Issuu on Google+

Volume 57 Issue 2 SUMMER 2006

psychologist A SS TT EE XX A

New Ideas For Assessment

Many Paths To Support Psychology In Texas

www.texaspsyc.org


Donna Davenport, PhD Brian H. Stagner, PhD Co-Editors

David White, CAE Executive Director

Sherry Reisman Assistant Executive Director

George Arredondo Marketing / CE Coordinator

Lindell Brown Membership Manager

Lynda Keen

FEATURES 14

Bookkeeper

Amber Frausto Administrative

Marita Frackowiak, PhD & Stephen E. Finn, PhD

18

Leslie C. Morey, PhD

Intern

22

Melba Vasquez, PhD

President-Elect

Report on the APA State Leadership Conference Disaster Response Network Meeting Rita Justice, PhD

President

M. David Rudd, PhD

Extended Utility of the Personality Assessment Inventory Christopher J. Hopwood, MS

Bryan White

TPA Board of Trustees

Therapeutic Assessment: Basic Concepts and Techniques

24

TPA Disaster Response Network News Judith Andrews, PhD, DRN Co-Chair

Ron Cohorn, PhD President-Elect Designate

26

Paul Burney, PhD Past President; CAPP Representative

Board Members Tim Branaman, PhD, ABPP Mary Alice Conroy, PhD Donna Davenport, PhD Alan Fisher, PhD Robert McPherson, PhD Randy Noblitt, PhD Lane Ogden, PhD Verlis Setne, PhD Brian Stagner, PhD Thomas Van Hoose, PhD Alison Wilson, PhD

Ex-Officio Board Members

Cheryl Hall, PhD

DEPARTMENTS 4 6

From the President Melba J. T. Vasquez, PhD, ABPP

8

From TPA Headquarters David White, CAE

10

NEWS FROM PSY-PAC Mimi H. Wright , PhD

12

Elizabeth Richeson, PhD Texas Psychological Foundation

Why Should an Academic Psychologist Join (or stay with) the Texas Psychological Association? M. David Rudd, PhD, Texas Tech University

Jerry Grammer, PhD Business of Practice Network Rep.

From the Editor Brian H. Stagner, PhD

Mimi Wright, PhD PSY-PAC President

An Invitation to Become a Member of the TPA Psychopharmacology Division

25

Welcome, New Members

Student Division Director

28

PSY-PAC Contributors

Federal Advocacy Coordinators

29

Legislative Champions 2006 TPF Contributors

30

Classified Advertising

Deborah Horn

Ollie Seay, PhD Sherry Reisman The Texas Psychological Association Is located at 1005 Congress Avenue, Suite 410, Austin, Texas 78701. Texas Psychologist (ISSN 0749-3185) is the official publication of TPA and is published quarterly.

www.texaspsyc.org SUMMER 2006

Cover Photo: The Kentucky Psychological Association Foundation launched an innovative public health education campaign, titled “Heads Up Kentucky! Psychology Promotes Healthy Living,” in June, 2005. This multi-faceted project addresses critical health information, raised funds for future public education activities while enhancing the city’s landscape with appealing public art. 3


Texas Psychologist

FROM THE EDITOR

Brian H. Stagner, PhD

At the end of a long week, when I groan at facing yet another treatment-resistant parent or payment-resistant managed care reviewer, the passion I once felt for psychology seems to fade. My restorative tonic at such moments occurs when my TPA duties re-connect me with the stellar people who have dedicated their lives to our profession.

T

he discipline of psychology attracts people with a very wide range of goals, talents, and personalities. It is my belief that, deep in their hearts, most psychologists want to contribute; altruism is a common, uniting motive. Happily, TPA provides lots of ways to get involved with the profession, and if you want to get more involved, there is a niche for you! Consider: Psychologists want to build knowledge and improve our ability to understand the world and the people in it. Case in point: Texas is home to several psychologists who have established themselves as national leaders in the area of assessment. This issue includes two articles by prominent Texas assessment research groups. Frackowiak and Finn provide an introduction to the process (and the promise) of therapeutic assessment. This approach has been featured in a recent APA Monitor and other professional publications and is having substantial impact on how assessments are conducted. Hopwood and Morey discuss the efforts of their research group to extend the application of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Since its introduction in the 1990s, the PAI has become one of the workhorse instruments in personality assessment for adults. This article describes the development of two new instruments to extend the PAI to work with adolescents and to gather personality ratings from an observer. We plan similar updates from Texas research labs in upcoming issues. 4

Psychologists want to gain knowledge and improve their ability to practice. Over the past several months there have been several superb CE workshops sponsored by TPA. Lane Ogden’s presentation on the ethics of psychopharmacology drew an enthusiastic crowd up near Dallas. The Professional Development Conference in Austin provided workshops on conducting evaluations for family court, and on working with the new CPT codes, on malpractice risk management, and on dealing with the Texas Board of Examiners of Psychologists. A particularly informative presentation on evidence-based practice was provided by Geoffrey Reed, an APA staff member who was on the committee that formulated APA’s policy statement on evidence based practice (recently published in the May-June issue of American Psychologist). A further workshop on TSBEP matters was presented for the benefit of the psychologists who took time to attend the recent TSBEP meeting on the psychological associate issue (see Melba Vasquez’s presidential column for a summary of this critically important meeting.) And the really exciting CE activity was the trip to Edinburgh. Uh, we have very stalwart TPA membership in Edinburgh, Texas, but there is evidently a second Edinburgh. Go figure. See David White’s column for details. There was nothing perfunctory about any of these workshops: the presenters were really superb and the participants were eager

to learn and brought sophisticated curiosity to the process. Psychologists want to be active politically to maintain high professional standards. As Melba’s column relates, we had a very important meeting with the TSBEP and it appears that the board will shelve efforts to expand the scope of practice for psychological associates. This and other regulatory issues are by no means permanently settled. As was discussed at a recent summit of local psychological association leadership (see Melba’s discussion of the LAS retreat), we have reached a point where the political environment dictates that TPA devote substantial time and resources to a long term legislative and regulatory agenda. Psychology must be vigilant to initiative by groups that may not share our concerns, from the LPA issue to hospital access, to prescriptive authority, to parity for mental health, to funding for indigent mental health clients, to case law on dozens of issues. To be effective, we will need to become much more active at building liaisons with legislators, regulators, and allied provider groups. There will be lots of opportunities for psychologists to become active in advocating for their profession. Two items in this issue are noteworthy in this regard. The TPA Division on Psychopharmacology has issued a call for members. Whether you seek prescriptive authority, the division will offer educational updates and other advocacy for the profession that will benefit all of us. See the call under their new SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

name, TxASAP. The second item describing the tireless efforts of fellow psychologists on behalf of the profession is the article by Mimi Wright, current president of Psy-Pac. It is a political inevitability that our efforts to advocate for our profession will founder if we cannot make a credible lobbying appearance, and Psy-Pac is essential for this. Check out Mimi’s bulletin to see how we’re doing. TPA WILL have a niche for you! I really think that psychologists want to contribute to make the world better, but they may not see how TPA is relevant to them. President-elect David Rudd has written eloquently about the relevance of TPA for the academic psychologist. David speaks from certain knowl-

edge; he has recently assumed the job of chair of the psychology department at Texas Tech, yet he continues to devote significant time and energy to promoting psychology and to building TPA into a stronger professional organization. And what about YOU? There’s lots of things TPA can do for you, from education to networking to protecting your practice in the regulatory environment. And there are lots of ways you can, through TPA, get more involved in advocating for your profession, as you define it. Moreover, if your particular passion seems not to be addressed, we have a big tent and welcome ideas and energy. Get involved!

Here’s your homework. It costs you no money and very little time. Two items: Mark your calendar to be sure to attend the convention in Dallas in November 17-20. It will be really good. I’ve seen a preview of the invited speakers and, well WOW. It is really going to be good, but I’ve promised not to tell. Mark your calendar right away. Pass this issue along to a colleague. Get them to join TPA.

Do it RIGHT NOW!

CONFIDENTIAL AND EXPERIENCED

LEGAL REPRESENTATION FOR

TEXAS PHYSICIANS

Representation before The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists, 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. MICHAEL SHARP*

COURTNEY NEWTON**

TONY COBOS**

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

SUMMER 2006

5


Texas Psychologist

FROM THE PRESIDENT

Melba J. T. Vasquez, PhD, ABPP

It is with firm satisfaction that I report that the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists (TSBEP) voted on May 11, 2006 to dismiss the proposed rules regarding independent practice for licensed psychological associates.

T

he TSBEP concurred with widespread opinion that scope of practice issues should be determined by the Texas legislature. The rules submitted by the Texas Association of Psychological Associates would have redefined psychology practice as a non-doctoral degree profession. TSBEP Chairperson Dr. Pauline Clansy began the meeting by reading into the minutes a letter co-authored by the Texas Legislative Sunset Commission Chair, Senator Kenneth Brimmer, and Vice-chair, Vicki Truitt ,on the behalf the Commission and other legislators, stipulating that the consideration of scope of practice issues were beyond the legislatively mandated function of the TSBEP. TSBEP Board member Dr. Gary Elkins immediately initiated a motion to dismiss the proposed rules, then Board member Dr. Carl Settles seconded the motion. Following debate, these three psychologists and two public members voted in favor of the motion; the two LPAs Board members voted against the motion, and Dr. Art Hernandez abstained. We are very grateful to the TSBEP Board members who worked very hard to be as respectful, considerate and concerned about the LPA discontent, and for their constructive stance in regard to maintaining the doctorate as the minimal standard for the independent practice of psychology. The TPA Board of Trustees, various TPA members and TPA staff worked very hard over the past 10 months to inform members of the TSBEP and the legislature about the historical precedents, national training

6

and licensure standards, and public safety interests associated with the practice of psychology . While the recent TSBEP vote is truly a celebratory event, we should expect that TAPA and its sister organization, the Texas Association of Master Psychologists (TAMP), will initiate future legislation to obtain their objectives to achieve practice and title parity with psychologists. You may anticipate that their arguments will be framed around two sets of assumptions. First, they will seek to minimize and/or trivialize the value of the doctorate, claiming their training and psot masters degree experience equates and/or is superior to your doctoral degree and post doctoral supervision. Second, they will assert that the Texas Psychological Association seeks to protect its professional turf at the expense of unmet services to low income, minority populations. I most certainly disagree with their unfounded assertions about the value of doctoral training. And while I share their concerns for the needs of underserved,populations in Texas, I have spent my entire career advocating for higher standards of training for psychologists and for programs and services for those with the fewest resources and the most need for psychological assistance. It was truly disconcerting for me to hear about the career unhappiness of some LPAs; however, lowering of the standards and definition of a psychologist is not the appropriate resolution to their concerns. We will continue to be as clear as possible about informing the legislature and the public about the high training standards

and the specialized services provided in this state by psychologists. We are firmly committed to the doctoral degree serving as the minimum standard for full independent practice of psychology in Texas, as it is in almost every other state in the nation. It is also worth noting that federal laws regulating government programs such as Medicare and TRICARE provide reimbursement of services for doctoral trained psychologists. Only two states have laws that allow one to be licensed at the master’s level for independent practice of psychology (Vermont and West Virginia). Alaska, Kansas, Kentucky, Oregon and Tennessee allow master’s level of independent practice of psychology in specific limited areas and usually after a distinct period of supervision by doctoral level supervisors. . In other states, persons with masters degrees in psychology hold titles such as “licensed clinical psychothe rapists”(Kansas) or “senior psychological examiners” (Tennessee, where this category of practitioner is no longer available since December 31, 2004) (Hinnefield, personal correspondence, February 6, 2006). Tennessee law will place permanent moratorium of future licenses for person with masters degrees in psychology in the near future. In my last column, I reported that we were to host a retreat for the Local Area Society (LAS) representatives. Fourteen of the twenty-one LAS were represented and it was a very productive retreat! We will most likely repeat the opportunity, and hope to have full representation! As a direct result of the retreat 26 psychologists were present at the May 11 meeting, and SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

most made public comment about their concerns about the LPA proposed rules. Various others sent correspondence to their legislators as well as to members of the TSBEP. I am very grateful for all the efforts. Many of the psychologists present at the meeting drove several hours to be present. I am listing their names below because they deserve recognition for giving up practice and other obligations to attend. Austin Kay Allensworth, PhD Amy Blackmon, PhD Marla Craig, PhD Bonny Gardner, PhD Thomas Kramer, PhD Bruce Mansbridge, PhD Leslie Rosenstein, PhD Dan Roberts, PhD Selia Servin-Lopez, PsyD Vicky Spradling, PhD Melba Vasquez, PhD

San Antonio Dee Yates, PhD TPA Staff David White, CAE Sherry Reisman The two Continuing Education events held last spring, Ethics in Psychopharmacology on April 22 and the Professional Education Conference in Austin, on May 5-6 were both successful. The TPA Board of Trustees meeting on May 5 was very productive, and several projects and activities are in process. We will be reporting more about these in the future. I do want to mention that we have been in the process of developing our Legislative Agenda for 2007. The TPA Legislative Committee is

chaired by President-Elect David Rudd. We will be in touch with the membership about our needs for the varied kinds of support we will require. Our goals are to promote the practice of psychology for psychologists as well as for the well being of consumers in this state. In the meantime, please continue renewing your memberships. It would also be helpful for you to make regular contributions to Psy-Pac, the TPA entity that raises money to impact the legislature. In addition, we hope that you are making plans to attend the November 16-18 TPA Convention at the Westin Galleria in Dallas. I am very grateful to the TPA staff and to the Executive Committee and Board of Trustees for the effective working relationships that we have developed.

Conroe Paul Burney, PhD College Station Brian Stagner, PhD Dallas Lane Ogden, PhD Ft. Worth Earl Johnson, PhD Alan Hopewell, PhD Houston Laurie Baldwin, PhD Leslie Crossman, PhD Suzanne Mouton-Odum, PhD Carmen Petzold, PhD Robin Reamer, PhD McAllen Joseph McCoy, PhD Jose Sanchez, PhD

SUMMER 2006

7


Texas Psychologist

FROM TPA HEADQUARTERS

David White, CAE

Planning Your 2007 Vacation? For the past 10 years, TPA has invited members and their families and friends to attend our annual “Family-Get-Away”. Over the years, this annual trip has taken us to places like Cancun and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico; Vail, Colorado; cruising on the Caribbean; and traveling to Paris, France. This year was probably the most exciting trip to Edinburgh/St. Andrews, Scotland!

T

his trip allowed the participants to experience sightseeing tours of Edinburgh and St. Andrews on “executive deluxe private motor coaches” with our own private guides. We toured 16th century castles; ancient cathedrals

and the birthplace of Robert Louis Stevenson. Some of our group also followed in the footsteps of Scotland’s literary heroes, in The Macallan Edinburgh Literary Pub Tour, which takes in the famous and infamous pubs of Edinburgh’s Old and New

Towns. While others took the Mary King’s Close tour which traveled through a warren of hidden streets beneath the Royal Mile, dating back to the 16th century. Others experienced the Royal Yacht Britannia which served the Royal Family for forty four years and is the last in a long line of Royal Yachts. Some folks even walked around Edinburgh University, one of the most famous universities in the world, which was established in 1583. And of course, when in Scotland, you must do as the Scottish do, so the trip would not have been complete unless we toured the oldest scotch distillery in Scotland, the Grouse Distillery at Glenturret. All this and 8 hours of CE made for a once in a life experience! Special thanks goes out to Drs. Robbie Sharp and Bob McLaughlin for putting together a fabulous workshop on “Psychologists as Consultants”. The weather was spectacular and the food superb so it was no surprise to hear that Edinburgh has been designated a World Heritage Site. I hope you will join us next year London!

Back row: Ben White, Michael Huffmaster, David White, George Graham, Christie Graham, Nancy Van Morkhoven, Joe Williamson, Nick Brizendine Front row: Chris Robbins, Nancy Gordon Moore, Bob McLaughlin, Mrs. Sharp, Robbie Sharp, Marcia Lindsey 8

SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

SUMMER 2006

9


Texas Psychologist

NEWS FROM PSY-PAC

Mimi H. Wright , PhD

PSY-PAC is Your PAC

A

s I’m sure you know, PSY-PAC is the Political Action Committee of the Texas Psychological Association. Contributions to PSY-PAC help protect our practice of psychology in Texas and make sure that legislation promotes mental health care, which is currently a crisis in Texas. Voting membership in PSY-PAC requires a minimum contribution of $100.00

10

per year. Board members are elected from PSY-PAC voting members. With enthusiasm, energy, and innovative ideas, the 2006 PSY-PAC Board has had one Conference Call Meeting on March 29, 2006, one “live” Board Meeting in Austin on May 4, 2006 prior to TPA’s Professional Education Conference, and PSY-PAC Board Members joined the

TPA Board for an Executive Session on the morning of May 5, 2006. I also attended the retreat that TPA hosted for Local Area Association Presidents and representatives in order to encourage their support of PSYPAC and active involvement in the legislative process. A breakdown of 2006 PSYPAC contributions by Local Area Society (LAS) follows:

Bell County Psychological Association

$370

Bexar County Psychological Association

$1,774

Brazos Valley Psychological Association

$320

Capital Area Psychological Association

$2,091

Collin County Psychological Association

$383

Dallas Psychological Association

$2,338

East Texas Psychological Association

$300

El Paso County Psychological Society

$400

Fort Worth Area Psychological Association

$1,097

Houston Psychological Association

$4,528

Montgomery County Psychological Association

$150

Nueces County Psychological Association

$325

Panhandle Psychological Association

$124

Psychological Association of Greater West Texas

$625

Red River Psychological Association

$300

Rio Grande Valley Psychological Association

$300

South Plains Association of Psychologists

$735

Southeast Texas Psychological Association

$150

Texoma Psychological Association

$50

SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist Because you all understand statistics, I want to share some simple math facts with you. There are 3,500 licensed psychologists in Texas. Only 1,060 of us belong to our state professional organization, TPA. Currently 272, or 20 % of psychologists who are members of TPA support PSY-PAC. These few psychologists have contributed an average of $83.61 per person. Contributions average $21.45 per TPA member, or $0.15 per licensed psychologist in Texas! Hopefully, you support our profession and care about protecting our interests! Even if you are in an area of Texas that doesn’t have a LAS, you can still contribute to PSY-PAC! TPA and PSY-PAC worked tirelessly on behalf of all licensed psychologists to educate and work with legislators during the Sunset Review of our licensing act. Thankfully, our work was successful as we were able to pass legislation that prevented consolidation of our Board with other mental health professions. Also, in May of this year, we suc-

cessfully defended a proposal submitted to TSBEP that would allow Psychological Associates to practice independently. Even though we are not currently in a legislative session, our legislative efforts are still very active, and your help is needed! Supporting mental health is always a good investment! Go to TPA’s Web site at www. texaspsyc.org to identify your legislators and learn their contact information. Contact them and build a relationship with them. Your relationship could be the one that makes the difference in the next legislative session! Talk to legislators about the time and money saved for businesses in Texas when workers are mentally healthy. Develop personal relationships with your legislators so they will ask for your input on mental health issues between and during legislative sessions. Let us know who you know! Take a moment and think about what you can do to support our legislative efforts. I urge you to send regular contributions

to PSY-PAC of $25., $50., $100., or whatever you can afford. The amount you contribute is money well spent! You may have your checking account or credit card account drafted monthly by PSY-PAC. The PSYPAC Board voted unanimously to reinstate the “earmarking” of contributions to be used for efforts to obtain Prescription Privileges. If you wish to do so, just go to www.texaspsyc.org. You may contribute on line or send your check to PSY-PAC at the TPA office. It is up to us to protect our profession and keep the psychology and the ethical principals of psychologists in the public eye. Mimi H. Wright, PhD, 2006 PSY-PAC President 2006 Board Members Patrick Ellis, PhD, Past President Michael Pelfrey, PhD Robert Mehl, PhD Dee Yates, PhD Stephen Loughhead, PhD

WHEN YOU SEND A CLIENT TO HAZELDEN, YOU BOTH GET EXCEPTIONAL TREATMENT. You won’t find a more comprehensive treatment program for your clients. Or one that does more to partner with you. We treat young people, ages 14–25, keeping you involved every step of the way. And our full line of curricula and educational materials can help you in your practice. To learn more, call 888-355-6894. www.hazelden.org/helpingyouth

SUMMER 2006

11


Texas Psychologist

Why Should an Academic Psychologist Join (or stay with) the Texas Psychological Association? M. David Rudd, PhD Chair, Psychology Department, Texas Tech University TPA President-Elect

Over the last several years I have found myself responding to this question with increasing, if not alarming, frequency. TPA membership among academic psychologists continues to be marginal at best, certainly not representative.

T

here are many reasons for the decline in membership among academics. Association membership fees have increased around the country, a trend paralleled by an exponential increase in the number of specialty associations nationally, along with the pervasive and inaccurate perception that TPA is a professional guild repre12

senting a narrow band of psychologists practicing in clinical settings. The competition for members these days is fierce. There is little doubt that we can (and should) do much better at attracting and retaining psychologist members claiming academia as their primary home and identity as a psychologist.

In order to grow the presence of TPA in academia, we need to clearly articulate the unique benefits of membership. I genuinely believe that membership in TPA is critical for each and every psychologist in the great state of Texas. If you can maintain membership in only one association, it should be TPA. Let me share with you why this is the case. Psychology is at a crossroads, facing issues critical to our survival as a doctoral-level profession. Although the recent assault by master’s-level practitioners is the most visible (and recent) evidence, it is a struggle that has been active for decades now and experienced by almost every generation of psychologists since licensure was achieved. The American Psychological Association represents the profession on the national stage. It’s important to remember, though, that these battles are waged in the state legislatures around the country, not in Washington, DC. Failure to retain the doctoral standard in psychology SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

would result in significant changes in every PhD and PsyD program in the state. Although most PhD programs are geared toward the production of scientist-practitioners, the vast majority of graduates go directly into clinical practice. Very few graduates of PsyD programs end up in academia since the primary goal of these programs is to produce clinicians. If the doctoral standard were to be eroded and master’s-level practitioners had access to independent practice with equal status and professional authority in the eyes of the public, several things would happen. First, it is doubtful that doctoral programs would be effective in recruiting and retaining the best and the brightest students into programs that, on average, require six years of postgraduate education. Why would a student expend the time, energy and financial resources for a degree that provided no identifiable distinction from a master’s degree in psychology, particularly if the overwhelming majority of clinically-oriented graduates end up going into practice? Those that end up in doctoral programs would be those genuinely interested in academic careers, a number that is dramatically smaller than current programs enroll. Reductions such as this would have tremendous impact on the structure and function of graduate programs. Most, if not all, programs have minimum enrollment requirements in order for courses to be offered. The net result would be noticeable changes in the size of programs, that is the number of faculty employed and the number and type of courses offered. In short, curricula would have to change accordingly. Some programs with reduced enrollments would likely not survive due to financial constraints. The net ripple effect of losing the doctoral standard would most likely be a reduction and modification of doctoral training programs in the state. SUMMER 2006

Academics of all stripes, not just applied practitioners, would be impacted. The state legislature and the Texas State Board of Examiners (TSBEP) control the doctoral degree as the entry-level standard for the profession, be it in academia or clinical practice. TPA is your liaison, and I might add the only liaison, to both of these groups. The actions of TSBEP have significant and direct impact on the educational and training curriculum offered in every academic department in the state. Although APA articulates accreditation standards, the TSBEP articulates licensure standards, including curricular content and continuing education requirements. How we define professional psychology is ar-

state are in clinical and counseling psychology doctoral programs. Licensed or not, the TSBEP wields great influence on professional and academic psychology in the state of Texas. It’s also important to recognize that the legislature and higher education coordinating board directly control the number, size and type of doctoral programs available in the state of Texas. If you are an academic, it is important to recognize that professional psychology is defined and regulated well outside the walls of the university. It is defined, regulated and ultimately changed in the legislature, the coordinating board and the TSBEP. Although it is sometimes difficult to see the link between these

Psychology is at a crossroads, facing issues critical to our survival as a doctoral-level profession. guably defined by state boards and state legislatures. Even in areas of academic psychology traditionally believed to be far removed from professional practice (e.g. cognition, experimental, individual differences, personality, social, biological, among others) would be directly impacted. Faculty across all of these areas teach in doctoral programs that are accountable to accreditation and licensure standards that demand this content be covered in order to achieve minimal competence in what has grown to be a diverse and rapidly changing field. It’s also important to recognize that the largest number of students enrolled in academic departments around the

various entities, the connection is undeniable and, without proper oversight and lobbying, the ties can have disastrous results. Events over the last several months have, without question, made it clear that we need a strong and unified voice, one with clear representation of those in academia. TPA is your voice in the state legislature, with the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists, and with the Higher Education Coordinating Board. TPA needs your support, broadly defined. We need your time creativity, expertise, energy, commitment and financial support. Join today and renew your membership each and every year. 13


Texas Psychologist

Therapeutic Assessment: Basic Concepts and Techniques Marita Frackowiak, PhD & Stephen E. Finn, PhD Center for Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX

As some readers of the Texas Psychologist may have seen, Therapeutic Assessment was recently featured in the January 2006 issue of the APA Monitor. In this article, we briefly describe the background and format of Therapeutic Assessment. sionate stories about themselves (Finn & Tonsager, 1997). For example a client who believes he is “lazy” because he lacks motivation and drive, may learn through an assessment that he is depressed. This new “story” is not only more accurate and less negative, it points towards concrete steps the client may take to address his lack of passion and motivation (i.e., therapy and medication). Independent studies confirm that TA can lead to decreases in symptomatology, increases in self-esteem and hope, and better compliance with treatment recommendations (Newman & Greenway, 1997; Ackerman, Hilsenroth, Baity, & Blagys, 2000).

Format of a Therapeutic Assessment Although every evaluation is unique, there is a common structure to many therapeutic assessments.

Background and Theory Therapeutic Assessment (TA) is a relatively new assessment paradigm where psychological tests are used as the centerpiece of a brief psychotherapeutic intervention. TA grew out of the tradition of collaborative psychological assessment introduced by Constance Fischer (1986/1994) and others, and was developed by Stephen Finn and his colleagues in Austin after they noticed that many clients seemed to undergo profound psychological changes after taking part in a 14

psychological assessment. As a faculty member at the University of Texas at Austin, Finn and his students studied why and how psychological assessment could be therapeutic (e.g., Finn & Tonsager, 1992) and eventually developed a theory of how this happens. Briefly, TA seems to work by producing changes in clients’ “stories” about themselves and the world. The assessor uses psychological tests to gain empathy for clients’ dilemmas and problems in living, and then helps clients develop more accurate and compas-

Step 1: Initial Session In the initial session, the client and assessor meet to discuss the goals and context of the assessment. If the client has been referred by another professional, the assessor reveals (with that person’s permission) the questions the referring professional hopes will be addressed in the assessment process. In addition, the assessor and the client work together to delineate questions the client has concerning him or herself or concerning the client’s life circumstances, about which the SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

assessment may be able to provide insights. Subsequently, the assessor collects background information relevant to each of the client’s questions, and practical aspects of the assessment are discussed (e.g., cost, number of subsequent sessions, who will receive information about the client’s assessment results). The client has an opportunity to ask questions about the assessment process and voice his or her concerns or fears. By centering on client’s personal concerns, questions, and agendas, TA: 1) helps motivate clients to respond to the psychological measures in an open and honest fashion, 2) identifies “open doors” through which difficult-to-hear test findings may be presented at the end of the evaluation, and 3) assesses and engages client’s curiosity and observing ego, which alone can decrease distress and set the stage for therapeutic change.

Step 2: Client Completes Tests (usually 3-4 sessions) In TA, assessors pay close attention to how the various psychological measures are introduced to clients and administered. Generally, it is important to begin by explaining that the tests are widely used in many different settings and yield information about a range of strengths, problems, and personality traits. Then the assessor should explain how a particular test is relevant to the client’s questions for the assessment. For example, a client who has asked, “How depressed am I?” may be told that the MMPI-2 and the Rorschach have been used in research to measure severity of depression. A client who has asked about having trouble concentrating and completing assignments at work may be told that the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Adults-III (WAIS-III) may help understand the nature of client’s difficulties. The assessor administers the tests (typically one per session) following standard instructions and administration procedures; however, a substantial effort is made to make the administration setting as comfortable for clients as possible. If clients express reservaSUMMER 2006

tions about taking a particular test, they are encouraged to discuss their concerns with the assessor and unless resolved and reassured, clients are never asked to participate in or finish (if concerns are voiced during an administration) any measures with which they are not comfortable. From our experience, this approach provides both clients and assessors with possible insights into clients’ dilemmas. For example, a client who dislikes the Rorschach because of “all the dark cards that look scary” may have an opportunity to connect to dark feelings inside him- or herself and with the fear of falling into a depression. In TA, after standardized administration of the measures, clients are asked to reflect on their experience of taking each test, process their feelings about it, and are encouraged to share thoughts, interpretations, or insights about their specific responses. By referencing client’s personal goals for the assessment, explaining how the various tests are relevant, and inviting the client to share his or her insights about the test, the assessor; 1) elicits the client’s cooperation and best effort, 2) communicates respect for the client by letting him/her “in” to the assessor’s thinking, 3) utilizes a client’s insight about their test results and process, and 4) supports the client in integrating new information he/ she may learn in the process of completing the tests.

Step 3: Tests are Scored and Interpreted In TA, there is great respect for the nomothetically based hypotheses that can be derived from standardized tests; thus, the next step is to score and interpret the test results and profiles as if they were the sole source of information about the client. That is, assessors first interpret the assessment results as if they were blind to the client’s assessment questions, and then seek a coherent integration of all the various test results and collateral information available for consideration. Next, assessors review the results again, holding the client’s questions in mind. At this

stage, assessors begin to sketch out tentative answers to a client’s questions and to anticipate which of these answers will be most challenging for the client to hear and understand.

Step 4: Assessment Intervention Session (Optional) One of the later developments in TA is the use of a separate assessment intervention session – prior to the summary/discussion (feedback) session – for assessors to introduce and explore hypotheses with clients that they have derived from the assessment data. Assessment intervention sessions are not necessary or advisable for all clients. Basically, in an assessment intervention session, an assessor uses non-standardized tests or other techniques – such as psychodrama, role-playing, or art projects – to create vivid experiences for clients that may help them understand their main questions for the assessment. Alternatively, standardized tests may be administered following individualized, nonstandardized instructions. Prepared with a set of hypothesis derived from the assessment results about the client’s conflicts, defenses, and core issues, the assessor attempts to elicit in the assessment session actual instances of the client’s problems in living. If such efforts are successful, the client and assessor may then observe, analyze, and discuss those problems as they occur in the assessment setting and then try to generalize any insights to the client’s outside life. As an example, let’s say a client has a question: “Why am I so tired all the time and can’t enjoy life the way I used to?” Imagine this client’s Rorschach scores suggest a substantial underlying depression (e.g., DEPI=6), but the MMPI-2 profile reveals no self-reported depression (Scale 2 = 50T) and suggests the heavy use of use of repression and denial to manage painful affect (e.g., Scale 3 = 75T). The assessor may ask the client to tell stories to selected TAT cards with a clear dysphoric content. If the client told stories related to painful events and consistently ended them 15


Texas Psychologist

by saying: “But, things will turn out just fine,” or “In the end, she will brush it off and will go on with her everyday life” -- the assessor could ask the client to tell a story without a happy ending. The assessor could then lead the client in observing and discussing the client’s coping mechanisms, their role in keeping the client’s painful affect out of awareness, and the costs paid in tiredness, lack of drive, and decreased enjoyment. If appropriate, the client and the assessor could

Following the assessment intervention session, the assessor takes time to carefully plan the summary/discussion session with the client. Based on our clinical work and supported by research, clients appear to find assessment information most useful when it is presented according to how closely it matches their existing ideas or the story they have about themselves (Schroeder, Hahn, Finn, & Swann, 1993). Early in a summary/ discussion session, assessors should relate in-

then discuss other ways of handling and processing difficult feelings. In general, assessment intervention sessions are centered on psychological issues that could be difficult for the client to grasp from an explanation of the test results alone. In our clinical experience, many clients describe these sessions as having impacted them greatly.

formation that is very close to clients’ existing self-conceptions. After this, assessors can proceed to information that is slightly new and different and, finally to ideas that are likely to conflict with clients’ current understandings of their situations. If one begins with this more difficult material, typically clients will react defensively or with anxiety or will get overwhelmed early in the session. On the other hand, if one never broaches difficult topics, the client may decide the assessment tools or the assessor are incompetent or that the information they revealed in the

Step 5: Assessor Plans the Summary/Discussion Session 16

assessment is too shameful to discuss. Another guideline for preparing the summary/discussion session has to do with the process and tone of the session. As Finn (1996) has noted, an assessor can use the assessment results as an empathic window into a client’s experience and ask, “If I were this person, what would be the best way to tell me about my test results?” For example, clients with high F scale on the MMPI-2, multiple elevations on the clinical scales, and DEPI = 6 on the Rorschach are in a state of general overwhelm, and assessors should plan for shorter summary-discussion sessions, structured, with a few major points. While giving feedback to clients with an elevation on the MMPI-2 Scale 4 (70T), and T = 0 and Human Content = 1 on the Rorschach, assessors should take care to present the test findings in a rather blunt, matter-of-fact manner rather than too “sympathetic” or “touchy feely” way, which makes these clients more likely to lose respect for assessors and the assessment process. Finally, most clients (not all) seem to appreciate some recognition from the assessor that psychological assessment is a vulnerable experience and that they showed some trust by agreeing to participate. Such comments fit naturally into the discussion of the test results (especially when interpreting unguarded and honest test protocols) or an assessor may choose to begin or end the summary/discussion session by expressing such appreciations.

Step 6: Summary/Discussion Session If there has been an assessment intervention session, the assessor typically begins the summary/discussion session by inquiring about the client’s reactions to that session and discussing those. Then the assessor reviews the plan for the session with the client- typically, to discuss and answer the client’s questions posed at the beginning of the assessment – and invites the client to interrupt, agree, disagree, ask SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

questions, and share any reactions during the session. With many clients, it is useful to start by showing the WAIS-III or the MMPI-2 profile, and orient the client to it. Then, the assessor begins to review the major test findings of the assessment and how they relate to the client’s questions. Research confirms our clinical experience by showing that the best method for reviewing test findings with clients is an interactive one (Hanson, Claiborn, & Kerr, 1997). For this reason we now call these types of sessions summary/discussion, rather than feedback sessions, for the latter term implies a unilateral flow of information from assessor to client. We suggest that assessors share one piece of information, all the while carefully watching a client’s demeanor to judge his/ her reactions. If the client agrees with the finding, the assessor asks for an example of how it is borne out in the client’s life and then listens carefully to the example to make sure the client is not simply blindly agreeing to the assessor’s interpretation. If a client disagrees, one may ask the client to help modify the finding so it fits with the client’s experience. If a client totally rejects a hypothesis derived from the testing, an assessor has several options. Sometimes, it is useful to restate the finding using different language; at other times one asks the client if any part of what one has said seems correct. And other times, it is better to simply back off and agree that the test could be wrong. As Finn (1996) has emphasized, one should never argue with a client about the validity of the assessment results. As outlined earlier, the assessors tries to present information in order of how well is matches client’s existing self-concepts, all while looking for signs of overwhelm or defensiveness from the client. (It is best to stop and come back later to review the results, should clients become too overwhelmed to process the information). If all pertinent information is covered, the asSUMMER 2006

sessor moves toward ending the session by inviting other questions or reactions from the client, thanking the client for participating, mentioning that a letter will follow, and inviting the client to attend a follow session in 4 to 6 weeks. Finn (1996) also encourages that assessors share some way with clients that they felt moved or learned something through working with the client.

peutic assessment as psychotherapy. It is best to consult with each company about how it wishes to handle such sessions. It may also be useful to remind payors that the current APA ethics code requires assessors to offer feedback to clients about their assessment results, except in certain forensic and employment screening situations.

Step 7: Written Feedback Given to the Client

Training in Therapeutic Assessment is offered through training workshops sponsored by the Center for Therapeutic Assessment and by a number of other organizations around the country. To be placed on our mailing list for future workshops, please email Stephen Finn at sefinn@mail.utexas. edu or call 512-329-5090.

In TA, the assessor sends a letter to the client shortly after the summary/discussion session, reviewing the major points from the session and incorporating the client’s modifications and examples (noted during the summary/ discussion session.) In this way, the client sees his or her own impact on the assessment findings. With the client’s permission, a copy of the letter is also sent to the referring professional. Assessment feedback forms are included with the letter, providing clients with an opportunity to reflect on the assessment process and provide the assessors with feedback about strengths and weaknesses of the assessment.

Step 8: Follow- Up Session(s) (Optional) At the summary/discussion session, clients are invited to return at some later date (typically 4-6 weeks later) to talk about their later reactions to the assessment and any new questions they have. In our clinical experience, such meetings serve as “booster sessions” in enhancing the beneficial aspects of TA. A similar invitation is extended to the referring professionals, who often use the assessment as a base for consultation in their ongoing work with the client.

Billing for Therapeutic Assessment Many third-party payors permit and encourage assessors to bill some parts of a thera-

Training in Therapeutic Assessment

References Ackerman, S. J., Hilsenroth, M. J., Baity, M. R., & Blagys, M. D. (2000). Interaction of therapeutic process and alliance during psychological assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75, 82-109. Finn, S. E. (1996). A manual for using the MMPI2 as a therapeutic intervention. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1992). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to college students awaiting therapy. Psychological Assessment, 4, 278-287. Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1997). Information-gathering and therapeutic models of assessment: Complementary paradigms. Psychological Assessment, 9, 374-385. Fischer, C. T. (1985/1994). Individualizing psychological assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hanson, W. E., Claiborn, C. D., & Kerr, B. (1997). Differential effects of two test-interpretation styles in counseling: A field study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 44, 400-405. Newman, M. L., & Greenway, P. (1997). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to clients at a university counseling service. Psychological Assessment, 9, 122-131. Schroeder, D. G., Hahn, E. D., Finn, S. E., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (1993, June). Personality feedback has more impact when mildly discrepant from self views. Paper presented at the fifth annual convention of the American Psychological Society, Chicago, IL. 17


PAI

Extended Utility of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Christopher J. Hopwood, MS Leslie C. Morey, PhD Texas A&M University

In this article, we would like to describe some of our recent work extending the clinical utility of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991). The PAI is a multi-scale self-report psychological inventory with a variety of clinical and research applications.

popularity; for example, the PAI has recently been made the subject of a special issue of the Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA, 2005), and research applications have involved topics as varied as distinguishing nonepileptic from epileptic seizures (Wagner et al., 2005) and screening prospective kidney donors (Henderson et al., 2003) to predicting recidivism in released prison inmates (Walters & Duncan, 2005). A comprehensive description of recent PAI research is beyond the scope of this article; rather, we aim to describe three extensions of the PAI, two of which are currently in the final stages of development.

The Personality Assessment Screener (PAS)

T

his measure has 344 items that comprise 22 non-overlapping full scales, including validity scales designed to assess both negative and positive distortion related to exaggeration, intentional feigning, or a combination of these factors. Clinical full scales are composed of subscales that help capture the full breadth of diagnostic constructs, while additional scales were designed to assess other treatment relevant constructs 18

such as suicidality, aggression, interpersonal style and environment, and treatment resistance. A variety of surveys demonstrate that the PAI is among the most commonly used instruments in doctoral training (Belter & Piotrowski, 2001), internship (Piotrowski & Belter, 1999), correctional (Boothby & Clements, 2000) and forensic (Lally, 2003) settings. Hundreds of research reports in the empirical literature also attest to its emerging

One of the first extensions of the PAI involved the development of an efficient screening instrument to quickly identify potential for emotional problems under conditions of limited time and resources. The Personality Assessment Screener (PAS; Morey, 1997) was designed for this purpose. The PAS, which can be administered and scored in three to five minutes, was constructed to sample broadly from the domain of problems assessed by the PAI, and it is comprised of 22 PAI items that are maximally sensitive for this purpose. The PAS yields p scores that represent the probability that the respondent SUMMER 2006


PAI

would achieve a clinically significant score on the full PAI. In settings where the base rate of clinical problems is relatively low (as opposed to a psychological clinic), the clinician can streamline their practice by conducting a more thorough assessment of emotional problems only when respondents exceed an empirically-identified cutoff. Its brevity makes the PAS particularly useful for evaluations in which emotional problems are not the central concern but may need to be ruled out (e.g., certain cognitive evaluations), or in mass-testing situations in which it is not feasible for every person to complete the PAI (e.g., an EAP program).

Personality Assessment Screener – Observer (PASO) Both the PAS and its parent instrument, the PAI, are self-report questionnaires that provide the professional with important insights into the experiences of the respon-

dent. However, self-report instruments are limited in that clients may provide distorted information, either intentionally or unconsciously. Thus, supplementing self-report with additional data is an important part of the assessment process. We have recently developed the Personality Assessment Screener – Observer (PASO) to provide a systematic means of gathering information from a collateral observer or informant. The PASO consists of the same 22 items as are on the PAS, but items are worded in the third person according to the gender of the person being rated, resulting in parallel, gender-specific forms. The PASO can be given to friends or family, therapists, or other individuals, depending on the nature of the assessment, and has the potential to provide important supplemental information to the clinician using the PAS. Because the PAS was developed to sample both broadly and sensitively across a wide range of different

emotional problems (e.g., depression, anger problems, suicide problems, paranoia), these items provide an efficient means of gathering convergent data from a third party on these important issues. Furthermore, because the PAS itself includes items selected from the PAI, the PASO can provide supplementary information regardless of whether the client completed the PAS or the full PAI. The comparison of self-report (PAI or PAS) and observer-report (PASO) can provide the professional with important insight into the clinical picture. For example, strong convergence across the instruments indicates that clients’ self-descriptions are similar to the way others perceive them, lessening the possibility that certain issues might be overor under-reported. Conversely, discrepancies between the PAS/PAI and PASO may indicate a variety of potential issues. The client may be truthfully responding according to their experience, but may be unconsciously

“Hey Helper, you just won

Best in KLAS!” Helper Software is proud to announce that it was awarded “Best in KLAS” in recognition for it’s #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. Download by 7/31/06 and you will automatically be entered to win an Apple Video iPod. (Just use code TPSYIPOD on the download page) See for yourself why the proud owners of Therapist Helper® rate it so highly!

3RZHUIXO5HOLDEOH$IIRUGDEOH

ph. 800.343.5737 | email: sales@helper.com

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

SUMMER 2006

19


PAI distorting his or her experience in either the positive or negative direction. Respondents may also intentionally provide an inaccurate picture because they perceive potential gains for forming a certain impression. In this case, observer report may help to identify those areas where client report is suspect. The convergence across the 10 element scores of the PAS may also be of interest. For example, a respondent may report suicidal ideation on the PAS/PAI which is not endorsed on the PASO, suggesting that suicidality is an aspect of the respondent’s experience that he or she does not share with the informant and perhaps most others. Conversely, the PAS may indicate no substance problems, whereas the PASO indicates significant problems in this area, perhaps suggesting the denial of substance use issues by the respondent. At present, the PASO is available to be used free of charge; interested professionals should contact Dr. Morey at morey@tamu. edu.

Personality Assessment Inventory-Adolescent (PAI-A) Another extension of the PAI that is currently in development involves a version of the instrument designed to be used with adolescents, the Personality Assessment Inventory-Adolescent (PAI-A). The PAI-A has been developed in response to the reported needs of clinicians who valued the constructs assessed by the PAI but who wanted reliable and valid assessments of those constructs in adolescents. Because the normative sample of the PAI included individuals ranging in age from 18 to 89, norms were not available for younger adolescents. The goal in the development of the PAI-A was to provide a direct translation of the PAI for adolescents. The intent of this work was to explore the applicability of an instrument

20

that would retain the structure (and as much as possible, the items) of the adult inventory, rather than develop an entirely new instrument specifically targeted at an adolescent population. Several features of the test remain the same; for example, the scales and subscales are exactly the same across instruments, the response format remains the same, and similar item evaluation parameters were used. Like the PAI, the PAI-A is in the process of standardization in both community and clinical settings to assure adequate representation of a variety of clinical phenomena and demographic characteristics. Also like the PAI, the PAI-A is being validated using a variety of other instruments to explore convergent and discriminant validity. Given the differences between adult and adolescent assessment, several features of the PAI were altered on the PAI-A. For example, the content of several items changed to be more appropriate for adolescents (e.g., references to ‘school’ rather than ‘work’). Based on the anticipation of lesser attentional capacity in adolescents than adults, the test became shorter, now consisting of 264 items, meaning that the instrument can often be completed in 30 minutes. Essentially, 2-3 items were removed from each scale, depending on analyses of differential item functioning that indicated when problem items seemed to perform differently for adolescents than for adults. Our group is currently in the later stages of development of the PAI-A, and we are hoping that the instrument will be available from the publisher (Psychological Assessment Resources) in early 2007. We currently have normative data on over 900 community and 900 clinical adolescents ages 12-18, and concurrent validity data on 10 to 15 commonly used measure of clinical issues in adolescents. Any professionals who might be interested

in becoming involved in any standardization or validity projects for the PAI-A during this pre-publication phase should contact Dr. Morey at morey@tamu.edu.

References Belter, R.W., & Piotrowski, C. (2001). Current status of doctoral-level training in psychological testing. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57, 717726. Boothby, J.L., & Clements, C.B. (2000). A national survey of correctional psychologists. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 27, 716-732. Henderson, A.J.Z., Landolt, M.A., McDonald, M.F., Barrable, W.M., Soos, J.G., Gourlay, W., Allison, C.J., & Landsberg, D.N. (2003). The living anonymous kidney donor: Lunatic or saint? American Journal of Transplantation, 3, 203-213. Journal of Personality Assessment. (2005). Call for papers: Journal of Personality Assessment Special Issue on the Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 84, 319. Lally, S.J. (2003). What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evaluations? A survey of experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 491-498. Morey, L.C. (1991). The Personality Assessment Inventory Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. Morey, L.C. (1997). The Personality Assessment Screener: Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources: Odessa, FL. Piotrowski, C. & Belter, R.W. (1999). Internship training in psychological assessment: Has managed care had an impact? Assessment, 6, 381-389. Wagner, M.T., Wymer, J.H. Topping, K.B. & Pritchard, P.B. (2005). Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory as an efficacious and costeffective diagnostic tool for nonepileptic seizures. Epilepsy & behavior : E&B, 7, 301-304. Walters, G.D. & Duncan, S.A. (2005). Use of the PCL-R and PAI to predict release outcome in inmates undergoing forensic evaluation. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 16, 459 - 476.

SUMMER 2006


Texas Law and the Practice of Psychology A Sourcebook By TPA Editors Code: XB-205

ISBN: 1886298203

Pages 256

$35.00

The Single Resource for the Legal Guidelines Shaping the Practice of Psychology in Texas. T Texas Law and the Practice of Psychology provides licensed psychologists, psycchology students, interns, and professors with the key legal and policy issues specific to the state of Texas today. Issues directly affecting all these practitios ners and their students have been carefully selected from statutes, case laws, n official archives of the Attorney General Opinions and Open Records Opinions o as well as synopses of the opinion letters of the Texas State Board of Examina ers of Psychologists. No other compilation of such critical, up-to-date material e exists for the state of Texas. e 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

Join one of TPA’s Special Interest Groups (SIG) or Divisions. Contact Lindell Brown at membership@texaspsyc.org to let her know if you wish to join. You must be a TPA member in order to participate. Aging Division

Binational Issues SIG

Forensic Practice Division

Child/Adolescent Issues SIG

Psychopharmacology Division ($10 dues required)

Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Transgender Issues SIG

Women in Psychology Division ($10 dues required)

Mental Retardation/Developmental Disabilities SIG

Psychologists in Schools Division ($10 dues required)

Diversity SIG

SUMMER 2006

21


Texas Psychologist

Report on the APA State Leadership Conference Disaster Response Network Meeting Washington, D.C. March 5-7, 2006 Rita Justice, PhD DRN Co-Chair

T

he DRN is alive and well and working hard! Chairs representing 44 states met in D.C. in March 2006 for two days to discuss lessons learned, frustrations, successes, and share experiences with each other. The groupings were both by size of state and regions, providing opportunities for meeting different people and exchanging different kinds of information. The first meeting, Saturday afternoon, was by state size, which gave me an opportunity to learn how Atlanta handled their 100,000

22

evacuees, and, later, by region, to accept appreciation from the Mississippi Chair for all we had done in Houston for evacuees from their state and Louisiana. Sunday morning there was a training on “Multicultural Knowledge and Awareness in the Delivery of Disaster Mental Health Services.” The workshop speakers were Priscilla Dass-Brailsford, EdD, and Kevin Washington, PhD The small group exercise, video, and music gave opportunity to reflect on discrimination we have all experienced in some way, as well

as looking at the cultural history of the people who were displaced by the hurricanes. At the DRN business meeting on Sunday afternoon, we sat by region and discussed several questions, starting with “Lessons learned as a result of responding to Katrina” and “What would be your top 10 favorite resources to go out on a disaster assignment in the deployment kit?” (Hand sanitizer and fanny packs were top picks!) Monday morning, there was a workshop entitled “Beyond Immediate Aid: Bolstering Communities with Psychological Support Following Disaster.” The panel of speakers was from Texas, Kentucky, Georgia, and North Dakota. The audience was state leaders and a few DRN folks. Post-crisis activities range from offering training on a telehealth network (Kentucky) to do exit interviews with all 358 mental health responders (Georgia) to developing training and doing pro bono work with the responders (North Dakota). For Texas, our emphasis now is networking with the many organizations responding to the needs of the evacuees/ new residents and expanding the DRN network within Texas. There is no substitute for “flesh to flesh” and the DRN meeting was no exception. Many people have been working, and continue to work, very hard, to help the displaced and traumatized get on with their lives, and it was inspiring to be in the midst of people who have taken a leadership role for psychology to do its share. SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

TPA Disaster Response Network News Judith Andrews, PhD, DRN Co-Chair

B

y the time you are reading this hurricane season will be upon us again. We are all, quite understandably, highly sensitized to this seasonal threat. Many of you responded as volunteers during Katrina and Rita and many have continued efforts to build resilience in your affected communities. Our hats off to all of you!

What is the DRN? The DRN is APA’s mechanism for providing psychological assistance to the Red Cross and other groups responding to disasters. Because state associations such as TPA have neither the ďŹ nancial or physical resources to provide an independent disaster mental health response, it is imperative our psychologists be directed into organizations or vehicles of response that have such capacity at the time of disaster. To refresh all of our memories, the American Red Cross formally introduced Disaster Mental Health Services as part of their disaster services in 1991.On December 13, 1991 an ofďŹ cial “statement of understandingâ€? formalizing a cooperative relationship with Red Cross and APA was signed. APA’s Disaster Response Network was ofďŹ cially unveiled in 1992. Following September 11th, the need for a well established network of psychologists around the country who were not only willing, but trained, to respond following a disaster became even more urgent. Each state’s psychological association was asked by

0ARTNERING7ITH9OU INTHE4REATMENTOF %ATING$ISORDERS

APA to develop a well established network. Currently, the DRN consists of 44 states who participate in recruitment and preparedness for psychologists volunteering during disasters. In Texas alone, our DRN roster multiplied ďŹ vefold during the course of Katrina and Rita. Yet many of these psychologists lacked the prerequisite training and were deployed through APA and Red Cross on an emergency basis.

What is “Being Preparedâ€?? Basic disaster mental health training is available through Red Cross local chapters in the process of enrolling to become a Red Cross mental health volunteer. There are many other vehicles of response such as NOVA, SAMSA, CISM, DMAT, and teams that are part of local ofďŹ ces of Emergency Preparedness and Response. All of them offer their own trainings and have their own process of registration. As a part of the TPA DRN, you will receive notices of trainings as we receive them from a variety of sources. It is strongly recommended by APA that psychologists have fundamental training in debrieďŹ ng techniques, crisis intervention, traumatic stress, death notiďŹ cation, and services for diverse and special populations. Being prepared also involves being mentally prepared as a volunteer. Deciding to go out on a disaster response is a personal decision and not appropriate for every psy-

7ERECOGNIZETHATNOTALLEATING DISORDERCLIENTSNEEDINPATIENT TREATMENT(OWEVER WHENA HIGHERLEVELOFCAREISREQUIRED WEHOPEYOUWILLENTRUSTYOUR CLIENTTOUS 2EMUDAS"IBLICALLY BASED PROGRAMSTREATPATIENTSOFALL FAITHSANDPREPARETHEMFOR COMPLETERECOVERYWHENTHEY RETURNTOYOUFORCONTINUED OUTPATIENTTREATMENT

SUMMER 2006

chologist. If you are a member of the DRN, deployment remains your personal decision and is not expected of you. However, should you decide to go, the actual and mental preparation you have put in place for yourself will be an important factor in your personal stress level as you encounter the very stressful and challenging situations in disaster responding. If you notiďŹ ed us that you wanted to be a part of the DRN we should have you in our DRN database – now a part of your proďŹ le on the TPA database. Please check the TPA member database to be sure you have completed and updated your contact information for the TPA DRN. If you are interested in being a DRN liaison for your local psychological association or are interested in serving on our TPA DRN committee, please contact me at judithphdjudith@yahoo.com. Rita and I have been honored to be cochairs of the TPA DRN through several disasters and, together with our committee, have been able to assist psychologists in their desire to volunteer. Our chairmanship has brought us into contact with the other APA DRN state chairman. In March, Rita attended the DRN meetings of APA’s State Leadership conference in Washington. This forum brought together a wealth of lessons learned and experiences shared by responders throughout the country during Katrina and Rita.

7EHAVEDEVELOPEDTOOLSTO ASSISTYOUINPROVIDINGONGOING TREATMENTSUCHASOURONLINE 0ROFESSIONAL.ETWORK %DUCATIONAL#ONSULTATION3ERVICE %DUCATIONAL,UNCHEONSAND4HE 2EMUDA2EVIEW4HE#HRISTIAN *OURNALOF%ATING$ISORDERS

1-800-445-1900 • www.remudaranch.com

7HENYOURCLIENTNEEDSINPATIENT TREATMENT CALL2EMUDA2ANCH "YPARTNERINGTOGETHER WECAN MAKERECOVERYAREALITY

23


2 0 0 6 A n nu al Co n v e nti on November 16-18, 2006 Westin Galleria - Dallas, Texas Texas Psychologists Making Strides: Health, Human Welfare, and Career Opportunities in 2006 TPA’s Convention will prove to be another superb opportunity for mental health professionals to obtain continuing education credit and to network with colleagues from around the state and from neighboring states. Westin Galleria, Dallas ($129 Convention rate 13340 Dallas Parkway, Dallas, TX 75240) -book, modify, or cancel a reservation until Friday, October 27, 2006. Reservation link at www.texaspsyc.org - Located within the impressive Galleria, “a city under glass,” The Westin Galleria Dallas offers instant access to more than 200 exclusive shops, twodozen restaurants and endless entertainment options, from a multi-screen movie theater to an indoor ice rink.

Invited Speakers Norman Anderson, PhD

24

Oliva Espin, PhD

“Documenting Our Progress In, and Communicating the Value of, Psychology as a Health Profession”

“Multiple Identities, Multiple Sources of Growth”

Rosie Phillips Bingham, PhD

Carol D. Goodheart, PhD

“The Diversity Guidelines and Ethics: A Practice Workshop”

“Evidence Based Practice: What It Means, Where It is Headed, & Impact”

Ronald S. Palomares, PhD

Full schedule and registration available soon at www.texaspsyc.org.

“Psychology in Schools and Ethics”

(888) 872-3435, (512) 280-4099 or emailing admin@texaspsyc.org.

Questions should be directed to the central office by calling

SUMMER 2006


WELCOME NEW MEMBERS New Member Yukie Aida, PhD Louis Anderson, PhD Amelia Anthony, PhD Sunny Anyalebechi Anne Appel, PhD Carla Berkich Dana Bernstein, PhD Michael Carey, PhD Michele Ford, PhD Jacqueline Hawkins, EdD Rebecca Kraatz, PhD Linda Ladd, PsyD, PhD Frank Lawlis, PhD Lynda Mathis, PhD Laura McCracken, PhD Mary Lynn Patton, EdD Eli Reitman, PhD William Stewart, PhD

Member Out of State Sue Lerner, PhD

Recent Graduate Associate Heather Atkison, MA Alexander Beaujean, PhD Beth Peters, PhD Laura Tolpin, PhD

Associate Out of State Leonore Bazan, Lic. Psicologa Bertha Maycotte-Salinas, Lic. Psicologa

Shannon Ash, BA Danielle Bates, BA Michelle Beakey Catherine Boswell, MEd Aleha Buffaloe, MA Stephanie Capalbo, MS Melissa Case-Vincent, MEd Kristen Chambliss, MA Jason Cooper, BA Dolores Duarte, BA Sonia Duque-Miyashita Jackie Engelhardt Valerie Fredrickson Michael Giunta, PsyD Zane Grubaugh, BA Kylin Haedge Kristen Hammond, MA Rachal Harman, BS Jeffrey Harris, JD Mekel Harris,MA Teri Hennigan Emily Hiatt Cashuna Huddleston

Student

Frances Johnson, M.Div. Dana Kelly Heather Liapis, MS Kacey Little Abigail McNeely, MSSW Marissa Mendoza, BA James Noblitt, BA Patricia Reyes Amanda Ripple Nelda Rodriguez Justin Springer Allison Staley, BA Kristen Stedham John Sutherland Niria Takase, BS Laura Thompson Jeffrey Weichert, MBA April Wiechmann Gayle Wilson Julie Wilson, MS Megan Wilson Jennifer Wright John Wyble

TPA Homestudy Opportunities Earn Continuing Education in the comfort of your home or ofďŹ ce! Simply download the articles or read online, then complete the exam and send back with appropriate fee. Download articles at www.texaspsyc.org Applied Ethics and Law for Texas Psychologists (3 hours ethics CE) Professional Ethics for School Psychology (3 hours ethics CE) Therapeutic Contract (1 hour ethics CE) A Practical Guide to Risk Assessment (1 hour ethics CE) Substance Use Disorders (2 hours CE) more coming soon SUMMER 2006

25


Texas Psychologist

An Invitation to Become a Member of the TPA Psychopharmacology Division Devoted To Psychopharmacology Interests and The Promotion of Pharmacotherapy Cheryl Hall, PhD Psychopharmacology Division Chair

TPA’s membership has approved a Psychopharmacology Division devoted to the promotion of psychopharmacology and psychotherapy in Texas. What do the members of this division have in common? All psychologists who are health care providers share a broad mission: to provide necessary services to those in need of mental health treatments, especially underserved populations.

T

oward this end, we embrace the judicious use of medications in mental health treatment, and the key role that psychologists can play in integrating pharmacotherapy with psychotherapy. We acknowledge the importance of increasing public knowledge of medications, how they work, and when they should be used. Because many of our patients utilize the

medication in the treatment of mental disorders. Most psychologists readily acknowledge this need, and can benefit from this division’s efforts to disseminate up to date information about the ever-growing number of psychotropic medications. Second, we want to be in a role to most effectively and collaborate in the full treatment of our patients. This can be through education, consultation, oversight,

Our mission encompasses more than just efforts to gain prescriptive authority of psychologists in Texas. ever-growing number of psychotropic medications in their mental health treatment, it is our responsibility to understand and address this important aspect of our patients’ lives and treatment. It is widely recognized that the best approach for many disorders combines counseling or psychotherapy with medication management. Certified prescribing psychologists would be in an excellent position to contribute to this comprehensive approach to mental health care. Our division goals are multi-pronged. First, we want to promote awareness and education among psychologists of the role of 26

and facilitation, of the use of pharmacotherapy in conjunction with psychotherapy, even when our patients’ medications are prescribed by others (e.g., psychiatrists, family practitioners, nurse-practitioners). Finally, we want to extend services to vast numbers of underserved populations by supporting the training opportunities and gaining prescriptive authority for properly trained psychologists. Regardless of where medication fits into your practice, its important role in our clients’ lives and treatment calls on us as a profession to be as educated, trained, and ready

to promote the integration of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy in the service of our patients. Whether prescriptive authority is a goal for you personally, all psychologists need to know which patients can benefit from medications, have a basic understanding of their functions, and how they work with psychotherapy in a complementary manner. All psychologists will benefit from measures that enhance the expertise and credibility of our profession to address the full spectrum of mental health treatment options. Our mission encompasses more than just efforts to gain prescriptive authority of psychologists in Texas. Many of us involved with the Division have no intention of pursuing prescription privileges, but we believe that psychologists should play a central role in integrating the judicious use of medications in mental health care. To meet the important goal of promoting complete access to mental health treatment to all those in need, prescriptive authority for those psychologists who desire to seek this training and degree of competence is crucial. Texas has many underserved populations that are in great need of the combined psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy care that well-trained and certified prescribing psychologists can best provide. It is obvious that medications must be part of a comprehensive treatment plan for many of our patients. However it is a realSUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

ity that we face a national crisis of shortages of psychiatrists to address this need. This is especially true for the child and adolescent populations. It is estimated that at least 80% of psychotropic medications are prescribed by general practitioners—or even nurse practitioners--, with minimal training or experience in working with mental health issues. We are uniquely qualified by training and by professional practice to provide education, support, oversight, and responsibility for psychopharmacological adjuncts to psychotherapy. One of our most immediate goals is to develop and maintain collaboration with the APA Division 55, American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacology (ASAP), whose mission statement states it was created to enhance psychological treatments combined with psychopharmacological medications. It promotes the public interest by working for the establishment of high quality statutory and regulatory standards for psychological care. The Division encourages the collaborative practice of psychological and pharmacological treatments with other health professions. It seeks funding for training in psychopharmacology and pharmacotherapy from private and public sources, e.g., federal Graduate Medical Education programs. It facilitates increased access to improved mental health services in federal and state demonstration projects using psychologists trained in psychopharmacology.” www.division 55.org In May, 2002, after the well-publicized success of the Department of Defense study of psychologists in prescriptive roles, New Mexico was the first state to pass legislation covering the training, certification, and practice of prescribing psychologists. This was followed by the passage of similar legislation by the Legislature of the Territory of Guam in 1998. Most recently, under the provisions of a 2004 law, in Louisiana “Medical Psychologists” (“MP”s) are permitted to prescribe medications for mental and emotional disorders. Many other states are soon to folSUMMER 2006

low. The result will be the extension of comprehensive mental health care to those most in need, the rural and traditionally underserved populations. For example, Licensed Medical Psychologists in Louisiana have been invaluable in reaching out and providing desperately needed services in the aftermath of Katrina. In New Mexico, delivery of much needed services has been expanded. “Currently, many individuals and families face waiting periods ranging from several weeks to five months or have to travel long distances in order to see a psychiatrist,” says Ed Snyder, PhD, 2004 NMPA President. “With the adoption of these regulations, the New Mexico psychologists who have completed or will complete the required didactic and practicum training will be in the position to provide badly needed psychological and psychopharmacologial treatment services, working in collaboration with patients’ primary treating health care practitioners.” We believe that many areas in Texas share the same levels of unmet need as are found in our neighboring states, and we hope that the legislature will come to understand that psychologists can be credentialed to serve

these populations as safely and effectively here as they have elsewhere. That, obviously, will be a long-term objective of this division. More immediately, his division hopes to inform public policy by demonstrating to public service agencies, regulatory bodies, and the general public that training psychologists in psychopharmacology will result in more effective, and cost-efficient services, especially among the most traditionally underserved populations. This division seeks to be a resource to those psychologists who desire to be the best informed source of support and education for your clients, to those who wish to actively collaborate with other care providers in comprehensive mental health care. In addition, the division will support those who seek prescription authority to provide comprehensive integrated pharmacological and psychotherapeutic services within a biopsychosocial model. Regardless of where your specific goals fall on this spectrum, you will benefit from the efforts of this Division. Its effectiveness will be determined by the support of psychologists like you. We invite you to join today!

Info on how to join this division Contact Lindell Brown at TPA’s Central Office by emailing lindellbrown@austin.rr.com. Texas Psychological Association’s Psychopharmacology Division to Promote Psychopharmacology and Pharmacotherapy President: Cheryl Hall, PhD . . . . . . . . . . challphd@nts-online.net Vice-President/Secretary: Carol Grothues, PhD . . . . . . . . carolgrothues@aol.com Membership Committee: Cheryl Hall, PhD (Chair) . . . Ron Davis, PhD . . . . . . . . Michelle A. Emick, PhD . . . . Steven C. Schneider, PhD . . . Vicky Y. Spradling, PhD, ABPP

. . . . .

. . . . .

. challphd@nts-online.net . ronald.davis@dads.state.tx.us . doctoremick@verizon.net . dr.schneider@nts-online.com . vicky.spradling@dshs.state.tx.us

27


Texas Psychologist

PSYPAC CONTRIBUTORS $500 and above Edward Davidson, PhD Lane Ogden, PhD

$300-$499 Dean Paret, PhD

$100-$299 Judith Andrews, PhD Paul Andrews, PhD Larry Aniol, PhD Kyle Babick, PhD Eileen Barbella, PhD Julie Bates, PhD Joan Berger, PhD James Berkshire, EdD Peggy Bradley, PhD Tim Branaman, PhD, ABPP Ray Brown, PhD Timothy Brown, PhD Joan Bruchas, PhD Erica Burden, PhD Sam Buser, PhD L. Carol Butler, PhD Brian Carr, PhD Betty Cartmell,PhD Ron Cohorn, PhD Sean Connolly, PhD Mary Alice Conroy, PhD Donna Copeland, PhD Mary Cox, PhD James Crawford, PhD Walter Cubberly, PhD Ronald Davis, PhD Sally Davis, PhD Mary De Ferreire, PhD Leah Dick, PhD Michael Downing, PhD Marie-Elise DuBuisson,PhD Richard Eckert, PhD Anette Edens, PhD Wayne Ehrisman, PhD Patrick Ellis, PhD Donald Ennis, PhD Alan Fisher, PhD Ft. Worth Area Psychological Association Cheryl Fuller, PhD Cynthia Galt, PhD Elizabeth Garrison, PhD Karen Gollaher, PsyD Michael Gottlieb, PhD Jerry Grammer, PhD Dennis Grill, PhD Edmund Guilfoyle, PhD Cheryl Hall, PhD 28

Michael Hand, PhD James Hardin, PhD Charles Haskovec, PhD Sophia Havasy, PhD Lillie Haynes, PhD Charles Holland, PhD C. Alan Hopewell, PhD David Hopkinson,PhD Sandra Hotz, PhD Carola Hundrich-Souris, PhD Daniel W. Jackson, PhD Charlotte Jensen, MA Krista D. Jordan, PhD Rita Justice, PhD Stephen Karten, PhD Burton A. Kittay, PhD Joseph Kobos, PhD Amelia Kornfeld, PhD Richard Krummel, PhD John W. Largen, PhD David S. Litton, PhD Victor Loos, PhD Stephen Loughhead, PhD Alaire Lowry, PhD Thomas Lowry, PhD Ann Matt Maddrey, PhD Janna Magee, PhD Patricia P. Mahlstedt, EdD Rebecca Marsh, PsyD Patricia R. Martinez, Ed. Stephen McCary, PhD, JD Jill McGavin, PhD Richard M. McGraw, PhD Sherry McKinney, PhD Robert J. McLaughlin, PhD Robert Mehl, PhD Robert S. Meier, PhD Daneen Milam, PhD Maritza Milan, PhD Janel H. Miller, PhD Robert W. Mims, PhD Suzanne Mouton-Odum, PhD Gina Novellino, PhD Fernando Obledo, PhD Sherry L. Payne, PhD P. Caren Phelan, PhD Shelley Probber, PsyD Manuel Ramirez, PhD Robert Rankin, PhD Robin Reamer, PhD Carolyn B. Reed, PhD Catherine Rees, PhD Herbert Reynolds, PhD M. David Rudd, PhD David M. Sabine, PhD

Gordon C. Sauer, Jr., PhD Steven Schneider, PhD Leigh S. Scott, PhD Robbie Sharp, PhD Joyce Sichel, PhD Sonia Simon, PsyD Karen E. Smith, PhD W. Truett Smith, PhD Brian Stagner, PhD Daniel J. Thompson, PhD Willson S. Thornton, PhD Thomas Van Hoose, PhD Deborah J. Voorhees, PhD Ann P. Vreeland, PhD Laurel Wagner, PhD Michael Walker, EdD Richard Wheatley, PhD David White, CAE,CAE Connie S. Wilson, PhD James Womack, PhD John W. Worsham, PhD Jarvis A. Wright, PhD Mimi Wright, PhD Gary Yorke, PhD Sharon Young, PhD Robert Zachary, PhD

Less Than $100 Constance Adler, PhD Kay Allensworth, PhD Mary Alvarez-del-Pino, PhD Kim Arredondo, PhD Lisa Balick, PhD Patricia Barth, PhD Bexar County Psychological Association Bonnie Blankmeyer, PhD Joy Breckenridge, PhD Glenn Bricken, PsyD Michael Bridgewater, PhD Amos Jerry Bruce, PhD Constance Byers, PhD Kay Campbell,PsyD Leslie Crossman, PhD Maria Concepcion Cruz, PhD Mark Cunningham,PhD Stephanie Darsa, PhD Daniel Diaz, PhD Sid Dickson, PhD James Duncan,PhD S. Jean Ehrenberg,PhD Emily Fallis,PhD Joseph Fogle,PhD William Frazier,PhD Richard Fulbright, PhD Sylvia Gearing, PhD SUMMER 2006


Texas Psychologist

Martin Gieda, PhD Guillermo Gonzalez,PhD B. Thomas Gray,PhD Pamela Grossman,PhD Ranee Gumm,PhD William Gumm,PhD Paul Hamilton, PhD Barbara Pugh Hinojosa, PhD Willam J. Holden, PhD Nahid Hooshyar, PhD David Ivey, PhD Thomas Johnson, PhD Cliff Jones, PhD Bruce Kruger, PhD Trinh Le, PhD Deborah M. Longano,PhD Melinda J. Longtain, PhD Martin Lumpkin, PhD Bruce Mansbridge, PhD Stephen K. Martin, PhD Donald C. McCann, PhD Marsha D. McCary, PhD Charles McDonald, PhD Rose McDonald, PsyD James McLaughlin, PhD Robert McPherson, PhD Richard S. Mechem, PhD William Montgomery, PhD Craig Moore, PhD George R. Mount, PhD Gary Neal, PhD Margaret P. Norris, PhD Will Norsworthy, PhD Ronald Palomares, PhD Freddy A. Paniagua, PhD Carmen Petzold, PhD Randy E. Phelps, PhD Cynthia Pladziewicz, PhD John Price, PhD Lynn Price, PhD Tova Rubin, PhD M. David Rudd, PhD Dale Rudin, PhD Earl S. Saltzman, PhD Ollie Seay, PhD Verlis Setne, PhD Robert M. Setty, PhD Terri L. Thompson, PhD Dana Turnbull, PhD Melba Vasquez, PhD Ken Waldman, PhD Mac Walling, PhD Patricia D. Weger, PhD Nancy Wilson, PhD Burton Zung, PhD SUMMER 2006

LEGISLATIVE CHAMPIONS

2006 TPF CONTRIBUTORS

$100-$299

$100-$299

Larry Aniol, PhD Connie BenďŹ eld, PhD, ABPP Joan Berger, PhD James Berkshire, EdD Constance Byers, PhD Sean Connolly, PhD Mary Cox, PhD Anette Edens, PhD Burton A. Kittay, PhD Marcia Laviage, PhD Sherry McKinney, PhD Ann Salo, PhD James Womack, PhD Constance D. Wood, PhD

Michael Blain Nicolas Carrasco, PhD Mary De Ferreire, PhD Jerry Grammer, PhD Victor Loos, PhD Ann P. Vreeland, PhD

Less Than $100 B. Thomas Gray, PhD

Less than $100 William Frazier, PhD Richard Fulbright, PhD Dorothy C. Pettigrew, PsyD

MARK YOUR CALENDARS TPA 2006 Annual Convention (Dallas) November 16-18, 2006 (online registration already available!) TPA Membership Dues Renewal Deadline December 31, 2006 National Multicultural Conference and Summit (Seattle) Januar y 24-26, 2007 TPA 2007 Annual Convention (San Antonio) November 15-17, 2007 TPA 2008 Annual Convention (Austin) November 20-22, 2008

29


CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING College of Juvenile Justice & Psychology Prairie View University The Department of Psychology at Prairie View A&M University invites applications for three nine-month tenure track positions beginning in August 2006. The positions are: Three Clinical Psychologists: Assistant/Associate Professors. Applicants must have a doctorate degree in clinical psychology from an APA accredited program and will have completed an APA accredited internship. Candidates for the position must be license-eligible in Texas. Applicants with research in all areas of clinical psychology are welcome. However, the ideal candidate should have a track record of research in one or more of these areas: adolescent developmental psychopathology or treatment, forensic mental health issues, and family psychology.

Candidates for all positions are expected to compete for extramural funding and have an established program of research. The salar y for all positions is commensurate with qualifications. Prairie View A&M is a university within the Texas A&M system and one of three constitutionally-designated institutions of first class in Texas. The main campus is located approximately 45 miles nor thwest of Houston, Texas. The University’s diverse student body and faculty reflect the ethnic and cultural heritage of the region. Bilingual Spanish speaking applicants are especially encouraged to apply. The university has made a strong commitment to grow the Depar tment of Psychology. By Fall 06, the Depar tment of Psychology is scheduled to move into a new state-of-the ar t building equipped with its own training clinic. Our depar tment offers undergraduate degrees in psychology, a master’s degree in Juvenile Forensic Psychology, and a Ph.D. in Clinical Adolescent Psychology. To apply send a letter of introduction, a statement of your teaching philosophy, your graduate transcript(s), your curriculum vita, reprints and also arrange to have at least three letters of recommendation sent to: Prairie View A&M University, Office of Human Resources, P.O. Box 5, Prairie View, TX 77446 i/ o (in care of) Louis P. Anderson, Ph.D. , The Search Committee, Prairie View A&M University, College of Juvenile Justice & Psychology, P.O. Box 4017, Prairie View, TX 77446. Please feel free to visit University Employment Center website at: http://old.pvamu. edu/HR/employment/faculty/. Prairie View A&M University is an EEO/AA/ADA employer and encourages applications from all minorities.

Licensed Psychologist Classified Description: Houston - Growing and enthusiastic private practice seeks a Texas licensed psychologist to provide therapy and assessment services with children, adolescents, and adults. You will have an opportunity to build your practice around your areas of personal interest and expertise while also joining us as we move into areas such as neurofeedback, biofeedback, and other mind/ body interventions. We are ideally located in an easyto-reach, attractive atrium setting that serves the rapidly growing Sugar Land area as well as west and southwest Houston. Our clientele are primarily private pay with little managed care. Come join the fun and excitement as we continue to grow and develop. Send resumes by fax to 832-328-1635 or via email to dr_everett@msn.com. 30

SUMMER 2006




Introducing sharper diagnosis. The new, improved Millon™ Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III ™) test now includes the Grossman Facet Scales. Now it’s an even more precise tool for guiding therapy, helping you see clearly whether your patients are staying on top of life’s challenges or are in over their heads. It’s just one of the Millon Inventories that’s been freshly updated to help you

create more efficient, accurate and valid differential diagnoses of complex disorders. New customers receive a 10% discount on their first order.* The Millon Inventories are available exclusively from Pearson Assessments. Visit www.pearsonassessments.com or call 1.800.627.7271 now.

A4A 955-MIL 6/06 *Offer expires December 29, 2006. See Returns Policy on page 125 of the 2006 Pearson Assessments catalog.


Save the dates for these Texas Psychological Association

Continuing Education Events

2007 Annual Convention

2006 Annual Convention November 16-18, 2006

November 15-17, 2007

Dallas, Texas

San Antonio, Texas

Westin Galleria

Westin La Cantera Resort

13340 Dallas Parkway

16641 La Cantera Pkwy

(discounted rate of $129 for reservations made before 10/27/06)

3 full days of continuing education credit available

Additional information coming to www.texaspsyc.org soon!

PRESORTED STANDARD U.S. POSTAGE PAID AUSTIN, TX PERMIT #1149


Summer 2006 Texas Psychologist