UKCP briefing on regulation of psychotherapy and counselling
What follows is a summary of a three-part report incorporating notes from the tenth and final meeting of the psychotherapists and counsellors Professional Liaison Group (PLG) at the Health Professions Council (HPC). The full report is available here: http://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/regulation_report.html 2 February the psychotherapists’ and counsellors’ Professional Liaison Group had its final meeting. The activities of the past few years have seen UKCP's engagement with the statutory regulation question move from being a mainly internal dialogue, to being one where we have engaged fully with other professional organisations in the field. As UKCP representative and with the support and empowerment of the board, I carried forward discussions and negotiations with other professional bodies and representatives to the PLG. Additionally I joined Andrew and David as a representative at the Psychological Professions Alliance Group (PPAG) meetings and attended the subgroup meetings looking at the question of differentiation.
We have chosen a far harder path than just simply holding one position; we decided the majority and the minority groupings had to be attended to in what we do, what we encourage the membership to consider and discuss and in understanding that personal professional judgments will need to be made.
While there remains a level of uncertainty around regulation, it has become vital for us to refrain from sitting in our internal corners of modality groupings. Forms of communication include organisational members using the Chairs’ Google group, Psychotherapy Council meetings (also open to members), regional/country specific forums, the Chair and Chief Executive's regular email Bulletin update, and the members’ forum on the website at: www.psychotherapy.org.uk/discussion_forum.html where your views on articles in The Psychotherapist and key issues of concern can be shared. The above forms of communication have allowed us to remain engaged with the field and with the thoughts and concerns, ideas and contributions from members; they have been invaluable in representing the field at the PLG and elsewhere.
Report from the final PLG meeting at the HPC, 2 February 2011
Health Bill
The meeting opened with a discussion on the draft health and social care bill published in January. HPC acknowledged that the bill has an overlap between new HPC (proposed to be Health and Care Professions Council) and CHRE (proposed to be Professional Standards Authority (for health and social care) powers in respect of holding and accrediting voluntary registers. It was clear that HPC (HCPC to be) are still integrating what the bill might mean for them. On or off the table it was not at all clear what this means for the regulation of the professions of psychotherapy and counselling. The PLG was asked at this meeting to come to some conclusions that would inform the recommendations to be made to the main HPC Council in May 2011.
Child psychotherapy
Should there be a regulated title of child psychotherapist? Michael Guthrie introduced the paper he had written for the PLG members setting out the various positions and the questions that that had to be met for the separate title to be feasible from a regulatory perspective. The HPC Executive asked the meeting to consider: the ‘feasibility’ in considering a separate title and the ‘in principle’ question of the necessity of a separate title.
Carmen presented the joint work done by UKCP and ACP, setting out a full case for the title of child psychotherapist and for a marker on the register for psychotherapists competent to work with children and young people, stating that the specific psychological frames that pertained to working with children and young people were part of the psychological protection of the vulnerable child.
Points and views expressed by members of the PLG in the discussion included:
•The separate title is unnecessary for statutory regulation and does not add to protecting the public
•The title would protect a ‘modality’ with the implication that only psychodynamic/psychoanalytic practitioners would be under the child psychotherapist title
•UKCP child psychotherapists are from more than one modality and ACP are starting to include other modality approaches in their training
•The title could only make sense if counsellors had a separate professional title for youth counselling
•From the regulated profession of radiography: there are two titles in that profession which have shared and separate standards that reflect different activities which require separate protected titles
•The public would look for a psychotherapist specifically trained to work with children from the outset
•Such a title should not exclude psychotherapists competent in working with children
Differentiation of counselling and psychotherapy
Entry levels to the statutory register for psychotherapy and counselling were discussed including whether the entry level for counselling should be at 4 or 5. A vote was taken and level 5 was carried overwhelmingly.
Sally Aldridge BACP, opened the discussion by reporting on the recent widened PPAG meeting (attended by relate and CPCAB in addition to BACP, UKCP, BPC, BPS, in chair for the meeting).
Points and views expressed by members of the PLG in the discussion included:
•Language, culture and frame are different between the two professions
•Looking at the field being regulated ‘now’, the professions are different; although they may coalesce in the future
•Provide public protection: present in other countries – see European Associations for each profession
•Lay members of the group expressed that they needed clearer standards to clarify the differentiation
•Psychotherapy is about language – if counselling could not live within the standards of proficiency then it is, per se, a different profession
•That the two exist in each other’s worlds makes it difficult for the two professional groups to see what needs to be regulated
•What people are able to do at entry level is an important factor – they may not meet both standards
•At the PPAG sub-group meeting UKCP agreed to changing from an assessment to a simple verification process where practitioners would provide evidence of practising under the other title and their voluntary regulating body would verify this and add them to the appropriate register
The discussions and indicative votes on both child psychotherapy and differentiation of the L7 counsellor title and the psychotherapy title, should now inform the report to the HPC Council Meeting on 12 May 2011.
Please see the main report for a full version of this discussion and the implications arising, including the indicative voting at the PLC.
Fitness to practice
Despite a statement from the HPC CE that the standards were the more important matter to be resolved for the purpose of regulation; it is important to remember that the draft standards of proficiency have been developed by the professions of psychotherapy and counselling to reflect current practice for the purpose of regulation. UKCP believe that fitness to practice matters and complaints processes are of equal importance to sufficiently articulated standards of proficiency for regulation to be fit for purpose. Further work is needed to gain a good enough position for the board to feel confident about recommending what emerges from the currently uncertain picture on regulation.
Carmen Joanne Ablack
UKCP Advisor and Consultant and former UKCP representative to the PLG
2 February 2011
United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP)
2nd Floor, Edward House, 2 Wakley Street, London EC1V 7LT
Direct Line: 020 7014 9973
Fax: 020 7014 9977 Website: www.ukcp.org.uk
