Alphabetical Minefields

Anastasia De Waal, 17 December 2009

Weeding out the rogues from the refined is a particularly difficult task for—often very vulnerable—people in search of a private psychotherapist or counsellor.  Scanning through the myriad of entries in the Yellow Pages makes for an interesting, if not distressing, task.

From ‘B.A. Hons’ to ‘DIP Couns.’ and ‘Clin. Hyp.’ to ‘UKRC Reg.’ the alphabetical minefield that accompanies the list of entries is a navigational nightmare.

With pressure from the government, a concerned community within the psychotherapeutic sphere and complaints from clients, last week the Psychotherapists and Counsellors Professional Liaison Group (PLG) made strong recommendations in favour of independent statutory regulation under the Health Professions Council (HPC).  After three months of deliberation, the result is no mean feat.  Those for and against this move orbit around the same primary aim: the best structure for patient protection, a mutual belief in the importance of rigorous and ongoing training and an anxiety to revive confidence in the public.  However, their trajectories follow very different paths.

At the heart of the dispute, like those facing a trawl through their local directory, lies the problem of language.  As potential clients struggle to tell the difference between certificates and diplomas, on a theoretical level, some worry that conforming to a medical model of cure (one necessarily endorsed by the HPC with its associated “assessments”, “objectives” and “demonstrable standards”) works in opposition to the process of healing underpinning the profession and runs the risk of alienating practitioners from their clients.

The general consensus is that the titles ‘psychotherapist’ and ‘counsellor’ need to be protected in order to safeguard the public.  However, the HPC will have to tailor their regulations accordingly in order to gain collective support and avoid sterilising the culture of psychotherapy.

By Annaliese Briggs