of the term, in-cluding ethnic/racial minority/immigration issues, but also other diverse issues, such as those related to gender; gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender; disabilities; age. These are not fringe issues. Psychologists in general, and organized psychology in particular, are in a position to reaffirm the values of the pro-fession, and provide leadership against the damages of prejudice, stigma and discrimina-tion of all marginalized groups. Psychology should be a model for what society should be. TPA is ideally a place where diversity is mainstreamed, and where mutual apprecia-tion exists for the contributions of all.

We began the year by cosponsoring an Immigration Conference in San Antonio, Texas, with several divisions of the Ameri-can Psychological Association, and with APA President Gerry Koocher. We held our first Board of Trustees meeting of the year in con-junction with that conference. See TPA Past-

President Rick McGraw’s article on Immi-gration, this issue that identifies some of the very timely issues. We resurrected the Texas Psychologist, under the able editorships of Donna Davenport and Brian Stagner, which included a new column “In the public inter-est” coordinated by Rick McGraw, as part of his chairpersonship of a Social Justice Task Force (soon to be a Special Interest Group).

We have new Special Interest Groups, including one on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Is-sues (founded by Richard Holt), and one on Early Career Psychologists (founded by Marla Craig). The Diversity Special Interest Group collected enough signatures to be made into a division, under the leadership of Vincent Ramos, with the help of former Chairs Jose Sanchez and Sheila Jenkins. These members, along with new BOT member Selia Servin-Lopez also proposed to the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists (TSBEP) that they allow for competency training in diversity issues, an ethical requirement according to our APA Ethics Code, to “count” for the required continuing education ethics training.

Other successful projects include our mid-year Professional Education Conference, held in Austin; it was well attended, as was an eth-ics workshop sponsored by our Prescription Privileges Division. We’ve also proposed that the Texas Education Agency recognize the new APA sponsored high school curriculum, This effort is coordinated by TPA Board of Trustee member Alan Fisher and Marissa Sarabando, a high school psychology instruc-tor at Lamar Academy in McAllen Tx., who served on the APA task force to update the high school curriculum. TPA funded and co-ordinated an Oral Exam Work Group, with

TSBEP, which was requested by the Sunset Commission.

We have revised job descriptions for our very able staff, including extending the re-sponsibilities of our Executive Director Da-vid White to do more lobbying and interact-ing among our membership via the Local Area Societies; Sherry Reisman has more in house responsibilities, as a result. George Ar-redondo is a new, full time staff person, and a great addition! Our staff also produced a beautiful TPA 2006 membership directory, and continues to make our website accessible and helpful. The TPA sponsored “Psychol-ogy News” that clips and provides articles of interest, is a new, very popular benefit of membership as well. Staff is working to produce a comparable “Legislative Clips” to keep our membership informed of relevant events during the legislative session.

We’ve had a very active Psy-Pac, now re-named the Association for the Advancement of Psychology in Texas (AAPT), under the leadership of Dr. Mimi Wright, and a very active Texas Psychological Foundation, un-der the leadership of Dr. Elizabeth Richeson. See reports from them, this issue. From the Presidential view, I was able to see many of the contributions of the leadership of various Local Area Societies.

The responsibilities that evoked anxiety mostly had to do with the challenges that came from master’s level Licensed Psycholog-ical Associates and from Licensed Specialists in School Psychology via their respective re-quests to the TSBEP for rule changes. It fell to TPA to present positions that both pro-tected clarity of title and professional services for the consumer as well as for the profession.

WINTER 2006 9

CONFIDENTIAL AND EXPERIENCED

LEGAL REPRESENTATIONFOR TEXAS PHYSICIANS

Representation before The Texas State Board of Examiners ofPsychologists, Texas Medical Board, The Texas Medical

Foundation, and Medical Staff Peer Review.• Personal Counsel in Medical Liability Cases

• Non-Profit Certification / Recertification• Probation Modification / Termination • Managed Care Exclusions • Licensure

• Reinstatement • Medico-legal Issues• Expert Review • Telemedicine

• Medical Ethics Opinions • Physician Assistants.

SHARP & COBOS, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW

4705 SPICEWOOD SPRINGS ROAD • SUITE 100• AUSTIN, TEXAS 78759 • 512 473 2265 • FAX: 512 473 8525 • www.sharpcobos.com

TONY COBOS**MICHAEL SHARP*

* Board Certified in Administrative Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. ** Not Board Certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.

COURTNEY NEWTON**

My personal “default” tendency is to support and facilitate empowerment of groups that experience disempowerment. However, the professional situation is more complex than that. The primary issue has to do with the fact that the doctorate in psychology is the appropriate and minimum educational re-quirement for entry into the independent practice of psychology. Both the title of psy-chologist and the independent practice of psychology have been clearly determined by Texas legislative intent as well as by national standards in the profession, Fortunately, TSBEP agreed that it was not their role to change those. The training and expertise of doctoral level psychologists is substantively different from those persons with master’s degrees. It is likely that we will continue to have to address these issues during the next legislative session.

Executive Director David White’s inspira-tion to hold a retreat to educate the leader-

ship among the Local Area Societies about these and other related issues was a tremen-dous success, and promoted our theme of in-clusion. We also provided and will continue to provide input regarding the new proposed credential for Sex Offender Treatment, (an-other challenge) which we believe is redun-dant for licensed psychologists who specialize in this field.

Another anxiety-producing issue in the past year had to do with the declining access to care for the mental health needs of Tex-ans, especially those identified as “at-risk”. The 79th legislature cut health and human services significantly, and we witnessed the painful fallout. We look to the 80th legisla-tive year to promote increased funding for all services. See David Rudd’s article, this issue, for more detail about how to be involved in these efforts. I look forward to working with all of you to make next year a successful one, and strongly encourage your contributions

to these efforts.I wish I had space to mention the very

hard work of several of our Board of Trust-ees and other TPA members on numerous other projects. As I see people follow their passions and commitments in support of our consumers and the profession, my belief in humanity is affirmed.

In this, my final column, I would like to express appreciation to all who made this a very good year. The TPA Executive Com-mittee and Board of Trustees, TPA’s staff, and all the incredible volunteers, too numerous to mention, have been inspiring. I want to especially thank my life-partner (as well as business associate), Jim H. Miller. In addi-tion to being the love of my life, he is (mostly) exceedingly patient and supportive of me as I engage in this very consuming “hobby”—in-volvement in professional leadership-- that entails numerous hours of involvement.

Adios, y hasta luego!

10 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Unique Needs of Early Career PsychologistsMarla C. Craig, PhD

Outreach Services and Program Development Coordinator

St. Edward’s University

Do I try to get a job first or get licensed? What steps do I need to take in order to get licensed?

How do I get my practice off the ground (insurance, paperwork, billing, etc)? How do I balance my career goals while starting a family? Should I specialize in a certain area? Who can I talk to about my career goals and aspirations after I graduate? These ques-

tions and several others are at the forefront for many new professionals. The Texas Psy-chological Association (TPA) has created a new initiative to address these needs.

What is an early career psychologist (ECP)? An ECP is considered to be some-one who has completed their doctoral de-gree within the last 7 years (State Leader-ship Conference, 2006). Between 1985 and 2003, ECPs shrank from a third to a quar-ter of APA’s membership, while later career membership doubled to a third (Law, 2004). This is cause for concern since new psychol-ogists represent the future of the discipline. Possible reasons for the decline include de-mands placed on new professionals such as spending more time in postdocs, incurring more debt, splitting time between multiple

jobs, and attempting to balance career and family. The career path is different for many early-career psychologists. They are likely to have more debt and multiple jobs (e.g., an adjunct professor with some consulting and practice on the side). Innovative uses of the psychology degree are more common today than in the past.

APA has created a continuing Commit-

tee on Early Career Psychologists to address the unique needs of members starting first jobs while also facing such challenges as starting families and paying off education debt (Law, 2004). Many states (e.g., Wash-ington DC, New York, Kentucky) have started Special Interest Groups (SIG) and Divisions for ECPs.

It is with great pleasure to announce that the Texas Psychological Association (TPA) has passed a motion to adopt a Special In-terest Group for Early Career Psychologists. This decision was made at TPA’s 2006 an-nual convention. The Early Career Psychol-ogist (ECP) Special Interest Group (SIG) would address the unique needs of TPA members who have completed their doc-toral degree within the past 7 years and who

are starting first jobs while also facing such challenges as starting families and paying down education debt.

At this year’s TPA convention there was a roundtable discussion, “Unique Needs of Early Career Psychologists,” attended by many new professionals and students who expressed much enthusiasm and energy about TPA’s initiative for ECPs. The at-tendees also shared some of the challenges associated with being an ECP and generated several ideas to discuss with TPA’s Board of Trustees in order to best meet the needs of ECPs. At the end of the roundtable discus-sion, several attendees volunteered to be committee members including Marla C. Craig, PhD (Chair); Nora Benny, PsyD.; Angela Cool, PhD; Mekel Harris, MA, LPA; Patty Reyes; Celeste A. Riley, PhD; J. Gregory Ryan, PsyD., LSSP; Joanne Salas, PhD; Russel Thompson, PhD; Eric Wood; and Catherine Woolley, PhD Thank you to these individuals for their willingness to get involved.

There are many goals that could be ac-complished by having a voice within TPA. One goal of ECP SIG would be to help make the value of TPA membership more obvious to early-career professionals. Since, early ca-reer psychologists tend to be overwhelmed with the demands of their new profession (finding employment, education debt, ob-taining licensure), it would benefit ECPs to learn about career opportunities in Texas and the professional process through TPA.

Another goal would be to develop TPA resources to help with tasks like setting up a practice, traversing the tenure track, and advertising employment opportunities in Texas. Further, TPA could provide tips and suggestions in the following areas: obtain-ing employment and licensure; minimizing loan debt; securing research grants; han-

An Early Career Psychologist is considered to be someone

who has completed their doctoral degree within the last 7 years.

WINTER 2006 11

Texas Psychologist

dling health insurers; and providing net-working among new professionals, graduate students, and experienced professionals.

A third goal would be to propose a new dues schedule. A revised dues schedule would allow ECPs (effective for new TPA members) to pay reduced rates instituted on a graduated pay scale, such that the dues would continue to increase from year to year taking into account financial challenges posed to ECPs.

A fourth goal would be to develop a mentoring program similar to that of New York State Psychological Association for students and early career psychologists to identify and develop their professional ca-reers (www.nyspa.org). The mentoring pro-cess would provide a venue to communicate

with new professionals and others with more experience. Mentoring is important in the development of every psychologist. The mentoring relationship between a more experienced psychologist and a student or early career psychologist would help to fa-cilitate the professional growth of ECPs (www.nyspa.org).

This is an exciting time for ECPs. It is important that we take initiative to get more involved at the state (TPA) and national lev-el (APA). Together our voice is strong while our needs are unique. We are the future of TPA and psychology!

A special thank you goes to Dr. Melba J. T. Vasquez, whose continued support has been most influential in making this initia-tive possible.

For more information or if you want to get involved, please contact any of the following persons:

Marla C. Craig, PhD marlac@stedwards.edu

Angela Cool, PhD dr_angela_cool@yahoo.com

Mekel Harris, MA, LPA huntmek@sbcglobal.net

Catherine Woolley, PhD Catherine.Woolley@utsa.edu

ReferencesLaw, B. M. (2004). Psychology’s newest get their due. Monitor on Psychology, 35, 56.

New York State Psychological Association, www.nyspa.org

Texas Law and the Practice of PsychologyA Sourcebook

By TPA EditorsCode: XB-205 ISBN: 1886298203 Pages 256 $35.00

The Single Resource for the Legal Guidelines Shaping the Practice of Psychology in Texas.

Texas Law and the Practice of Psychology provides licensed psychologists, psychol-ogy students, interns, and professors with the key legal and policy issues specific to the state of Texas today. Issues directly affecting all these practitioners and their students have been carefully selected from statutes, case laws, official archives of the Attorney General Opinions and Open Records Opinions as well as synopses of the opinion letters of the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists. No other compilation of such critical, up-to-date material exists for the state of Texas.

Quickly and easily find information that would usually take hours to track down. Practitioners and students alike will find comprehensive codes related to:

• Civil Practice and Remedies • Human Resources

• Education • Insurance

• Family • Penal

• Occupation • Health and Safety

• HIPAA

For more information or to order, go to www.bayoupublishing.com and click on the books link or email orders@bayoupublishing.com or call 800-340-2034

12 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Closing a Practice

Brian H. Stagner, PhD

Clinical Associate Professor

Psychology Department Texas A&M University

Eventually any professional practice will come to a close in response to transitions in the practitioner’s cir-

cumstances. These transitions may be hope-ful, as when a psychologist relocates to a new community, a different job, or retirement, or sad, as when the provider succumbs to impairment, illness, or death. In all cases closing a practice is more complicated than

we realize and it is one of those unrewarding duties we prefer to avoid thinking about very much. In fact, closing a practice is such a complicated process that you should, ideally, allow six months to one year to accomplish the many tasks involved. Some psychologists who are retiring begin planning how to their practice up to two years ahead of time, while others condense closure into a few months. Practices that must close due to unanticipat-ed illness or the sudden death of the provider require a plethora of important decisions with little time to think. Regardless of how imminent you think you may be to winding things down, you should probably formulate some sort of a written plan for the disposi-

tion of your practice. This written plan can provide the skeleton for your winding down and retiring plan, and in the interim it will serve as the instructions for the executors of your practice should you be unable to handle these tasks yourself.

There are few rules about closing a prac-tice; there are many guidelines and these vary according to the circumstances of the

practice. Some suggestions deal with the business, legal, or risk management aspects of closure, while others concern clinical is-sues. This article will provide an overview of the questions to think about when mak-ing a plan for the closing of a practice. The first section considers problems that must be addressed when any practice is going to close, regardless of the reason. A second sec-tion details considerations for pre-planning for the unexpected disposition of a practice due to illness or death. The ethical and le-gal considerations involved in the sale of a practice are more complicated than we have space for here, but this will be considered in a later article.

Closing your practiceWhether occasioned by planned retire-

ment or unexpected death, closing any prac-tice entails answering two sets of questions. To answer the “who” questions, one needs to have a plan for announcing the closure of the practice. To answer the “what” questions, one needs to consider tasks that need to be completed and to appreciate the chronology of events.

Who should be told—and how? Every psychologist should have some sort of writ-ten plan to address this issue. Obviously this first involves the employees and clients of the practice. The Texas State Board of Ex-aminers of Psychologists (TSBEP) states, in rule 465.32-b that psychologists who close or sell a practice are required to “make rea-sonable effort to notify current and former patients or clients” and to specify where pa-tient records will be transferred. The em-phasis of rule 465.32 is that the closure or transfer by sale of a practice should assure the continuity of care for ongoing and re-cent clients by specifying where records will be kept, by obligating the departing practice to provide adequate referrals to all clients and to ensure that the records are forwarded to the new provider. The TSBEP rule es-tablishes a very minimal threshold. An un-systematic perusal of guidelines from other settings suggests a more definitive and more stringent standard: notification by running a public notice for two weeks in the paper of record plus sending a (return receipt) letter to any client seen at least once in the previ-ous three years.

A written plan for notification should address • How clients are to be notified of changes

From the day the doors close a number of tasks must be

addressed to successfully wind up the disposition of a practice.

WINTER 2006 13

Texas Psychologist

in the practice. This is best done by let-ter explaining the change, including the final date of practice. (Some guidelines recommend that letters be sent by certi-fied mail, return receipt requested, and that a copy of the letter with return receipt. To inform inactive patients or those who have moved away, place an advertisement in a local newspaper.)

• How clients will be advised as to where their clinical records will be stored in-cluding how to access them. To facilitate forwarding records to a new practitioner an authorization form should be includ-ed in the letter.

• How clients will secure continuity of care. If the practice is being taken over by another psychologist or another can be recommended, clients can be referred to that provider. In other cases, disposi-tion may be on a case-by case basis (e.g. referral back to referring physician, re-ferral to office associates, etc.) but the process should be spelled out.

For both legal and ethical reasons, notifica-tion also involves many other institutions, including:• The state licensing board. TSBEP re-

quires that you submit notification when you intend to retire your license. It is NOT sufficient to simply stop paying your renewal fees. Contacting the board is imperative if you want to avoid the hassles of a revocation process. (TSBEP requires this for technical reasons that are imposed on the board as a matter of law, so just do it.)

• Any insurer covering the practice, its em-ployees or facilities. Review the policies to determine notice requirements and how to obtain premium refunds. Many insurance plans have a 90-day notice of termination provision

• Medicare and Medicaid. • All third-party payers. In most managed

care contracts there are specifications re-garding notice. These may have changed since the contract was initiated. Hope-

fully, you have been keeping up to date with your records of these contracts and have kept them well organized so you (and/or your executor) can access them with relative ease.

• Hospitals and other facilities/agencies where you have consulting relationships

• Professional associations in which you hold membership.

There are still further notification obli-gations. Which colleagues need to be told of the changes in your practice? Obviously the psychologists who will pick up referrals from your practice need to be told both that the referrals are coming and how they can arrange to have access to treatment records. People who refer to you may need to be notified that your practice is closed. Fur-ther, after spending years developing word of mouth referral networks and bundles of cash on advertising, psychologists often ne-glect to turn off the taps that flow into their practices. To be thorough it is important to post notices on all web-based resources (including referral sites as well as personal websites) and to request that the phone company forward incoming telephone calls to another practitioner. This last one is im-portant: clients shouldn’t get a “no longer in service” message when they call in an emer-gency.

What needs to be done, and over what time line? From the day the doors close a number of tasks must be addressed to successfully wind up the disposition of a practice. These are treated here in rough conceptual order. Since some of these tasks arise on the day of your last client contact, it will be very helpful to have done the leg work ahead of time and to be prepared with a plan of action.

• Immediate office operations: Here most practices will continue under the same policies that they have been following, so a great deal of this information will be in the practice’s policy and procedures

manual. This is a step that most small practices probably shortchange, so let’s digress a moment. Because your practice may close unexpectedly (and for other reasons beyond our concern here), your everyday practices should be written down. For now, this can be used to orient new staff members, and will be invaluable should it be necessary for an executor to assume responsibility for closing your practice. A good policy manual should include discussions ofo How security of the physical space, the

clinical files, bookkeeping and payroll records and the electronic records are to be maintained, and the procedure for backing up electronic data. This includes who has access, where keys are kept, and how to ascertain pass-words in an emergency. Are any files being stored off-site?

o A list of personnel to contact in an emergency, including both logistical support (e.g., landlord, building se-curity, info tech services, bookkeeper, accountant, attorney) and clinical backup.

o The written procedural information on the release of records.

o Where all contracts between the prac-tice and referral agencies, third party payors, and services vendors can be found.

• Billing issues: Usually, the last order of business in discontinuing a practice is dealing with accounts receivable. It may 12 to 15 months to collect 90 percent of the money you are owed, although your own billing experience will provide a ba-sis for prediction. How will this task be handled? For a short while, it may make sense to keep the office running so staff can process collections. You can move the practice's billing operations to home and work on it there or you can hire a billing service. (An alternative is to sell AR to whoever takes over your practice but as noted that is beyond the scope of this article).

14 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

• Liability: The office may continue to function after the practice closes, so all the general liability issues persist; it may be possible to negotiate reduced premi-ums due to reduced traffic in the office or a smaller payroll. The more crucial issue is professional liability. Most psy-chologists have coverage for claims made during a calendar year, covering any ac-tivity that may have occurred in prior years. Upon closing the practice, liabil-ity continues as claims may be made in the future. Many carriers provide for the purchase of the “tail” of this ongoing li-ability. It makes sense to research several products well before the practice closes.

• Taxes will be owed and filings will be re-quired both the year the practice closes and the year following.

• Eventually you will be ready to disman-tle the physical plant, breaking leases, selling furniture, disposing of books and journals (good luck with that!), and all the other things that go with moving. Remember that HIPPA regulations es-tablish standards for preserving patient privacy when disposing of electronic me-dia such as hard drives. When your tele-phone is turned off, arrange for calls to be forwarded so that former clients will not be left in limbo.

• Tell the governor. Really, the Secretary of State needs to be notified if you are closing a limited liability corporation or other legally recognized entity. Consult your attorney.

• Make a timeline and a budget: After re-viewing all the things you will need to do, try to estimate when each task will be finished and to set aside resources to complete the task, including a budget for the costs of hiring a collection agen-cy, retaining legal or accounting help, maintaining insurance, etc.

In the event of death or disability

Several years ago, there was a presenta-tion at APA on the difficulties encountered

when an active practitioner dies unexpect-edly (Salomon, 2001). The program was a response to the sudden, unexpected loss (in separate, unrelated incidents) of four prom-inent psychologists from the same profes-sional community. As we might expect, the fine psychologists in the area stepped up to help out, providing oversight of the dispo-sition of ongoing cases, managing records, and so forth. Most of the thrust of the APA program was on the clinical problems; the clients’ responses to losing a therapist, the intrusion of understandable grief reactions into the process of establishing a new alli-ance, and of course the countertransference problems for therapists who were often dealing with their own grief at losing a col-league. A secondary theme, however, was the tremendous burden placed on the surviv-ing psychologists to step into a colleague’s ongoing practice with little information or guidance from either professional standards (including board guidance, case law, and so forth) or from the deceased practitioner.

Some professional associations and one or two licensure boards have discussed guidelines or recommendations that might establish a standard for planning for the un-expected closing of a practice due to death or disability. Central to proposals is that the practitioner develops a professional will. Pope and Vasquez (2005) have outlined the basic elements for this preplanning for psychologists, and several attorneys have described similar process for the benefit of other professions. Like long-term care in-surance, living wills or preplanning one’s funeral, the professional will is a task un-dertaken to ease the burden on others. One hopes it will never be needed, but it needs to be done.

Assuming that your practice has a good policy manual and that you have developed the written plan for closing your practice, your next task is to identify a colleague who will serve as your agent---the executor of your practice. This person will be called upon to make both business and clinical decisions, so it needs to be a mental health professional

with some understanding of your particular kind of practice; this person needs to un-derstand your business, but also needs to be competent to make clinical decisions regard-ing continuity of care for the clients.

In thinking about who you might ask to serve in this capacity, consider the workload involved. How big is your current casel-oad? How many returning clients does your practice see in a given year? How big is the business---accounts receivable, number of accounts, long term debt, non-clinical em-ployees, and so forth. Are there other clini-cians in the practice and will they require ongoing supervision? Are there other clini-cians in the practice who can be enlisted to help meet the needs of your clients?

Once you have identified a person to serve as the executor of your practice, meet with them, and discuss what you want them to do. This is a time to briefly review your written plan for closing the practice. You may wish to provide a copy of this, but you may be updating it from time to time so let your executor know where the most current version will be kept. At that time, make sure that you have recorded relevant contact information for this person and that your family and/or office staff know how to no-tify this person should the need arise. You and your designated executor may wish to identify a backup person who can act on your behalf if the executor is unable to be available on short notice.

Obviously, your executor should be pro-vided with clear access to your written plan for closing your practice (or the procedures manual described above). In addition, how will the executor obtain the necessary access to the physical plant, client records, your schedule, billing records, etc. While much of this will be described in general terms in your written plan, it is probably a good idea to provide your executor with keys to your office, directions to where to find other keys (e.g. file storage), and where to find relevant passwords to computerized records. Imag-ine that you are suddenly incapacitated: what will your executor need to do in order

WINTER 2006 15

Texas Psychologist

MOST TREATMENTCENTERS CAN’T TELLTHE DIFFERENCE. Even though they both have problems

with addiction, they have little else in

common. That’s why we treat young

people, ages 14–25, on a campus just for

them. And why we offer youth-specific

addiction materials for professionals and

families. To learn more, visit us on the

web or call 888-355-6894.

www.hazelden.org/helpingyouth

to find out who you are scheduled to see tomorrow and contact those people? Have you put sufficient resources in your execu-tor’s hands? It will do no good to have a de-tailed written plan for closing the practice if the executor is physically locked out!

After an initial flurry of crisis manage-ment, the executor will be able to rely on your written plan for guidance. You should walk through this together so that he or she will understand what tasks need to be done. Obviously the means of accomplish-ing these tasks will be out of your hands; for example the executor may want to take personal charge of accounts receivable, or may prefer to outsource this job, but ei-ther way the billing needs to be processed. You need to discuss how the executor will handle expenses. Some mechanism needs to be in place to give the executor authority to pay bills. A power of attorney can be stored with the written plan and with the execu-tor. This is also the time to discuss how you

want the executor to be compensated for his or her time and for expenses incurred in the closing of the practice. There are many ways to structure this; the important thing is to agree on this in writing to prevent misunderstandings later on. Obviously this agreement should be stored with your pro-fessional will.

You should consider developing a legal agreement that authorizes your executor to represent the practice in legal matters regarding custody of records and financial matters such as collections and liquidation of the practice. Ask your attorney to review your professional will to advise you whether this can simply take the form of a contract with the designee, whether it should be notarized and/or recorded. This is a good time to look over your personal will as well. Make sure that the two documents don’t contradict each other, and that your person-al executor will be aware that management of your practice

Summary These suggestions are aspirational, offered

in the hope that practitioners will devote some thought and energy to planning for the dispo-sition of their practice. Closing a practice is a complicated and time-consuming task. It can be broken down into a manageable timeline; it will help write out a plan. Doing so will help psychologists who are facing retirement. More importantly, it will be helpful in the event that somebody else is required to close the practice on your behalf. Develop your professional will, and keep it updated. It’s part of being a responsible professional.

ReferencesPope, K. S. & Vasquez, M. J. T. (2005). How to survive and thrive as a therapist: information, ideas, and resources for psychologists in practice. Washing-ton, DC, American Psychological Association.

Salomon, F. (2001) (Chair) Ethics beyond the grave: impact of the therapist’s death—our ethical responsiblities. Panel discussion presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.

16 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

(This article is not intended to represent official policy of the Texas Psychological As-sociation, but is offered by the Social Justice Task Force to promote the discussion of rel-evant mental health and social justice issues as they pertain to Texas and the nation.)

The ongoing controversy surround-ing immigration in Texas and the nation serves to increase the aware-

ness of psychologists regarding the mental health needs of marginalized groups. Recent events in a Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex suburb, with a Hispanic population of 37%, exemplify the continuing tension relating to the status and rights of the immigrant popu-lation. Anti-immigration statutes there, which follow legislation already enacted in many other states, include fining landlords who rent to undocumented workers and their families, and making English the city’s official language. Opponents of these mea-sures cite the impact on individuals in terms of obstacles to accessing basic human needs, as well as the adverse impact on human dig-nity.

Proposed legislation in Texas includes a bill (Berman HB28) which challenges the citizenship of children who are born in the United States, a right which was established by the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, to illegal immigrants. This

proposal would bar such children from re-ceiving state benefits including food stamps, health care, or public housing assistance. Other proposed measures would tax mon-ey wired to Mexico, or Central and South America; rescind in-state tuition waivers for undocumented college students; and autho-rize the state attorney general to sue the fed-eral government to recover expenditures by Texas related to illegal immigration. There does not seem to be disagreement regarding the high cost of providing services and ben-efits to large numbers of people, just whether or not an individual is entitled, or is to be granted entitlement, to those services.

The Immigration and Naturalization Ser-vice has estimated that in January of 2000 there were approximately 7 million illegal aliens living in the United States, while the

Census Bureau estimate was 8 million. Those of us who are members of professional orga-nizations may want to consider our inter-pretation of the mission statements of such organizations with regard to commitment to the promotion of human welfare. Many groups have advocated for the humane treat-ment of individuals residing in this country regardless of citizenship status.

The American Friends Service Commit-tee, founded by Quakers in 1917, sponsors a number of programs which support the ef-forts of legal and illegal immigrants to cope with disadvantages and barriers to accessing basic need resources based on their status. The Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace has addressed the issue of attitudes toward immigrants from a religious perspective sug-gesting that attention be called to the rights of immigrants and their families to respect for their human dignity regardless of their le-gal status. These sentiments were echoed by the Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops in January of 2006 who expressed their concern that proposed legislation would criminalize those who would provide pastoral care or health and human services to undocumented persons. Many other religious and social ac-tion organizations are providing a variety of support to the immigrant population, both throughout the nation and in Texas.

The American Psychological Association (APA) Council of Representatives Policy Manual includes reports that “mental health-related issues, particularly stress associated with trauma, acculturation to language, eco-nomics, health care, education, religion, as well as encounters with both individual and institutional bias are faced consistently by

Immigration Status and Mental Health Issues in TexasRichard M. McGraw, PhD

Chair, Texas Psychological Association Social Justice Task Force

The social responsibilities of health care providers are inevitably

linked to economic realities.

WINTER 2006 17

Texas Psychologist

foreign-born residents of this country,” and that “immigration has periodically evoked in the citizenry negative perceptions and feel-ings that find expression in executive and legislative initiatives that attempt to limit immigrants’ civil rights and access to public benefits such as education and other human services for children, youth and families.”

APA, with regard to its commitment to promoting the psychological well-being of children, youth and families, has resolved to advocate “for the development of a sci-entific data base concerning the adaptation, development, education, health and mental health, as well as the social impact and con-tributions, of immigrant and refugee popula-tions;” to support “efforts to increase funding for research about the adaptation, develop-ment, education, health, and mental health of diverse immigrant children, youth, and families;” to promote and facilitate “psychol-ogists’ acquisition of competencies, including relevant cultural knowledge, attitude, and skills in providing services to and conducting research on immigrant children, youth, and families;” to advocate and promote “efforts to increase the availability of and access to educational, health, mental health, and social services to immigrant children, youth, and families;” and to promote and support “pub-lic policies that recognize and provide for the psychosocial needs of immigrant children, youth, and families.”

At the American Psychological Associa-tion Expert Summit on Immigration held in January of this year in San Antonio, sociolo-gist and keynote speaker Daniel J. Hernan-dez, PhD reported that 20 percent of chil-dren in America are members of immigrant families compared to 6 percent in 1950 and 28 percent in 1910, and that the percentage is expected to significantly increase in the next several decades. He also reported that 30 percent of children living in families in which one or both parents immigrated from Mexico, 29 percent of children living in fam-ilies from the Dominican Republic, 40 per-cent of children living in Hmong families, 34 percent of children living in families from

Cambodia, and 29 percent of children living in families from Afghanistan live below the poverty level experiencing the disadvantages associated with that condition. Presenter Fred Bernak, EdD encouraged those work-ing with refugees and immigrants to remem-ber that “mental health is affected by poverty, oppression, discrimination, economics, and racism.” Summit co-chairs Cynthia de las Fuentes, PhD, and Toy Caldwell-Colbert, PhD reminded attendees that current immi-grants who are primarily from Latin Ameri-can and Asian countries are unable to assimi-late as easily into American communities as were earlier European immigrants.

The social responsibilities of health care providers are inevitably linked to economic realities. Most healthcare organizations, with the exception of the insurance industry, are experiencing tremendous financial pressure due to limited resources for providing care to uninsured and under insured groups, which include undocument-ed immigrants and their families. With-out relief, many fa-cilities face imminent closure, or restructur-ing, which further limits their ability to provide care for those in need of it. The complexities and dif-ficulties of finding so-lutions to the national health care crisis are beyond the scope of this report, however consideration can be given to efforts which address the problems and discrepancies in access to reasonable services by individu-als further marginal-ized by a society’s at-tempt to cope with a larger social and eco-nomic crisis.

The situation is somewhat analogous to medical futility. The ethical issue usu-ally surrounds insuring that the decision to withdraw or withhold care, which then results in death, is in the best interest of the patient with regard to unnecessary and prolonged suffering or discomfort, and negligible opportunity for recovery ver-sus the societal need to conserve limited financial resources. While the withhold-ing of mental health care and other social services may not usually result in an im-mediate physical demise, there is typically prolonged and unnecessary suffering that occurs with accompanying indirect social and economic costs that may offset some of the need to conserve limited medical and psychological financial resources. It may also be important to remember that even in cases of medical futility, ethical consideration demands the continuation of palliative care.

18 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

2006 Texas Psychological Association Distinguished Professional Contribution Awards

Outstanding Contribution to ScienceRobert Mor-

gan, PhD - Dr. Morgan’s research focuses on the eval-uation of treatment and intervention programs for incar-cerated offenders, a research area of in-credibly high need and social impor-tance. Let me sum-marize some recent and noteworthy accomplishments.

Dr. Morgan and his colleagues conducted a large scale national sur-vey that indicated that group psychotherapy remains a prominent treatment modality for incarcerated offenders. He also conducted a group psychotherapy outcome study, which integrated an interper-sonal process-oriented approach to group psychotherapy with struc-tured cognitive-behavioral strategies and homework exercises. This program resulted in universally positive reactions from inmates. In addition, the treatment providers perceived the treatment program as efficacious with particular efficacy in fostering a cohesive group environment and increasing inmate responsibility for the work of the group. Finally, he co-authored a meta-analytic review of 26 em-pirical studies and found positive treatment effects for the use of group psychotherapy with incarcerated offenders across all outcomes. More specifically, the results of this empirical review indicated that the literature pertaining to group psychotherapy with incarcerated offenders reports improvement for inmates receiving group therapy relative to control across outcome variables including: institutional adjustment, anger, anxiety, depression, interpersonal relations, locus of control, and self-esteem. Interestingly, this review indicated that inmates who were referred or mandated to attend group treatment fared no better or worse than inmates who self-referred for services. Dr. Morgan is a highly sough- after speaker in the area of treatment of criminal offenders.

He recently received an award from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) for a study investigating criminal think-ing patterns of mentally ill offenders. The data collected from this study will be used to develop the criminological component of a

multifaceted intervention within the prison system that targets both the mental illness and criminal behavior treatment needs of mentally ill offenders. More specifically, mentally ill offenders will be taught the types of criminal thinking styles (formerly called criminal think-ing patterns) and attitudes they exhibit in their lives and how these thinking styles and attitudes contribute to criminal behavior. Of-fenders will then participate in cognitive restructuring exercises to al-ter the thinking styles and attitudes that contribute to their criminal behavior. Clearly, important ground breaking research, with clear implications to benefit society.

Outstanding Contribution to Public ServiceCharlotte Kim-

mel, PhD - Dr. Kim-mel’s contributions are partly reflected in the very challenging positions that she has held. She began work in mental retardation services as a work ad-justment coordinator and caseworker at the Baytown Opportunity Center. She received her master’s degree

from the University of Houston/ Clear Lake in 1979 and her doc-torate in school psychology from Texas A&M in 1988.

Following short stints in rehabilitation psychology services in Galveston and Austin, Dr. Kimmel became the Psychologist and Program Director for the Dual Diagnosis Unit at Austin State Hospital, serving there for six years. In 1996, Dr. Kimmel was offered the position of Chief of Psychology Services for the Beaumont State Center, in Beaumont, Texas.

During her tenure, she helped with the transition from a state center to a community center and the difficult merger with the local mental health authority. In addition, Dr. Kim-mel was an instructor at Lamar University for their Psychology Department.

After serving briefly as Chief Psychologist for the Texas Youth Commission facility in Beaumont, Dr. Kimmel was of-

WINTER 2006 19

Texas Psychologist

fered her current position as Director of Psychology Services at Mexia State School. There she manages a large staff of doctoral level psychologists and other mental health providers. Mexia State School serves a range of populations with special needs, including a large offender population remanded to the facility by the courts. Psychology services for this difficult population includes therapy, behavioral programs, staff training, consulta-tion, and forensic evaluations. Dr. Kimmel’s experience with a variety of challenging populations and her oversight of this complex range of services make her especially well qualified for this leadership role.

Dr. Kimmel also has a strong record of service to the public and to the profession. She has served on the Board of Trustees for TPA, and as President of the Texas Association for Mental Retardation, devoting many, many hours towards improving the educational experiences, training, environment, and legislative initiatives to benefit persons with mental retardation, as well as for those of us that serve in that field.

Dr. Kimmel has also provided leadership service to the Amer-ican Association for Mental Retardation, to local psychological associations, and to a number of community organizations. In recognition of her contributions, in 2005, Dr. Kimmel was ac-knowledged as a Fellow by the American Association for Mental Retardation.

This kind of public service in psychology takes a special type of dedication- to the clients served as well as to the field of psy-chology itself. In recognition of her dedication, Dr. Kimmel is hereby awarded the Texas Psychological Association award for Outstanding Contribution to Public Service.

Outstanding Contribution to Public Service Award

This year we have 2 winners for this award. Our first re-cipient is George Parnham

Although he has practiced law in Houston for 35 years, George Parnham was thrust into the spot-light because he rep-resented high profile

mental health cases such as that of Andrea Yates, the mother who killed her five children while decompensating in postpartum psy-chosis. He is recognized as an expert on the defense of individuals with mental illness and as an articulate advocate for legal reform of the treatment that mentally ill offenders receive in the criminal jus-tice system. His expertise has been recognized by numerous requests for presentations including at the National Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers, Federal Public defender Annual Staff Conferences, the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, the National As-sociation for the Mentally Ill, and twice at the annual conventions of TPA.

Mr. Parnham founded the Yates Children Memorial Fund committee. The mission of this fund is to educate the public and health/mental health professionals about postpartum illness. With the co-sponsorship of the Mental Health Association of Houston, the YCMF hosted a conference for health and mental health pro-fessionals on Women and Mental Health. In addition the YCMF has created training modules for paraprofessionals and continuing education workshops for mental health professionals on recognizing postpartum illness.

Mr. Parnham has seen the tragic consequences of misperceptions about mental illness and has used his visibility to educate both pro-fessionals and the public to remove stigma and increase understand-ing. TPA enthusiastically commends his important work on behalf of this often misunderstood aspect of mental illness.

Our second winner for TPA’s Outstanding Con-tribution to Pub-lic Service Award goes to Lynn Laskey Clark, MSSW

Lynn Laskey Clark, MSSW, could not be with us. Her colleague, Dr. Jerry Grammer accepted the award

on her behalf. Lynn Laskey Clark, MSSW, is the President and CEO of the Mental Health Association in Texas. She has been involved with non-profit mental health advocacy organizations in volunteer and staff positions for fifteen years. She holds a BA in Psychology from The University of Texas at Austin and a MSW from the University of Houston, Graduate School of Social Work. Ms. Clark has held positions as the Public Policy Director and Executive

20 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Director at the National Alliance on Mental Illness-Texas (NAMI Texas) as well as the Director of Program and Public Policy for the Mental Health Association of Greater Houston. She also worked with the Mental Health and Mental Retardation Authority of Harris County and the Mental Health Association of Fort Bend County. Ms. Clark has also held leadership positions with the National As-sociation of Social Workers—Texas Chapter (NASW Texas), NAMI West Houston, NAMI Tomball, and the Tomball Pines, Inc. (HUD 811 Housing Complex). Her background includes experience in direct service to persons living with mental illness as well as mental health education and advocacy. From these diverse experiences she has perfected the craft of coalition-building. Through her current efforts the Mental Health Association has made stellar contributions to educating the public and influencing policy at the legislative and agency levels. TPA is proud to honor her hard work, and are hopeful that we can work with her on common interests in the future.

Outstanding Contribution to Education Award David Drum,

PhD - Dr. Drum recently retired as Associate Vice President for Stu-dent Affairs and Executive Director of the Counseling Learning and Ca-reer Services at the University of Texas at Austin after 28

years in those roles. He has provided

excellent training opportunities at the APA accredited internship program and practicum experiences for nearly three decades of doc-toral trainees. As administrator of mental health and career counsel-ing services for UT students, he increased the quality of life on the UT campus immeasurably; programs he directed doubtless made the difference in helping many students successfully attain their educational goals.

Dr. Drum was among the first to perceive that the impact of managed care would have a negative impact on university counsel-ing centers. He has authored several highly regarded publications on health care, campus service delivery, and program development. He is the co-founder and coordinator of the national research consor-tium of counseling and psychological service in higher education.

In addition to his scholarly contributions, Dr. Drum has been an exemplary leader in several professional arenas. He is past president of many organizations, including the American Board of Profession-al Psychology, APA’s Division 49 on Group Psychology and Group Psychotherapy, the American Board of Counseling Psychology, and the National Registry of Health Service Providers in Psychology.

Many organizations have recognized Dr. Drum’s work. He re-ceived the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Association of University Counseling Center Directors, and the American Board of Professional Psychology’s Distinguished Service and Outstand-ing Contributions to the Profession of Psychology Award. He also received the Alfred M. Wellner PhD Senior Career Psychologist Award, which is the most prestigious honor given by the National Register of Health Service Providers in Psychology.

Certainly Dr. Drum has had a distinguished career, and has been an outstanding scholar, leader, and role model for Texas psycholo-gists. It is with great pleasure I honor him here today; he was my Director when I worked at the UT CMHC from 1982-1991, so I am especially honored to be able to present him with this very well deserved award.

Outstanding Media CoverageH a r o l d

“Hap” LeC-rone, PhD – Dr. LeCrone received his PhD from the University of Okla-homa in 1968 and has been licensed as a psycholo-gist in Texas since 1970. He entered private practice in Waco in 1971 and has has made pro-

fessional contributions in a wide variety of settings. For example he has twenty-five or more years experience as a member of the hospital staff at the DePaul Center, at Hillcrest Baptist Medical Center, and at Providence Health Center, all in Waco.

Most relevant to this award, he has written a weekly newspaper column since 1983 entitled PSYCHOLOGY AND YOU which is carried on the Cox and N.Y. Times wire services. The fact that he receives responses from readers all over the country, and occasionally from a foreign country, indicates the educational value of the mate-

WINTER 2006 21

Texas Psychologist

rial to individuals and the enhancement of our profession. He has received the Mental Health Association In Texas media award nine times since 1983. His columns can be seen on his website www.haplecrone.com. If you visit his website you will find not only an excellent example of a professional website but also links to scores of brief, crisp articles on topics ranging from road rage to finding a counselor to relationships to aging to quitting smoking. I visited this website, and found great columns, such as survivor guilt, how to best deliver bad news, and help your counselor leave her work at the office! Thank you, Dr. LeCrone for your use of media in helping make psychology a household word!

2006 Lifetime Legislative Achievement Award

G o v e r n o r Dolph Briscoe could not be with us. Jess Hay ac-cepted the award on behalf of Gov-ernor Briscoe. Jess Hay is former CEO of Lomas Financial Corporation from 1965-1994; he is Former Chairman of the Board of Re-

gents of the University of Texas; he is on the Board of Directors at SMU; he is Chair, Texas Foundation for Higher Education Member and Finance Chair of the Democratic National Committee.

Governor Briscoe is an extraordinary Texan whose commitment to mental health during his term as governor left a lasting legacy. Along with his beloved partner, Janey, their constant support of those most in need and their philanthropic generosity has impacted the lives of countless Texans. Their gifts to universities, medical schools, libraries, the arts, and such advocacy groups as the Mental Health Association are more than generous.

During the 1970s when Dolph Briscoe, Jr. served as governor

of Texas, many of today’s mental health issues were manifest. Gov-ernor Briscoe provided much-needed leadership in the movement to improve mental health and prevention services in the state. The issues in the news, then and now, included the need for funding mental health services in the community, the adequacy of the in-sanity defense, the impact of deinstitutionalization, housing and employment for persons struggling with mental health problems,

child abuse, elimination of discrimination of persons with mental illnesses in federal programs such as Medicaid and Medicare, myths and stigma surrounding mental illnesses, and the need for preven-tion programs.

Governor Briscoe made an impact on mental health in the state

of Texas during his tenure as governor for both children and adults. He looked at the slew of problems faced by so many Texas children living in poverty and did something important and constructive. He established the Governor’s Office of Early Childhood Development, which focused on the needs of children under the age of six.

The Office of Early Childhood Development was ahead of its

time in terms of understanding the positive impact of prevention programs. Back then, Governor Briscoe knew that for every dollar spent on a quality prevention program, from four to seven dollars were saved on reduced costs for jails, dropouts and health care. A prevention program launched by his Office of Early Childhood De-velopment, in partnership with the Mental Health Association in Texas, was the distribution of a research-based newsletter on early childhood development. The newsletter, called Pierre the Texas Peli-can, was distributed to every first-time parent in the state, to over 240,000 families, from birth to age three. This newsletter let parents know what was developmentally appropriate for their child, there-by reducing child abuse, and providing all-important information about immunizations, physical, social and emotional development, and where to get help.

Another important initiative launched by Governor Briscoe

was the Governor’s Task Force on Youth and Rehabilitation, which worked to fill the state’s gap in preventive services. This task force worked on parenting, early childhood screening, reduction of insti-tutionalization, nutrition for pregnant mothers and children, treat-ment and care of young children and child abuse prevention.

Adult issues in mental health were also of great concern to Gov-

ernor Briscoe. He supported expansion of funding for mental health services in the community. In fact, funding for community men-tal health centers doubled in the Governor’s first year in office, and continued to grow during his tenure. Improvements in educational services for children with autism, the insanity defense, emergency detention and patients rights limiting indefinite commitment to in-patient facilities were also realized.

It is with immense gratitude and admiration for these efforts that the Texas Psychological Association provides this Lifetime Legisla-tive Achievement Award to Governor Dolph Briscoe in apprecia-tion of his exemplary lifetime of contribution to the public good.

22 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

TPA’s Psychologically Healthy Workplace Award

Houston Tex-ans, a National Foot-ball League franchise. Suzie Thomas, Se-nior Vice President, General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer received the award on behalf of the Houston Texans.

We don’t auto-matically think of professional sports

as being eligible for best practices honors in promoting a healthy workplace, but this franchise truly deserves this this honor. Robert McNail is the Chairman, President and CEO and Glenda Morrison is the Director of Human Resources of this 111 full time employee organization.

The Houston Texans management feels that a benefits package centering on the whole person is critical, so effective August 1, 2002, the Texans added mental health parity to the group medical plans offered to employees. This means that mental health concerns (not including alcoholism or drug abuse) began being treated the same as any other medical condition and are now not subject to different plan limitations than diseases such as cancer, heart problems, etc.

Because of the Texans management’s strong belief and support of mental health parity, it has been a critical factor in their negotiations with their insurance carrier.

They have worked to remove stigma, including through the shar-ing of the well-respected Vice Chairman’s own personal experiences, employees are proud to be a part of a trailblazing organization that recognizes the importance of focus on employees as a whole.

Furthermore, Both the CEO Robert McNail and the Vice Chair-man, Philip Burguieres continue to speak out in support of this im-portant issue, with the belief that more and more organizations will follow suit in the pursuit of making mental health parity a reality for all individuals.

Help me congratulate the Houston Texans.

2006 Presidential Award

Marla Craig, PhD - Dr. Marla Craig received her doctorate at Texas A & M University, did her pre-doctoral in-ternship at University of Texas Counseling & Mental Health Center, and works as a staff psychologist at St. Edward’s Uni-versity Counseling Center.

Dr. Craig has been a member of Texas Psychological Association (TPA) since 2003, and a student member since 1998. Dr. Craig served as TPA’s Program Chair for this convention. She selected committee members to aid in reviewing proposal submissions for the 2006 Annual Convention.

She also assisted in developing the program schedule, and created the convention title, “Texas Psychologists Making Strides: Health, Human Welfare, and Career Opportunities.”

Dr. Craig was invited to attend the APA SLC as a diversity del-egate, along with Dr. Jose Sanchez. Partly because Dr. Sanchez was attending the Diversity functions, Dr. Craig elected to participate in many of the activities sponsored by the Early Career Psycholo-gists (ECPs). Her participation in those activities motivated her to begin the process of developing an Early Career Psychologist special interest group within TPA. Most recently, she presented the idea to TPA’s Board of Trustees to establish ECPs as a Special In-terest Group (SIG) which was approved, and was finally approved at the business meeting. She also submitted a proposal to hold a round table discussion of the “Unique Needs of Early Career Psy-chologists” at this convention to generate discussion among early career psychologists, members who have completed their doctoral degree within the past 7 years. From this discussion and follow-up discussions, she hopes to accomplish a set of goals over the next three years.

When Dr. Craig attended the 2006 State Leadership Confer-ence in Washington DC to represent Texas as a diversity delegate, she was inspired by the “Heads Up Kentucky! Program, and she and Dr. Ollie Seay decided to propose that TPA promote a simi-

WINTER 2006 23

Texas Psychologist

lar program. Dr. Craig is thus one of the program managers for the “Texas State of Mind: Psychologists Promote Healthy Living” sponsored by TPA which is an innovative project to educate the public about psychological factors in health and wellness that uses public art to convey the message.

The goals of this project include the following: promote psy-chology, educate the public about psychology and health, raise the profile of the Texas Psychological Association, energize current TPA members and attract new members, develop external fund-ing sources, create connections with key community leaders, and generate new funds for future educational activities. As one of the program managers, she oversees and organizes all aspects of the project, serves as ex officio member of all sub-committees, devel-ops the Community Advisory Committee, and develops budgets in concert with the Steering Committee.

Dr. Craig is also the vice president of the Latino/a Psychologi-cal Association of Texas (LPAT) whose organization is collaborat-ing closely with the Texas Psychological Association to advocate and serve the mental health needs of the Latino/a community in Texas.

Dr. Craig is clearly very active in TPA, and is working to increase

the visibility and importance of ECPs within TPA. I wanted to hon-or the energy and professional commitment that she has displayed as an early career professional. I believe she has strong leadership qualities and has begun to engage in an active and committed ways with organized psychology.

Lifetime Achievement AwardBarbaru Uzzell,

PhD - Dr. Uzzell re-ceived her bachelor’s degree from UT-Austin and her PhD from the University of Houston, followed by postdoctoral work at Texas Research Institute of Mental Sciences and Duke University Medical School. Her subse-quent career has cer-

tainly proved the promise of these early beginnings.

First, she is a highly regarded clinician with thirty years of expe-rience in psychology and neuropsychology. She is highly regarded as a specialist in rehabilitation psychology. She is board certified by

the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology, the Ameri-can Board of Medical Psychotherapists, and the American Board of Assessment Psychology and a fellow of both the American Psy-chological Association and the National Academy of Neuropsy-chology.

Second, she is an accomplished scholar. Her vita lists twenty five publications in refereed journals plus another fifty invited papers, book chapters and reviews and scores of abstracts and symposia. Her work spans technical and applied concerns in the evaluation of stroke and head injury patients.

She has held appointments in neuropsychology at the Univer-sity of Pennsylvania, the University of Pittsburgh, the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Baylor College of Medi-cine, and the University of Houston. She has founded and edited two journals: the Journal of Applied Neuropsychology, now the offi-cial journal of the Coalition of Clinical Practitioners in Neuropsy-chology, and of Neuropsychology, which is now an APA journal.

Finally, Dr. Uzzell has been active in leading the development of neuropsychology as a discipline. She was the founding president of the Houston Neuropsychological Society in 1990 and in 2000 she was elected president of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. It is an honor to present this recognition of a lifetime of work---a career that has contributed much to the development of an entire discipline that scarcely existed when Dr. Uzzell finished her under-graduate work in 1956.

Psychologist of the Year AwardRoberta L. Nutt,

PhD - Dr. Nutt was awarded her PhD in Counseling Psycholo-gy from the University of Maryland in 1976. Since then (some 30 years) she has climbed the professorial lad-der at Texas Woman’s University, becom-ing a full professor in 1990. She is cur-rently the Director of

the Counseling Psychology Doctoral Program. Achieving these ranks requires exceptional levels of accomplishments in teaching, research, and service, along with leadership ability recognized by her peers, supervisors, and outside experts.

24 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

In 2003, Dr. Nutt was awarded the Diplomate in Family Psychology by the American Board of Professional Psychology. She has achieved “fellow” status in six APA Divisions. She has received the Distinguished Psychologist Award from the Dallas Psychological Association, the Family Psychologist of the Year award from the American Psychological Association Division of Family Psychology, and the Distinction in Service Award For a Distinguished Record of University, Professional and Commu-nity Service from her own institution, Texas Women’s University. This attests to her recognition at local, state, and national levels.

With some 35 publications to her credit, Dr. Nutt has a re-search interest particularly in gender and family issues. She is a popular presenter at professional meetings and has given of her time and expertise at over 160 presentations.

As one might expect of a former Peace Corps volunteer, Dr. Nutt gives tirelessly to numerous professional associations at the local, state, national and even international levels, serving on committees and task forces. Her service here is too volumi-nous to enumerate but highlights include serving as a member of the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists from 1992-1998, including serving as chair of this body for 4 years, under-scoring her leadership ability. She has also served on the executive boards of the Texas Psychological Association and the Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs, as President of the Dallas Psychological Association, and President of both Divisions 17 (Society of Counseling Psychology) and Division 43 (Family Psychology) of the American Psychological Association. She is co-chairing the task force for the development of the Guidelines on Psychotherapy with Girls and Women, which has been at least a five year process.

In sum, Dr. Nutt’s accomplishments are of a caliber recognized as outstanding by anyone, but particularly by her fellow psychologists who have a deeper understanding of the enormous energy and talent this level of sustained performance has required. Dr. Nutt is most deserving of TPA’s Psychologist of the Year Award.

Finally, this year marks the 15th year anniversary of Da-vid White as our Executive Director. Some of you may have read David White’s column, where he described how we discovered that I had been his 6th grade teacher. I had served on the

TPA BOT for a while before we discovered that fact. It has been an honor and a pleasure to work as closely as we have this year. He has been a leader in the American Society of Association Executives, and of the Texas Society of Association Executives. At the State Leader-ship Conference, where all State Psychological Association Execu-tives gather, he is highly popular and sought after for consultation in an ongoing manner. Most importantly, I want you to know how fortunate we all are to have David White serve as our the Executive Director of Texas Psychological Association. In appreciation…

Congratulation to all of our award winners!

2006 TPF CONTRIBUTORS 1/1/06-11/30/06

$1,000 and aboveElizabeth Richeson, PhDAnonymous$500-$999Lane Ogden, PhD

$250-$499Cheryl Hall, PhDCatherine Matthews, PhD

$100 - $249Michael BlainTim Branaman, PhDNicolas Carrasco, PhDMary De Ferreire, PhDLynn Ferrell, PhDJerry Grammer, PhDVictor Loos, PhDRobert McLaughlin, PhDMelba Vasquez, PhDAnn P. Vreeland, PhDMimi H. Wright, PhD

Less than $100George ArrendondoPaul Burney, PhD

Ellis Craig, PhDDana Davies, PhDLinda Eklof, PhDPat Ellis, PhDBonny Gardner, PhDB. Thomas Gray, PhDCarol Grothues, PhDMarsha Harman, PhDScott HillDebbie HornKaren Jackson, PhDSheila Jenkins, PhDArthur Linskey, PhDStephen Loughhead, PhDTerri Menotti, PhDSuzanne Mouton-Odum, PhDMichael Pelfrey, PhDLynn Price, PhDLeigh Scott, PhDOllie Seay, PhDVerlis Setne, PhDRobbie Sharp, PhDTom Van Hoose, PhDMichael Winters, PhD

WINTER 2006 25

2006 AAPT CONTRIBUTORS Donations received 1/1/06 - 11/30/06

$1000 and aboveTim Branaman PhD, ABPPPaul Burney PhDM. David Rudd PhDMelba J.T. Vasquez PhD, ABPP

$500-$999Edward Davidson PhDFrank Fee PhDLane Ogden PhDFreddy A. Paniagua PhDMichael Pelfrey PhD

$250-$499Sam Buser PhDRichard Fulbright PhDRobert McPherson PhDThomas Van Hoose PhDMimi Wright PhDDeanna Yates PhD

$100-$249Joan Anderson PhDJudith Andrews PhDPaul Andrews PhDLarry Aniol PhDKyle Babick PhDEileen Barbella PhDKeith Barton PhDJulie Bates PhDJoan Berger PhDMelvyn Berke PhDJames Berkshire EdDNorman Bouffard PhDPeggy Bradley PhDTimothy Brown PhDRay Brown PhDLarry Brownstein PhDAmos Jerry Bruce PhDJoan Bruchas PhDErica Burden PhDL. Carol Butler PhDBrian Carr PhDBetty Cartmell PhDRon Cohorn PhDSean Connolly PhDMary Alice Conroy PhDDonna Copeland PhDJim Cox PhDMary Cox PhDJames Crawford PhDLeslie Crossman PhDWalter Cubberly PhDDana Davies PhDRonald Davis PhDSally Davis PhDMary De Ferreire PhDKatherine DeLaune PhDLeah Dick PhDMichael Downing PhDAlexandria Doyle PhDMarie-Elise DuBuisson PhDRichard Eckert PhDAnette Edens PhDWayne Ehrisman PhDPatrick Ellis PhDDonald Ennis PhDAlan Fisher PhDLarry Fisher PhDCynthia Galt PhDBonny Gardner PhDElizabeth Garrison PhDRay Gilbert PhDKaren Gollaher PsyD

Edward Goodman PhDMichael Gottlieb PhDJerry Grammer PhDCharles Gray PhDAndrew Griffin PhDDennis Grill PhDEdmund Guilfoyle PhDCheryl Hall PhDMichael Hand PhDJames Hardin PhDCharles Haskovec PhDSophia Havasy PhDJoBeth Hawkins PhDLillie Haynes PhDRobert M. Hochschild PhDCharles Holland PhDC. Alan Hopewell PhDDavid Hopkinson PhDSandra Hotz PhDCarola Hundrich-Souris PhDDaniel W. Jackson PhDSheila Jenkins PhDCharlotte Jensen MAKrista D. Jordan PhDRita Justice PhDStephen Karten PhDBurton A. Kittay PhDChristopher Klaas PhDJoseph Kobos PhDAmelia Kornfeld PhDRichard Krummel PhDJulie Landis PhDJohn W. Largen PhDDavid S. Litton PhDVictor Loos PhDStephen Loughhead PhDThomas Lowry PhDAlaire Lowry PhDAnn Matt Maddrey PhDJanna Magee PhDPatricia P. Mahlstedt EdDRebecca Marsh PsyDPatricia R. Martinez EdDCatherine Matthews PhDStephen McCary PhD, JDGlen McClure PhDJill McGavin PhDRichard M. McGraw PhDSherry McKinney PhDRobert J. McLaughlin PhDRobert J. McLaughlin PhDRobert Mehl PhDRobert S. Meier PhDDaneen Milam PhDMaritza Milan PhDJanel H. Miller PhDJanel H. Miller PhDRobert W. Mims PhDSuzanne Mouton-Odum PhDGina Novellino PhDFernando Obledo PhDSherry L. Payne PhDP. Caren Phelan PhDLynn Price PhDShelley Probber PsyDManuel Ramirez PhDRobert Rankin PhDRobin Reamer PhDCarolyn B. Reed PhDCatherine Rees PhDLynn Rehm PhDJohn Reid PhDHerbert Reynolds PhDElizabeth Richeson PhD

David M. Sabine PhDGordon C. Sauer, Jr. PhDSteven Schneider PhDLeigh S. Scott PhDVerlis Setne PhDRobbie Sharp PhDJoyce Sichel PhDJoyce Sichel PhDSonia Simon PsyDW. Truett Smith PhDKaren E. Smith PhDBrian Stagner PhDDaniel J. Thompson PhDWillson S. Thornton PhDDeborah J. Voorhees PhDAnn P. Vreeland PhDLaurel Wagner PhDMichael Walker EdDBeverly Walsh PhDJoan Weltzien EdDRichard Wheatley PhDConnie S. Wilson PhDMichael Winters PhDJames Womack PhDJohn W. Worsham PhDJarvis A. Wright PhDGary Yorke PhDSharon Young PhDRobert Zachary PhD

Less than $100Constance Adler PhDKay Allensworth PhDMary Alvarez-del-Pino PhDKim Arredondo PhDJoseph Bak PhDLaurie Baldwin PhDLisa Balick PhDPatricia Barth PhDMichelle Beard PhDJohn Beaty PhDBonnie Blankmeyer PhDRonald Boney PhDMadeleine Boskovitz PhDJoy Breckenridge PhDGlenn Bricken PsyDMichael Bridgewater PhDConstance Byers PhDKay Campbell PsyDJames Carpenter EdSPaul Chafetz PhDDonna Copeland PhDMarla Craig PhDMaria Concepcion Cruz PhDMark Cunningham PhDStephanie Darsa PhDDaniel Diaz PhDSid Dickson PhDJames Duncan PhDS. Jean Ehrenberg PhDEmily Fallis PhDJoseph Fogle PhDWilliam Frazier PhDCheryl Fuller PhDSylvia Gearing PhDMartin Gieda PhDGuillermo Gonzalez PhDLinda Gotts PhDB. Thomas Gray PhD, ABPPPamela Grossman PhDCarol Grothues PhDRanee Gumm PhDWilliam Gumm PhDPaul Hamilton PhD

Philip Hanson Marsha Harman PhDDavid Hensley PhDBarbara Pugh Hinojosa PhDWillam J. Holden PhDNahid Hooshyar PhDDavid Ivey PhDLinda Jackson PhDA. Grace Jennings PhDThomas Johnson PhDRichard Johnson PhDCliff Jones PhDMorton Katz PhDBruce Kruger PhDTrinh Le PhDHarold H. LeCrone PhDDoreen Lerner PhDArthur Linskey PhDDeborah M. Longano PhDMelinda J. Longtain PhDMartin Lumpkin PhDBruce Mansbridge PhDPerry Marchioni PhDStephen K. Martin PhDRonald Massey PhDLynn M. Matherne PhDVictoria McCain PhDDonald C. McCann PhDMarsha D. McCary PhDCharles McDonald PhDRose McDonald PsyDGeorge McLaughin EdDJames McLaughlin PhDRichard S. Mechem PhDWilliam Montgomery PhDCraig Moore PhDLee L. Morrison PhDGeorge R. Mount PhDGary Neal PhDMargaret P. Norris PhDWill Norsworthy PhDKathryn Oden PhDRonald Palomares PhDGeorge Parnham JDMurray Parsons LPCCarmen Petzold PhDCarmen Petzold PhDRandy E. Phelps PhDCynthia Pladziewicz PhDJohn Price PhDGlenda Rice Arlene Rivero MSM. Cecilia Robertson PhDTova Rubin PhDDale Rudin PhDJames Ryan PsyDTimothy Sadler PhDEarl S. Saltzman PhDJonathan P. Schwartz PhDOllie Seay PhDRobert M. Setty PhDRebecca Stein MATerri L. Thompson PhDDana Turnbull PhDJennifer Unterberg PhDLaurel Wagner PhDAlisha Wagner PhDKen Waldman PhDMac Walling PhDPatricia D. Weger PhDNancy Wilson PhDBurton Zung PhD

26 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Psychology as a Science and the Importance of the Doctoral Standard

M. David Rudd, PhD, ABPP

Professor and Chair

Texas Tech University

Psychology Department

Two noteworthy and passionate de-bates in psychology include the issue of “psychology as a science”

and “masters versus doctoral training” for practitioners. Careful scrutiny reveals that the two are interdependent and necessarily intertwined. It’s quite obvious that neither of these issues has been put to rest, as a wide range of opinions exist, but the importance of the doctoral standard is clear when con-sidering the complex and maturing scien-tific foundation of professional psychol-ogy. Although there are undeniably issues and challenges to the scope of practice in other healthcare areas such as medicine and dentistry, psychology is unique in that its scientific roots have continued to be chal-lenged, although the intensity of the de-bate has waned over the last decade. Im-plicit in this debate is a challenge to the complexity, precision, and maturing foundation of the profession itself. Originally this was a philosophical de-bate. It’s now widely accepted that psychol-ogy is a science. The manifold advances over the last decade, in particular, have evidenced both the clarity and complexity of the mind-body connection, with a phenomenal rate of discovery, publication, and applied applica-tion. The move toward evidence-based prac-

tice across most, if not all, areas of healthcare underscore the importance of science in pro-fessional psychology.

All too often, the perceived difference in doctoral and master’s level training has been flippantly characterized as the doctorate em-phasizing “research” or “academic” training. To the contrary, I would argue that doctoral level training is geared toward recognizing, understanding and developing entry-level ex-

pertise as a psychologist versed in the science of the profession. An entry level psychologist is someone capable of developing and ef-fectively and efficiently evaluating emerging technologies and techniques in a rapidly and ever changing clinical environment. Psy-chology is a science, although some would argue an emerging science, particularly in contrast to medicine. Education in health-

care sciences is founded on the premise that various professional competencies mandate varying levels of classroom, practical instruc-tion, and institutionally sanctioned applied supervision. All healthcare accrediting bodies work in this manner. The primary goal is to guarantee an adequate foundation, one based in identified competencies.

Although medicine and dentistry have experienced their own scope of practice

battles, you simply won’t find those cer-tified or licensed at sub-doctoral levels petitioning for in-dependent practice based on the idea that they can employ a specific and proven technology or tech-nique with equal effectiveness. In psychology, in par-ticular, the argument often emerges from data on comparable treatment outcome (e.g. psychotherapy) regardless of degree. This argument is inherently flawed

and one that reveals a lack of understand-ing about the importance and point of ad-vanced education, training and experience. I don’t believe I’ve ever heard anyone argue for designation as a physician because the physician’s assistant was equally effective at treating any targeted illness by using prov-en medicines or procedures. Antibiotics work equally as well regardless of who pro-

Doctoral-level training is training that prepares one to fully engage in the science of the profession one capable of developing and

effectively and efficiently evaluating emerging technologies and

techniques in a rapidly and ever changing clinical environment.

WINTER 2006 27

Texas Psychologist

vides them. The fact that we have arguably equal success rates in psychotherapy across providers is a statement about the efficacy of the employed technique and therapeu-tic technology, as well as a statement that the science of psychology is accomplishing some if its identified goals. One of the goals of evidence-based practice in psychology, particularly with respect to psychotherapy, is to make therapies portable, translatable and applicable in many settings by many providers.

What is it that doctoral-level healthcare providers do that sub-doctoral providers don’t, be it a psychologist, physician or den-tist? Doctoral-level training is training that prepares one to fully engage in the science of the profession, one capable of developing and effectively and efficiently evaluating emerg-ing technologies and techniques in a rapidly and ever changing clinical environment. I don’t believe anyone would argue against the fact that all healthcare professions, psychol-ogy included, are inundated with changes at a phenomenal rate. Those prepared for inde-pendent practice in psychology need to have the competency to independently evaluate and employ those changes, not to mention generate new innovations as well. That’s the difference between a physician’s assistant and a physician, a dental assistant and a dentist, a psychologist and a psychological associate. Simple experience and self-professed compe-tency doesn’t meet the mark. All healthcare professions recognize this fact; hence, we have licensing boards, accrediting bodies, and institutions of higher education. It’s not to dismiss the importance and relevance of applied experience. However, classroom and practical instruction, along with institution-ally sanctioned supervision are the standard across healthcare professions. These ele-ments ensure careful scrutiny and evaluation of identified competencies by those previ-ously identified as competent. Education, accreditation, and licensure are the checks and balances of our system, all geared toward patient protection and safety. Our entire

healthcare educational system is built around the notion of identified competencies and the infrastructure necessary to ensure those competencies have been developed and are employed in effective fashion. The American Psychological Association has endorsed the doctoral degree as the entry-level degree for the independent practice of psychology and has also encouraged state licensing boards to move toward single level doctoral licensure. In short, psychology had been identified as a doctoral level profession, no different than medicine or dentistry.

This is not just an opinion, but rather a conclusion based in data, garnering surpris-ing empirical support across a number of fronts. Expectations established by our state universities offering training in psychology are clear and specific. What is simply un-deniable is that every single state university in Texas that offers master’s level training in psychology clearly publicizes the intent and purpose of the training as falling into one or both of the following categories: 1) prepara-tion for clinical practice in psychology at a supervised, sub-doctoral level, and 2) prepa-ration for doctoral level training in psychol-ogy. I independently surveyed the publicly available literature offered by every clinically applied master’s degree program offered from a state supported university in Texas. Every single one, that’s 100% percent, were clear in their public statements that master’s level training was intended to prepare practitio-ners for practice at the sub-doctoral level (i.e. as a Licensed Professional Counselor or Psychological Associate) or for doctoral-level training in psychology. Not one single program implied, hinted, or otherwise mis-led applicants to believe they could practice psychology at an independent level, either at the time of graduation or at any point in the future.

Do those that hold sub-doctoral creden-tials in psychology (i.e. psychological associ-ates) in Texas recognize and understand the intent and purpose of the educational pro-grams they completed? The answer is yes. I

reviewed additional licenses held by psycho-logical associates in Texas. This information is publicly available and easy to access. Over 70% of psychological associates also carry an additional license as an LSSP, LMFT, or LPC that allows them to practice as in-tended and consistent with their education training and experience. Those that don’t carry a second license are predominantly those that graduated many years ago and might not qualify; others may have moved on to doctoral-level programs. After review-ing these two data points, I’m simply not sure why there has been so much debate. It’s clear that Texas universities are appropri-ately advertising the intent and purpose of their training programs, that is, to provide the education and training for those want-ing to practice at sub-doctoral levels and not engage in the independent practice of psy-chology. Similarly, those receiving master’s degrees in Texas understand this fact, and the overwhelming majority of those pursing the psychological associate credential (over 70%) are licensed at the level intended by the training program (i.e. LSSP, LPC, or LMFT) and can practice accordingly.

In closing, several things seem clear about psychology. Psychology is a rapidly evolving science and, accordingly, a doctoral-level healthcare profession. Those pursuing sub-doctoral, master’s education and training are appropriately informed of the intent and purpose of the training received. Their subsequent licensure decisions indicate they clearly understand the practice options available. And finally, for those interested in pursuing independent practice in psychol-ogy, the state of Texas offers a number of accredited doctoral training programs posi-tioned in all corners and regions of the state, some that accept non-traditional students that can’t attend in residence. Psychology is a wonderful profession and, consistent with all healthcare professions, there are varying levels of education, related competencies, and the educational opportunities available to achieve them.

28 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

Greetings Fellow Texas Psychologists!M. H. Wright

Association for the Advancement of Psychology in Texas

What an exciting Annual TPA Convention in Dallas for the Association for the Advance-

ment of Psychology in Texas (AAPT)! At our Annual Business Meeting on November 17, 2006, the voting members of PSY-PAC unanimously voted to change the name of PSY-PAC to the Association for the Advance-ment of Psychology in Texas (AAPT)! AAPT is now officially the name of the Political Action Arm of the Texas Psychological As-sociation! Thanks to Dr. Pat Ellis for all of the fun, informative posters at Convention encouraging donations and explaining the name change!

I also want to announce that AAPT had a most exciting and successful fundraising campaign! The reported results and totals for 2006 listed below include your dona-tions to PSY-PAC (Now AAPT) are cumula-tive from January 1, 2006 to November 30, 2006. The AAPT Board has voted to begin tracking 2007 contributions on December 1, 2006, so that Psychologists who make AAPT contributions at the time of their TPA dues renewals for 2007 will be credited for 2007. I’m sure that our 2006 totals would have been even higher had we counted those who contributed in December of ’05.

I am thrilled to announce that 281 Psy-chologists contributed to AAPT during 2006! Of those, 152 Psychologists gave $100.00 or more during 2006. These are the voting members of AAPT! Thanks to each of you for your generous donations! Your dona-tions are vitally important because politicians with the best motives need to understand the issues that face psychologists and the impact that their decisions have on mental health services for the public. The decisions that legislators make determine our practice pa-rameters and your ability to make a living! To update you statistically, there are 3,800 licensed psychologists in Texas. Only 1,060 of us belong to our state professional orga-

nization, TPA. Currently, 387 psychologists who are members of TPA support PSY-PAC. These few psychologists have contributed an average of $82.20 per person. Contributions average $30.01 per TPA member per year, or $8.37 per licensed psychologist in Texas!

A huge THANKS to Dr. Rob Mehl for suggesting and spearheading our AAPT LAS Challenge! The 4 regions were designed to include about 350 TPA members each. Two awards were given at the Convention: 1) an LAS Group Award; and 2) an LAS Per Capita Award. Congratulations to Group One that included Abilene, Bexar County, El Paso County, Fort Worth Area, Panhandle, Greater West Texas, Red River, and South Plains Local Area Societies! As you can see from the picture and totals listed below, do-nations made at the Convention sent this group “over the top!” Congratulations to the Panhandle Psychological Association for winning the Per Capita Award! With 12 members, Psychologists in the Panhandle Psychological Association gave an average of 70.83 per member! Hopefully, they shared equally in giving!!

Our new name, the Association for the Advancement of Psychology in Texas, sends the clear message concerning the purpose of our political action committee! Along with the name change, the AAPT Board approved a revised AAPT Mission Statement: “To pro-mote and insure the development and deliv-ery of the highest quality of mental health research and treatment for Texans by inter-acting with legislative, governmental, health delivery and mental health advocacy organi-zations at the state and local level.” Thanks to Dr. Michael Pelfrey for his work on the AAPT Mission Statement!

Dr. David Rudd, President-Elect of TPA and Legislative Chair, has set forth an am-bitious Legislative Agenda for the 2007 leg-islature year. Typically, multiple challenges to good mental health delivery, to availabil-

ity of mental health services, to psychologi-cal services you may provide, to payment amounts, and challenges to the profession of psychology as a whole arise during a legisla-tive session. While you are working in your offices, TPA constantly monitors this flurry of legislative activity, and AAPT works to raise money to fund the legislative and lob-bying efforts! Without this effort in the past few years, we would be earning less money, be defined as a master’s level profession, and be increasingly limited in the services we can provide. We must participate in the legisla-tive process, and we must fund our lobbying efforts! I urge each Psychologist in the state of Texas to donate at least one hour’s income to AAPT!

I have thoroughly enjoyed my year as 2006 PSY-PAC/AAPT President! I sincerely thank my active, outstanding Board Members: Dr. Pat Ellis, Dr. Stephen Loughhead, Dr. Rob Mehl, Dr. Michael Pelfrey, and Dr. Deanna Yates, along with David White, Executive Director of TPA, whose active involvement has been invaluable! It has been a pleasure to serve our profession in this capacity. At the Annual PSY-PAC/AAPT Meeting, Dr. Rob Mehl was elected 2007 President of AAPT. I leave AAPT in good hands! Dr. Pat Ellis and I will rotate off of the Board at the end of 2006.

By the time this article is printed, the vot-ing members of AAPT will have had the op-portunity to make self- or other nominations and to vote for the two new 2007 Board Members. I hope that each of you will take a moment to reflect on your professional re-sponsibilities and remain or become actively involved in TPA and AAPT. Each of us must take responsibility for protecting, sustaining, and advancing our profession!

Sincerely,Mimi H. Wright, PhD2006 PSY-PAC/AAPT President

WINTER 2006 29

Texas Psychologist

2006 Board MembersPatrick Ellis, PhD, Past President Stephen Loughhead, PhD Robert Mehl, PhD

Michael Pelfrey, PhDDee Yates, PhD

2006 LAS CHALLENGE Contributions Convention Final for 2006 Contributions Results at beginning of convention GROUP ONE: SAN ANTONIO, WEST AND TEXAS Abilene Psychological Association Abilene $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Bexar County Psychological Association San Antonio $1,948.33 $550.00 $2,498.33

El Paso County Psychological Society El Paso $500.00 $0.00 $500.00

Fort Worth Area Psychological Association Ft. Worth $2,014.50 $450.00 $2,464.50

Panhandle Psychological Association Amarillo $149.98 $700.00 $849.98

Psychological Association of Greater West Texas Odessa $725.00 $350.00 $1,075.00

Red River Psychological Association Wichita Falls $300.00 $0.00 $300.00

South Plains Association of Psychologists Lubbock $720.00 $1,750.00 $2,470.00

$6,357.81 $10,157.81

GROUP TWO: AUSTIN, CENTRAL TEXAS, RIO GRANDE VALLEY Bell County Psychological Association Temple $250.00 $0.00 $250.00

Brazos Valley Psychological Association Bryan, College Station $520.00 $100.00 $620.00

Capital Area Psychological Association Austin $3,120.16 $600.00 $3,720.16

McClennan County Psychological Association Waco $0.00 $50.00 $50.00

Montgomery County Psychological Association Conroe $300.00 $1,550.00 $1,850.00

Rio Grande Valley Psychological Association McAllen $325.00 $0.00 $325.00

$4,515.16 $6,815.16

GROUP THREE: DALLAS, EAST AND NORTH TEXAS, NUECES COUNTY Collin County Psychological Association Frisco, Plano $508.33 $150.00 $658.33

Dallas Psychological Association Dallas $2,785.30 $2,150.00 $4,935.30

East Texas Psychological Association Tyler $300.00 $150.00 $450.00

Nueces County Psychological Association Corpus Christi $325.00 $250.00 $575.00

Texoma Psychological Association Sherman $50.00 $0.00 $50.00

$3,968.63 $6,668.63

GROUP FOUR: HOUSTON, SUGAR LAND, BEAUMONT Fort Bend County Psychological Association Sugar Land $0.00 $100.00 $100.00

Houston Psychological Association Houston $6,321.12 $1,600.00 $7,921.12

Southeast Texas Psychological Association Beaumont $150.00 $0.00 $150.00

$6,471.12 $8,171.12

30 WINTER 2006

Texas Psychologist

MemberAzadeh Ajami PsyD.Peggy Auguste PsyD.M. Lee Berryman-Tedman PhDRobin Bullington PhDAbby Calisch PsyDDonald Chandler PhDPauline Clansy EdDDan Clement PhDMichael Downing PhDJoanna Foy PsyDWilliam Freeman PhDSheree Gallagher PsyDLance Garrison PhDDavid Gentry PhDKelley Haynes PsyDCassandra Hoke PhDS. Thomas Kordinak PhDVivian Laverty PhDMichael Leach PhDMichaelene Manus PhDMark Matthews PhDMichael McLane PsyDMichael McNeil PhDDonald Minnick PhDLynda Newman PhDPaul Rowan PhD

John Savell PhD Judy Sonnenberg PsyD Matthew Wong PhD Charles Woodrick PhD Catherine Woolley PhD David Drum PhD

Member Out of State Susan Gelberg PhD

Recent Graduate Associate Rochelle Elliott MACesar Gamez MA Recent Graduate MemberJudith Cepeda PsyD Jamylah Dunn PhD Charlotte Howard Jennifer Rigsby PhD Holly Schrier PsyD Heather Wheatley PsyD

AssociateLeigh Fahr MAMurray Parsons LPCColleen Paxton MS

Student Susan Angulo Mikhail Bogomaz BSJordana Broz BA Kimberly Buck MSAleha Buffaloe MA Madeleine Byrne MSWUche Chibueze BA, MS Ed.Sheila China-WashingtonMary Clarkson MA Kristen Cline Belloni MALisa Connelly BA Lori Cooley MSMelissa Dempsky BS Michael Denny BAWilliam Fisher Brooklyn FlemingRosslyn Franklin MA Matthew Garcia BAKarla Holyfield MS Jonathan Horowitz MAMarquita House BA Victor Jones BSTracy Jones MS Natalie Kalbas BANancy Kimmel BA Kate LeinbergerAngela Livingston Kacey Maestas

Brian Marianelli BS Virginia Maril Ana Martinez BA LeAnne McClure MA Bunnoi McDaniel BA Naomi Medina Megan Merlock BS Maria Oroza Katherine Orsborn BSShea Pilgrim BA Sue PortalesErika Reed MA Shanna Reeves-Washer MASandra Rivera BA Angela Rood MA Alberta Scott Mistie Seawell MA Shilpi Sheth MA Kenneth Shipman MSFelisse Sigman BA Amber Simpler MS Sharon Singh Jameel Smith BA Lisa Vana BA Femina VargheseValerie Viera BS Jeaneta Waithe Angela White

WELCOME NEW MEMBERS 9/1/06 to 12/15/06

“Hey Helper,you just won

Best in KLAS!”

Helper Software is proud to announce that it was awarded “Best in KLAS” in recognition for its #1 ranking in the Behavorial Health market segment. 1

Visit our website at www.helper.com/txpsy and download a fully-functional trial version of Helper.See for yourself why the proud owners of Therapist Helper rate it so highly!

Purchase Helper Software by 11/30/06 and you will be eligible for a $250 discount.*

TXPSY250: Use this code during download or when speaking to a Helper representative to get discount credit.

1Best in KLAS status is awarded annually to the top products in 20 industry segments by KLAS, the leading reviewer of healthcare software and service vendors. Rankings are based on customer interviews conducted by KLAS. KLAS and “Best in KLAS” are trademarks of KLAS Enterprises, Orem, UT. More information on KLAS is available at: www.healthcomputing.com*discount cannot be combined with other offers.

ph. 800.343.5737 | email: sales@helper.com

2007 Annual Convention

November 15-17, 2007

San Antonio, Texas

Westin La Cantera Resort

16641 La Cantera Pkwy

Additional information coming to www.texaspsyc.org soon!

save the date