Recent data shows that clinical counselors are almost twice as likely to be delinquent in renewing their California registrations compared to clinical social workers. Associate Professional Clinical Counselors (APCCs) are almost three times as likely to be delinquent as MFTs. As of September 2024, more than a quarter of California APCCs hold delinquent APCC registrations.
California
ASPPB gives up on requiring Psychology licensing boards to use the EPPP Part 2
Last week, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) announced that they are pausing plans to require member boards to use the EPPP Part 2 as a condition of Psychologist licensure. They had faced fierce resistance to the mandate, including a recent Federal Trade Commission complaint and a coalition of states looking at developing an alternative exam.
By not pursuing an interstate compact for MFTs, AAMFT is making a big mistake
In April, I wrote about AAMFT’s decision not to pursue an interstate compact for MFTs. You can see them discuss the issue and their rationale in this video. Their logic came down to two things: 1) since more than half of MFTs are in California and New York, and these states would almost certainly not join such a compact, the benefits to the MFT profession would be limited; and 2) the cost of such an effort, which would require resources to be pulled away from other initiatives, would not be worth it, especially given #1.
I think they’re wrong on both counts.
Why there isn’t an interstate compact for MFTs
Telehealth-based mental health care is now the norm. Many clinicians have sought to expand their telehealth practices by getting licensed in multiple states. Psychology, counseling, and social work have all pursued interstate compacts to expand telehealth opportunities for professionals in participating states. This has led many marriage and family therapists to wonder: Why isn’t there an interstate compact for MFTs?
California AB1758 signed, making video supervision legal across work settings through 2025
The bill was tagged as urgency legislation, meaning it took effect immediately upon the Governor’s signature. In addition to making video supervision legal across all work settings, it also newly requires supervisors (in all work settings, not just private practice) to assess a supervisee’s appropriateness for video supervision. I’ve created a form for that, modeled after the specific requirements in the bill. It’s available on my Resources page at the Ben Caldwell Labs site.