bon côté mauvais côté

Bonne nouvelle : Diane Côté m’a récemment informé que le service de référence de l’Ordre des Psychologues du Québec sera corrigé pour inclure les psychothérapeutes qui acceptent des mandats de Santé Canada pour les autochtones.  

Mauvaise nouvelle : ce changement n’aura pas lieu avant le mois de mars, 2015.  

Mme. Côté répondait à un courriel qui l'informait qu'un représentant de Santé Canada a confirmé que les services des travailleurs sociaux, des psychologues, et de tout psychothérapeute détenteur d’un permis délivré par l’OPQ sont tous remboursés par Santé Canada. 

Mme. Côté a par ailleurs écrit qu’elle ne jugeait ‘pas nécessaire’ d’en discuter avec ledit représentant de Santé Canada.

En réponse à Mme Côté, j’écrivais le suivant :
Si j'ai bien compris, la clientèle autochtone qui consulte le site de l'OPQ ne sera pas référée à tous les fournisseurs inscrits dans votre service de référence qui acceptent les mandats de Santé Canada avant le mois de mars, 2015?
On verra si Mme Côté répondra à cette question. 
Je lui ai aussi fait savoir qu'à mon avis il était bien nécessaire de tenir le représentant de Santé Canada au courant de sa décision. 


Newsjacking the death of an actor

The initial purpose of this blog was to spread the word on  my petition and document an encounter with various people at the OPQ.

As I heard more stories about the deleterious effects of Bill 21, I researched the various publicity campaigns that introduced it to the public.  I saw a connection to my own experience serving on the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC) where I heard all the same buzzwords.

“Stigma” and “Anti-stigma”

There is a class of “professional journalists” who depend on corporate and governmental sources for their livelihood, and who publicize to some degree the “official line” on a story in exchange for journalistic access to the powerful.  When I see the same keywords disseminated by these journalists whenever and wherever possible, I see a publicity campaign, which is to say, I see the tail end of a coordinated marketing campaign.

Now one of the key techniques of modern marketers is to hijack a story, also called “newsjacking.”  And one of the favorite types of stories to newsjack is the death of a celebrity.  And sure enough, right on time, André Picard, public health reporter for the Globe and Mail, has newsjacked the sad story of Robin Williams' death by retweeting the newsjack of James Kirkbride in order to direct us to the “sage words” of Ian Colman, quoted in another newsjack by Lynn Desjardins of Radio Canada.

James Kirkbride and Ian Colman both just happen to be in the business of getting funding for psychiatric research of the type that the “anti-stigma” campaign is hoping to fund.  (The MHCC and those behind Bill 21 have a very pronounced bias towards funding research, and seem peculiarly unable to take in that they are restricting public access to helpful mental health resources right now, the subject of this blog.)

I do not wish to discuss the particulars here except to say that an argument, based on Mr. Williams’ death, for funding the type of research called for by the “anti-stigma” campaign seems questionable, especially because Mr. Williams cannot speak for himself.  But no matter.  Picard, Kirkbride, Colman, and Desjardins had the hijack angle all figured out before the facts of Mr. Williams’ death were even established.  There really is no argument.  It is propaganda.

Mr. Williams, like most great comics, sometimes had a keen sense of how things work.  An interviewer described one of his recent films as “a devastatingly funny indictment of the modern grief industry.”  When she asked him if things were getting worse, Williams replied: "Well, I think people want it. In a weird way, it's trying to keep hope alive… you just try and keep it in perspective; you have to remember the best and the worst."

Sounds like Robin Williams would have forgiven Picard, Kirkbride, Colman and Desjardins for using the grief over his death to gain marketshare, but I for one wish they might listen to that critical marketing expert linked above, who notes “we stopped counting how many PR people broadly distribute a pitch for their client when someone in the public eye dies."


titles, licenses and who can do what to whom under Bill 21

A psychologist teaching at a major Canadian University who prefers to remain anonymous wrote to me because she was concerned that I was claiming that psychologists were “unlicensed and untrained”.

As I explained to her, nobody is disputing that psychologists are licensed and trained as psychologists.  What I am claiming is that psychologists do not always have specialized training or licenses in the specialized areas searched for by the public.

Most psychologists offering couple or family interventions, for example, are not licensed couple and family therapists.  So, when a person searches for a couple or family therapist using the Order of Psychologists' search engine and naïvely chooses "psychologist" as the first search criterion, this filters out all non-psychologist licensed couple and family therapists while leaving in psychologists without a license in couple/family therapy.

I explained to her that, when I said that psychologists were unlicensed in the specialties searched under, this was what I meant.  In the case of couple and family therapy, sex therapy, psychoanalysis, occupational therapy, art therapy and other specialized forms of therapy, professionals earn at least a master’s degree or have another equivalently high level of specialized training, and in many cases also a specialized license in these disciplines, which most psychologists lack. 

She made the interesting comment that, for psychologists, there was no "value added" by getting a couple and family therapy license since it was “covered” by their psychology license.

I reminded her that, although it may be legal for a psychologist to see couples, a psychologist needs to have a couple and family therapy license if she intends to treat them as a "couple and family therapist" or leads her clients in other ways to believe that she is a couple and family therapist when she is not.  So at least the title has some value under the law:
36.  No person shall in any way whatsoever:
(d) use the title “Marriage and Family Therapist”, “Marriage Therapist”, “Family Therapist”, or a title or abbreviation which may lead to the belief that he is such a therapist, or use the initials “M.F.T.”, “T.C.F.”, “M.T.”, “T.C.”, “F.T.” or “T.F.”, unless he holds a valid permit for that purpose and is entered on the roll of the Ordre professionnel des travailleurs sociaux et des thérapeutes conjugaux et familiaux du Québec
[my bold, Professional Code of Quebec; article 36]
Interestingly, my correspondent is not herself licensed to use the title of marital/family therapist but is currently training students to become licensed marital and family therapists in Quebec.  Whether that makes sense, whether it is even legal, is a question I ask myself.  It would be interesting to know how many couple and family therapists are training students to become licensed psychologists.

Finally, I said to my correspondent that, if she meant by "no value added" she meant no economic value, then I completely agreed: there is now *zero* economic value to being a licensed marital/family therapist.  That has been my main point from the beginning: those who have been trained and licensed as couple/family therapists (it used to take three years of post-graduate training and supervision of real clinical value to obtain this license), and who now pay their fees as psychotherapists to the Order of Psychologists and who also pay a fee to be included in the Order of Psychologists' referral system, can yet be excluded by the Order of Psychologists' search engine when the public is searching for a couple/family therapist.

Likewise insurance companies do not cover couple and family therapy offered by licensed couple and family therapists unless they are psychologists, while psychologists (and doctors!) who have no training, expertise or license as a marital/family therapist will be reimbursed for sessions of couple and family therapy.  This is not to say that all those who are reimbursed as psychologists or doctors have no training in this field...  But I never claimed that.

My main point has always been that none of this protects the public from those not qualified to practice, whereas public protection was the very raison d'être of Bill 21, and is now the Order of Psychologists' mandate.

I will end with a quote from my correspondent who said it better than I could:
for many of us, we have spent thousands of hours and thousands of dollars in training, supervision and supervised practice and the thought of getting yet one more license to do something we are already doing seems torturous.
This is exactly how all non-psychologist psychotherapists feel now that Bill 21 has been put into effect.

Bill 21 could have forced psychologists who are qualified to practice couple and family therapy to go to the Order of Social Workers and Couple and Family Therapists to apply for a permit, the way it is now forcing psychotherapists qualified to practice psychotherapy to go to the Order of Psychologists for a permit.  But it didn't.

Please sign my petition.


4.5 million dollars to reduce stigma?

The Toronto Star recently reported that the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) released a policy paper asking for “an additional $4.5 million a year earmarked for the Mental Health Commission of Canada (MHCC) to ramp up its anti-stigma campaign in schools, colleges and universities.”

The MHCC already has 65 anti-stigma partners and 45 active anti-stigma projects.  By the end of this fiscal year, 210 million dollars will already have been spent on the MHCC, with anti-stigma projects being a primary focus.

Presumably one reduces stigma so that people are more likely to seek help, but we are also told that there are “long waiting lists” for those who seek help now. 

So the question arises: before giving another few million dollars to the MHCC so it can urge students to get help they are not seeking, wouldn’t it make more sense to use this money to get help for those already seeking it?  The 4.5 million dollars requested could buy five psychotherapy sessions for every student at the University of Toronto.  The MHCC budget to date could have paid for 21 million psychotherapy sessions.

Another question: who really benefits from making stigma the focus of the mental health conversation?  Is it a coincidence that this whole campaign was led by “one student from the University of Moncton” who now sits on the MHCC’s Board of Directors?

Is it another coincidence that psychotherapy is simultaneously being transformed by Bill 21 into a therapeutic specialty of doctors and psychologists to the exclusion of non-medically-based therapeutic models?

What if de-stigmatizing “mental illness” really means adopting a medical treatment model that pathologizes all psychological suffering?  What if it really means meeting psychosocial problems with psychological testing and psychiatric diagnoses?

After all, once mental illness is “de-stigmatized,” won't publicly funded programs and insurance companies quite logically require a psychiatric or psychological diagnosis of mental illness before covering psychotherapy?  Yet isn’t it that diagnosis which carries the very stigma that so many fear? And won't more people then be discouraged from simply going to talk to someone, from seeking help in the form of psychotherapeutic support and advice?

Something tells me that the MHCC won't be spending the 4.5 million dollars on considering these questions but on funding another "anti-stigma project" run by someone now sitting on their BOD.

Please sign my petition.


Psychothérapie- diversité et liberté de choisir

Hier j’ai parlé hier avec Mme Andrée Thauvette-Poupart, présidente de La Société Québécoise des Psychothérapeutes Professionnels (SQPP), des initiatives récemment entreprises par le SQPP dans le but de promouvoir les psychothérapeutes et de protéger la diversité des psychothérapies pratiquées au Québec.  (Pour signer la pétition réclamant un meilleur accès aux services de psychothérapie, cliquez ici.)

Le SQPP fait un travail remarquable de rassemblement de ressources et de sensibilisation et d'éducation auprès des compagnies d'assurance, des syndicats et des employeurs aux Québec afin qu'ils prennent des mesures vers une représentation plus équitable des psychothérapeutes au sein de leurs organisations.

Je tiens à exprimer la solidarité avec les initiatives de la SQPP, avec son engagement envers la diversification de la pratique de psychothérapie et sa représentation des intérêts de tous les psychothérapeutes agréés indépendamment de leur appartenance à des ordres professionnels différents.

Je tiens également à exprimer la solidarité avec les thérapeutes qui ne sont pas membres d'un ordre professionnel et ne peuvent pas, pour cette raison, faire une demande de permis de psychothérapeute, et avec ceux qui, dans un avenir proche, ne seront plus en mesure de faire une demande de permis par la reconnaissance des droits acquis.

Beaucoup de professionnels ayant une formation en thérapie des arts créatifs, thérapie somatique, la psychanalyse, la sexologie ou la toxicologie ont des compétences particulières dans certaines formes de psychothérapie.   Cependant, depuis la mise en vigueur du projet de loi 21, le public n'aura plus accès à leur expertise en tant que psychothérapeutes.

Il est tout de même curieux que ceux qui manifestent leur inquiétude à l’égard de la « crise en santé mentale » et réclament un meilleur accès aux services psychologiques («Mon cheval de bataille, c'est d'améliorer l'accès aux services psychologiques, quel que soit le niveau de revenu.») sont les mêmes qui sont en train de limiter l'accès du public à ces services.  C'est une erreur de politique publique de limiter l'accès et le choix du public aux services de psychothérapie, et l'OPQ à tort de s'approprier le droit de pratiquer des formes de thérapies dans lesquelles les psychologues ne sont ni formés ni qualifiés.

L’encadrement de la psychothérapie par l'Ordre des Psychologues du Québec (OPQ) a été justifié en raison de «protection du public», et suivi d’une campagne menée par l'OPQ à «ne pas laisser n'importe qui entrer dans votre tête».  Mais en fait, cette communauté dont la pratique se veut « fondée sur les données probantes » n'a aucune preuve que les thérapeutes détenteurs de permis sont moins dangereux ou plus efficaces que les autres.  Au contraire:
... il ya des preuves et des arguments petinents qui démontrent que [la réglementation] fera plus de mal que de bien, à la fois en matière de protection du public et à la profession en général. Un certain nombre de livres de fond ont remis en question l'argument du «sens commun» de la protection du public... or il n'existe pas de recherches comparables, si abondamment et soigneusement étudiées et soutenues de façon convaincante, pour soutenir la décision de réglementer.  (Therapy Today, vol 20/6, 2009.)


psychotherapy- diversity and freedom of choice

I spoke yesterday with Mme Andrée Thauvette-Poupart, Président of la Société Québécoise des Psychothérapeutes Professionnels (SQPP), who told me about some of the initiatives the SQPP has recently undertaken to promote psychotherapists and various modalities of psychotherapy practiced in Quebec.  (To sign the petition asking for better access to psychotherapy services, click here.)

The SQPP has been doing amazing work collating resources to promote psychotherapy as well as sensitizing and educating insurance companies, unions and employers in Quebec so that they take steps toward a more equitable representation of psychotherapists within their organizations.  

I wish to express solidarity with the SQPP’s initiatives, its overall commitment to the diversification of the practice of psychotherapy, and its representation of all licensed psychotherapists regardless of professional order.  

I also wish to express solidarity with those therapists who may not qualify for a psychotherapist’s permit because they are not members of any professional order and with those who, in the near future, will no longer be able to apply for the acquired right to practice psychotherapy as a psychoanalyst, sexologist, etc.  

Many competent professionals with backgrounds in creative arts therapy, somatic therapy, psychoanalysis, sexology or toxicology are uniquely qualified to offer certain forms of psychotherapy to the public.  Under Bill 21, however, the public will no longer have access to their expertise as psychotherapists.

It is very curious when the people publicizing a crisis in mental health and promoting access to psychological services ("Mon cheval de bataille, c'est d'améliorer l'accès aux services psychologiques, quel que soit le niveau de revenu") are the very same people limiting access to those services. It is a public policy error to limit public access and choice of psychotherapy, and wrong of the OPQ to appropriate all therapies when psychologists are not trained or qualified in them.

The regulation of psychotherapy by the Order of Psychologists (OPQ) was justified on the grounds of 'public protection' and was followed by a campaign by the OPQ to 'not let just anyone into your head'.  But in fact this "evidence based" community has no evidence that permit-holding therapists are any less dangerous or more effective than others.  On the contrary:
...there is evidence and substantive argument that [regulation] will do more harm than good, both in the matter of public protection and to the field generally.  A number of full-length books have undermined the ‘common sense’ public protection assumption... no such extensive, thoroughly researched and cogently argued literature exists to support the decision to regulate. (Therapy Today; vol. 20/6, 2009)


que charest charade

Un article publié au mois de février sur le site Protégez-vous.ca contient des informations erronées au sujet du service de référence de l’Ordre des Psychologues du Québec.

L'auteure de l'article précise que "la première information qui vous sera demandée est la région dans laquelle vous souhaitez consulter."

Malheureusement, ce n'est pas vrai.  En fait, la première chose qu’on demande à ceux qui consultent le service de référence de l’OPQ est de choisir entre "psychologue" et "tous les professionnels autorisés."

Imaginez que l'on vient consulter le site de l’OPQ pour de l'aide à cause d’un trouble relationnel ou un problème au travail.  On pourrait très bien penser la chose suivante : "Je suis à la recherche d’une thérapie, et la thérapie est un service psychologique.  Je suis sur le site de l'Ordre des Psychologues.  Je suppose donc que je suis à la recherche d'un psychologue."  Cela semble raisonnable, or les résultats de recherche excluront effectivement tous les thérapeutes conjugaux et familiaux, sexologues, ergothérapeutes, travailleurs sociaux et d’autres professionnels en mesure d’aider.   Ils incluront de nombreux psychologues avec peu de formation, et aucun permis, dans ces domaines spécialisés.

Pourtant, l'auteure de l'article nous dit que Rose-Marie Charest, le président de l'OPQ "assure que les psychologues ne sont pas privilégiés aux dépens des autres thérapeutes."

Malheureusement, ceci n'est pas vrai non plus.

que charest charade

An article posted in February on the Protégez-vous.ca website contains incorrect information about the online referral service of the Quebec Order of Psychologists.

The author of the article states that "The first information you are asked for is the location in which you want to search.”

Unfortunately, this is not true.  In fact the first thing that one is asked by the OPQ referral service is to choose between "psychologist" and "all authorized professionals."

Now let’s say that one comes to the OPQ website and needs help, perhaps with issues around a relationship or work.  One might very well think along lines such as this: “I am looking for therapy, and that is a psychological service.  I am at the website of the Order of Psychologists.  I guess I am looking for a psychologist.”  That would seem reasonable, but the search results will actually exclude all licensed couple and family therapists, sexologists, occupational therapists, social workers, psycho-educators and others who are able to help.  It will include many psychologists with little training and no license in these fields.

Yet, the author of the article tells us that Rose-Marie Charest, the President of the OPQ "assures that psychologists are not privileged at the expense of other therapists."

Unfortunately this is not true either.


pétition adressée à l'Orde des Psychologues du Québec et l'Office des Professions

L'Ordre des Psychologues du Québec est responsable de l'homologation des psychothérapeutes, et son mandat est de protéger le public.

Or, l'Ordre des Psychologues du Québec ne respecte pas ce mandat.  Son service de référence en ligne favorise les membres de leur Ordre, souvent moins formés dans les traitements psychologiques demandés par le public que d’autres psychothérapeutes spécialisés dans ces traitements.

Nous, soussignés, sommes contre cette manière de faire.

L'Ordre des Psychologues du Québec induit les consommateurs en erreur quand il ne les réfère pas systématiquement à tous les fournisseurs qualifiés dans le service psychothérapeutique recherché, ou quand il les réfère en premier lieu à des psychologues qui sont souvent moins qualifiés dans la problématique visée.  Ceci va à l’encontre de l'intérêt public.

Pour avoir des informations complémentaires, veuillez consulter Psychothérapie et la Protection Public.

Pétition adressée à :
Commissaire aux plaintes, Office des professions du Québec
Mme Rose-Marie Charest, Présidente, Ordre des Psychologues du Québec 

Chère Mme Charest, 
Quand je consulte l’Ordre des Psychologues du Québec, je veux accès à l’ensemble de psychothérapeutes qualifiés pour fournir les traitements psychologiques que je cherche.
Je signe cette pétition afin que vous preniez des mesures dans l'intérêt public en facilitant un meilleur accès à l'ensemble des professionnels agréés par l'OPQ qui sont autorisés par la loi à fournir un traitement psychologique.

Plus précisément, je demande que:

1) L'OPQ cesse d’interférer avec la liberté du public de choisir ses fournisseurs de traitements psychologiques,
2) L'OPQ réfère le public à tous les psychothérapeutes qualifiés pour fournir le traitement recherché,
3) L’OPQ cesse de trier les résultats de recherche en ligne selon des critères qui excluent les titulaires de permis spécialisés dans la problématique recherchée, et
4) L'OPQ rend publique des informations complètes et pertinentes sur toute réunion, discussion, négociation et entente avec des organismes gouvernementaux, des compagnies d'assurance ou d’autres tiers, qui va déterminer comment et dans quelle matière des services de psychothérapie seront fournis au public. 

[Votre nom] 

petition to the Ordre des Psychologues du Québec and Office des Professions

The Order of Psychologists of Quebec is responsible for the licensure of psychotherapists, and its mandate is to protect the public.

The Order of Psychologists of Quebec is not meeting this mandate.  Its online referral service favours members of its own order who are often less trained in the psychological treatments sought by the public than other psychotherapists who are specialized in those psychological treatments.

We are opposed to this.

The Order of Psychologists of Quebec is misleading consumers when it fails to refer them to all of the qualified providers of the psychotherapeutic services they seek and refers them to the less qualified.  This is contrary to public interest.

Mme. Rose-Marie Charest, Order of Psychologists of Quebec
Commissaire aux plaintes, Office des professions du Québec

Dear Mme. Charest,
When I consult the Order of Psychologists of Quebec for a referral, I want access to the full range of licensed psychotherapists qualified to provide the psychological treatments that I seek.

I am signing this petition so that you will take action in the public interest by facilitating better access to all professionals licensed by the Order of Psychologists of Quebec who are authorized by law to provide psychological treatment.

Specifically, I am asking that:

1) The Order of Psychologists of Quebec cease interfering with the public’s freedom to choose its providers of psychological treatments,

2) The Order of Psychologists of Quebec refer the public to all psychotherapists qualified to provide the type of treatment sought,

3) The Order of Psychologists of Quebec's online referral service cease filtering search results using criteria to exclude specialized permit holders in the field searched under, and

4) The Order of Psychologists of Quebec provide me and the public at large with complete and relevant information on all meetings, discussions, negotiations and agreements with government organizations, insurance carriers or third parties, that determine how and in what matter psychotherapeutic services are to be provided to the public. 

[Your name]


comment le site de référence de l'OPQ ne s'acquitte pas de son mandat de protection de public, et comment réclamez un meilleur service

Le service de référence en ligne de l'OPQ n'aide pas le public à accéder aux services de tous les psychothérapeutes qualifiés dans les problématiques recherchées.

Voici comment son service de référence ne vous aide pas à trouver le meilleur intervenant:
1) les psychothérapeutes non-psychologues ne sont pas toujours inclus dans les résultats de recherche, même quand ils détiennent un permis spécialisé ou sont formés dans la problématique recherchée (par exemple, des problèmes conjugaux ou familiaux, de sexualité ou de travail), alors que les noms de psychologues sans permis ou formation dans ces problématiques sont toujours inclus dans les résultats de recherche.
2) les psychothérapeutes non-psychologues ne sont jamais répertoriés comme étant capable de faire des évaluations dans leur domaine d’expertise (par exemple, pour des problèmes relationnels, sexuels ou professionnels), mais les psychologues sans permis ou expertise dans ces domaines en sont toujours répertoriés.
3) les psychothérapeutes non-psychologue n’obtiennent aucune référence de l'IVAC, SSQ, la CSST ou Santé Canada lorsque le public recherche des services subventionnés par ces organismes, parce que ce cette option va automatiquement filtrer les résultats pour exclure les noms de tout intervenant à l’exception des psychologues.
Si vous êtes un psychothérapeute en pratique privée, vous serez probablement aussi étonné que moi d'apprendre que beaucoup de vos services sont inaccessibles au public quand il consulte le service de référence de l'OPQ, même si vous avez payé cher pour votre cotisation annuelle de permis de psychothérapeute et pour votre inscription sur cette page professionnelle de l’OPQ.

DE SURCROÎT :  l'OPQ assiste actuellement à des réunions privées avec quatre grandes organisations financées par l'état (SSQ, la CSST, de Santé Canada-Autochtones et IVAC) dans le but de déterminer quels fournisseurs de services de psychothérapie seront subventionnés financièrement par ces organisations.

Pouvons-nous lui faire confiance?

Pour des informations plus complètes, veuillez consulter Psychothérapie et la Protection du Public.  Vous y trouverez une explication du service de référence en ligne de l'OPQ, une pétition adressée à la présidente de l'Ordre des Psychologues du Québec qui lui demande de référer le public à tous les psychothérapeutes qualifiés dans les traitements qu'ils recherchent, et un exemple de lettre aux employeurs demandant la couverture de tous les fournisseurs de psychothérapie autorisés.


a psychologist accuses Rose-Marie Charest of conflict of interest as President of the OPQ

[translated from French]

As president of the Order of Psychologists, Rose-Marie Charest has a responsibility to protect the public, to represent the profession and psychologists. Promotional ads for her program On the Couch have alluded to the fact that she is president of the Order of Psychologists. Because of the credibility this title lends her, Rose-Marie Charest may be giving the public the impression that the analyses she offers on her program reflect what most psychologists would say. This is not the case. It can also give the impression that psychologists are first and foremost psychotherapists. This is not the case either.
The Order of Psychologists bought advertising messages that are inserted in the program In Therapy which is broadcast daily on TV5. It is deplorable.
Rose-Marie Charest promotes the profession of psychology as essentially a profession of psychotherapist. There are many psychologists who do not practice in the field of psychotherapy and who believe not only that we are licensed to protect the public but to also provide the public with accurate information about the profession of psychology. There are more and more psychologists who are not psychotherapists and who are not comfortable in the Order of Psychologists. Currently, Rose-Marie Charest's self-interest is fused with the interests of the Order of Psychologists. Rose-Marie Charest must choose.

Martin Courcy 

For the original article in its entirety, click here.

un psychologue dénonce le conflit d'intérêt de la présidente de l'OPQ, Rose-Marie Charest

Comme présidente de l’Ordre des psychologues, Rose-Marie Charest a la responsabilité de protéger le public, de représenter la profession et les psychologues. Cette charge publique exige une réserve. La promotion de l’émission Sur le divan a été faite en indiquant que Rose-Marie Charest était présidente de l’Ordre des psychologues. À cause de la crédibilité que donne cette fonction, Rose-Marie Charest peut laisser au public l’impression que les propos qu’elle tient dans cette émission, les analyses qu’elle fait, reflètent ce que diraient l’ensemble des psychologues membres de l’Ordre. Ce n’est pas le cas. Elle peut aussi donner l’impression que les psychologues sont d’abord et avant tout des psychothérapeutes.  Ce n’est pas le cas non plus.
L’Ordre des psychologues a acheté des messages de publicité qui sont insérés dans l’émission En thérapie diffusée quotidiennement sur TV5. C’est déplorabl.
Rose-Marie Charest fait la promotion de la profession de psychologue comme étant essentiellement une profession de psychothérapeute. Nous sommes plusieurs psychologues qui ne pratiquent pas dans le domaine de la psychothérapie qui pensent que, non seulement nos cotisations doivent servir à protéger le public mais aussi à donner au public des informations justes sur la profession de psychologue. Il y a de plus en plus de psychologues qui ne font pas de psychothérapie qui sont mal à l’aise au sein de l’Ordre des psychologues. Actuellement, les intérêts de Rose-Marie Charest se confondent avec ceux de l’Ordre des psychologues. Rose-Marie Charest doit choisir.

Martin Courcy

Pour l’article dans son intégrité, cliquez ici

how the OPQ's online referral service fails to protect the public and what to do about it

[pour la version française, cliquez ici ]

The OPQ’s online referral service is NOT helping the public access the services of all qualified psychotherapists specialized in the disciplines the public is looking for. 

Here’s how its online referral service fails to help you find the right provider:
1)     Non-psychologist psychotherapists are not always included in the search results under topics in which they hold licenses or have specialized training, e.g. in couple and family, sexual or work issues, whereas the names of psychologists who are unlicensed or untrained in these issues are always included in the search results.
2)     Non-psychologist psychotherapists are never listed as being able to do conduct evaluations in their areas of expertise, i.e. relationship, sexual or occupational problems, but psychologists who are without expertise and are unlicensed in these areas always are.
3)    Non-psychologist psychotherapists get no referrals when the OPQ’s online service is used by the public to find a professional funded by IVAC, SSQ, CSST or Health Canada because this search option automatically filters out all but the names of psychologists.
If you are a psychotherapist in private practice, you may be as surprised as I was to learn that many of your services are inaccessible to the public using the OPQ’s online referral site, even if you have paid good money for both your license and your professional page listing.   

AND THAT IS NOT ALL.  The OPQ is currently holding private meetings with four major, publicly-funded organizations (SSQ, CSST, Health Canada- Aboriginals and IVAC) to determine which providers of psychotherapy services will be financially supported by these organizations.  

Can we trust them?

For more complete information, please consult Psychotherapy and Public Protection.  It includes an overview and critique of the OPQ’s online referral service, a petition addressed to the President of the Order of Psychologists asking her to refer the public to all psychotherapists qualified to provide the treatments they seek, and sample letters to employers requesting coverage of all licensed providers of psychotherapy.