Attorney Richard S. Leslie, JD, wrote an opinion piece entitled "Mandatory Continuing Education-Does It Work" in the Risk Management section of the April 2009 edition of the Advocate Newsletter (published by the American Mental Health Counselors Association) about whether or not mandatory continuing education requirements for mental health counselors really decrease "the number and severity of disciplinary actions against licensees? (P.10). Attorney Leslie writes that if a study was done by each licensing board in each state, for example in Massachusetts, the results would indicate that the mandate does not decrease the number or severity of cases for disciplinary actions.
In fact, disciplinary actions taken by state licensing boards tend to be true violations of their state laws for example, insurance fraud, sexual relationships with clients, and failure to report child abuse. Attorney Leslie states these illegal acts are not related to a continuing education issue.
Attorney Leslie writes as he spoke to an "renowned expert" (P.10) about changing the system on mandatory continuing education requirements. The suggestion would be for mental health counselors to be tested every five years on specific topics designated by their licensing board. If the counselor fails the exam, his/her license would be reissued. However, the individual would be required to take continuing education training to increase his/her knowledge of a specific topic area that was not passed on the exam.
What do you think? I do not support taking a test every five years to measure certain areas of knowledge by the state licensing board. Taking an exam of this nature, requires many hours of studying that I would find inconvenient and not fun. I rather take the required thirty hours of continuing education units (CEUs) that is mandated by the licensing board every two years in which I can freely choose what trainings to take on my own time. I agree with Attorney Leslie that continuing education may not stop a counselor for committing an alleged illegal act under state laws. No mandated test or continuing education training will prevent a counselor that lacks immoral character from committing a crime.
I recommend that counseling graduate programs implement a mandated course on "Ethics and Professionalism" that will be able to weed out those students who don't belong in the program. Also, employers could implement a mandatory ethics training program once a year during their staff meetings to keep counselors updated and refreshed on new issues that may arise on the job.
Robbin Miller, LMHC
Facilitator
www.therapistsforchange.blogspot.com
5 comments:
The required CEU's provide an opportunity for licensed counselors to develop more specialized knowledge and skills. No degree program can teach all that is needed to be effective. That said, I am wondering about a graduated permanent license in which an individual who is ten years post Master's degree, with five consecutive completed renewals (150 hours of CEU's) is granted a permanent license with a renewal fee paid every two years.
I agree that the taking of a test/exam every five years is not the best way to evaluate our ongoing learning. I was just recently audited for verification of my CEU's and, while it was a pain getting all of them together to send,I would much rather that than to be taking courses/studying things that may or may not have anything to do with the real life practice of what I do. I would not want a "permanent" license either. It would be easy for us to become disconnected from the updated research that we need to know in order to do good practice if we felt that we didn't need to do it.It would become a volunteer gaining of new knowledge/research and it would not benefit our patients.
I am not sure I am ready to make a decision on the testing, although I do like CEU's for the choices offered. It does not mean that a test of some kind (not agreeing, just thinking) could not be beneficial.
I care more of what is beneficial for the profession as a whole, rather than easy, and I hope most of us do so as well.
Now for a graduate course in ethics and professionalism. I thought it was mandatory, at least my program has one although I do not agree with the weeding out part unless it would be put down into details what raises a red flag. Perhaps always leading to a part where you can talk the talk even though you may not walk the walk.
I would fear conservatism (different cultures) outplaying ethical issues on the professors behalf sometimes.
Robbin, This summer I will be teaching one of the professional identity and ethics courses of which you speak. I would like to hear more about how you think I might be able to weed out people who will eventually commit ethical violations.
Tom,
I will be happy to talk to you further about this. Please email me at rmillerchat@aol.com.
Post a Comment