independent practitioner

Independent PractitionerSummer 2021 • Volume 41 Number 3

division42.org

Raw Psychological Test Data: To Release or Not to Release — David Shapiro

Lifelong Learning: Maintaining Competence Beyond Formal Education— Tori K. Knox-Rice, Hannah E. Wadsworth, & Mona A. Robbins

Division 42 at the APA Convention

division42.org

Independent Practitioner Summer 2021 32 Summer 2021 Independent Practitioner

Board of Directors

Executive Committee

Elaine Ducharme, PhD, President

Peter Oppenheimer, PhD, President-Elect

Judith Patterson, PhD, Past-President

Derek Phillips, PsyD, Secretary

Gerald Koocher, PhD, TreasurerMembers-At-Large

Barry Anton, PhD Nancy McGarrah, PhD

James Bray, PhD Robin McLeod, PhD

Traci Cipriano, PhD Krystal Stanley, PhD

Representatives to APA Council

Norman Abeles, PhD Jana Martin, PhD

Lindsey Buckman, PsyD Lenore Walker, EdD

Lisa Grossman, JD, PhD

Early Career Representative

Tyler Bradstreet, PhD

Student Representative

Paula DeFranco, PhD, MBA

Governance and Standing Committee ChairsAwards: Judith Patterson, PhDDiversity Concerns: Lindsey Buckman, PsyD and Krystal Stanley, PhDFellows: David Shapiro, PhDFinance: Gerald Koocher, PhDMembership: Pauline Wallin, PhDNominations and Elections: Judith Patterson, PhDProgram: Amy VanArsdale PhDPublications and Communications: Terrence Koller, PhD

Continuing CommitteesAdvertising: TBDAdvocacy/Federal Governance: Robin McLeod, PhDAPA Governance Issues: Elaine Ducharme, PhDForensic Section: Joe Scroppo, PhD, JDMarketing and Public Education: Linda Campbell, PhDMentorshoppe: Lisa Grossman, JD, PhD

AppointmentsPractice Innovations Editor: Jeff Zimmerman, PhDBulletin Editor: Eileen A. Kohutis, PhDBulletin Associate Editor: Theresa M. Schultz, PhDWebsite: Derek Phillips, PsyDListserv Moderators: Blaine Lesnik, PsyD and Shannon Nicoloff, PsyDContinuing Education: Krystal Stanley, PhDFederal Advocacy Coordinator: Peter Oppenheimer, PhDGovernance Reorganization Task Force: Derek Phillips, PsyD

Editor: Eileen A. Kohutis, PhD (2019-2021)2 W. Northfield RoadSuite 209Livingston, NJ 07039(973) 716-0174

email: [email protected]

Associate Editors: Theresa M. Schultz, PhD (2019-2021) 630-323-3050 x12

email: [email protected]

LaKeita Carter, PhD email: [email protected]

Bulletin StaffPatrick DeLeon, PhD, JD, Opinions and Policy Contributing Editor David Shapiro, PhD, Liability, Malpractice, and Risk Management ContributorKrystal Stanley, Ph. D. Diversity EditorMona Robbins, Ph. D. and Tori Knox-Rice, Ph. D. Early Career EditorsRick Weiss, Layout Design Editor

Division 42 Central OfficeJeannie Beeaff919 W Marshall Ave.Phoenix, AZ 85013602-284-6219Fax: 602-626-7914Email: [email protected]

Independent Practitioner

About the Independent PractitionerSubmission deadlines: February 10 for Spring issueMay 10 for Summer issueAugust 30 for Fall issueNovember 15 for Winter issue

Submissions:All submissions (including references) must be formatted in APA style (with the exception that abstracts should be omitted) and emailed as an attached Word file to the Editor and Associate Editor. If you do not have attached file capabilities, mail the disc to the Editor. Hard copies are not needed. Please write two sentences about yourself for placement at the end of the article and provide contact information you would like published (e.g., address, phone, E-mail, web page). Photos are appreci-ated and should be sent directly to the Central Office. Most submissions should be limited to approximately 2,500 words (6 double-spaced pages), although longer submissions will be considered at the Editors’ discretion.

All materials are subject to editing at the discretion of the Editors. Unless otherwise stated, the views expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect official policy of Psychologists in Independent Practice, APA, or the Editors. Publication priority is given to articles that are original and have not been submitted for publication elsewhere.

Advertising:Advertisements are accepted at the Editors’ discretion and should not be construed as endorsements.

Copyright:Except for announcements and event schedules, material in the Independent Practitioner is copyrighted and can only be reprinted with the permission of the Editor.

Table of Contents

Advertising RatesBack Cover (7.5" x 5") $750.00Inside Back Cover (7.5”x10) $750.00Full Page (7.5" x 10") $500.00One Half Page (7.5" x 5") $300.00One Quarter Page (3.5" x 5") $200.00

10% Frequency DiscountClassified Advertising $5 per line, $25.00 minimum Subscription Rates for Non-members $42.00 annuallySubscription Rates for Students $10.00 annually

From the President

President’s Column — Laney Ducharme 4

Focus on Ethics

Raw Psychological Test Data: To Release or Not to Release — David L. Shapiro 5

Opinions and Policy

“Ooh-Ooh-Ooh. Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Way Up High” — Pat DeLeon 9

APA 2021 Convention

Division 42 at the Convention 13

Focus on Diversity

Gender Identity: A Primer — Krystal Stanley 15

Focus on Clinical Practice

Lifelong Learning: Maintaining Competence Beyond Formal Education— Tori K. Knox-Rice, Hannah E. Wadsworth, & Mona A. Robbins 17


Laney Ducharme

President’s ColumnDear 42 Colleagues and Friends

Focus on Ethics

Raw Psychological Test Data: To Release or Not to ReleaseDavid L. Shapiro

As I write this column I truly hope that we are emerging from the nightmare

of Covid-19. Although many of us have expe-rienced trauma and loss during the last year, there is definitely hope on the horizon. Flowers are blooming all around. The woods behind my house have filled in. Two sets of bluebird babies have fledged. And we are now getting together with friends. Yes, we are all vaccinated and it feels safe and very NORMAL! I have eaten indoors at several restaurants and have even gone to the mall to pick up a few items. Such very basic things have become amazing experi-ences! I was humbled when I told the waiter at a restaurant that it was so nice not to be cook-ing or cleaning up the dishes. He smiled and told me how happy he was to be able to do the clean-up because he was finally back to work after 6 months!

I have actually started to see some people in-person in my office. They have been vacci-nated and have minimal contact with others. I am going very slowly, following CDC guide-lines and have a large office with an air filter. I recognize that this is a very personal decision for each of us. But, I must say, what a joy it has been to be able to start a session with a greeting other than “hi, can you hear me ok?”

I am very happy to announce that Division 42 has been approved as a CE sponsor. Dr. Cami Winkelspecht is chairing this committee and is working to set up a number of both live and home study programs. Our first program offer-ing one free CE to registrants, on Risk Manage-ment,was held on July 7 with nearly 80 partici-pants. We will be making the program available to all Division 42 members as a general benefit. A very big thank you to Dr. Jeff Younggren and Dr. Jana Martin for this excellent and very rele-vant presentation.

The search committee for a new Division Ad-

ministrator has been hard at work. Our goal has been to find a qualified individ-ual to facilitate a smooth tran-sition. As I write this column, we are close to an-nouncing who will be taking on this position.

We know that the APA con-vention will be 100% virtual. We have been assured that the programming will run more smoothly and will be easier to navigate than last year. So, keep your eyes peeled for the excel-lent programming that was organized by Amy Van Arsdale. Thank you, Amy!

It has been a pleasure seeing many of you “vir-tually” at the two zoom meetings we have had to simply “chat” about what is going on profes-sionally and personally for each of us. I plan to continue this process as I think it really helps us connect. This is one of the positives of Covid and the world of Zoom! In addition, I have discovered that many of our members would like to be involved in connecting to colleagues internationally. I am currently working with other divisions to coordinate this effort.

Again, I want to invite you to reach out to me and our Board members with questions or con-cerns you may have about the division and how you can become more involved.

Please remember to take time each day to take care of yourselves. Enjoy a few moments of relaxation, exercise, fun or look at something beautiful.

Fondly, Laney

[I would like to acknowledge The Trust as the source of the information in the following article. The information is unpublished and has been retrieved from the Trust database.]

The issue of the surrender of raw psycho-logical test data has been one which has

intrigued, plagued and baffled psychologists for many years. Initially, the Ethics Code of the American Psychological Association clearly indicated that raw psychological test data could be turned over only to someone qualified to interpret it, which was generally seen as an-other licensed psychologist. However, with the advent of HIPAA, this was changed to reflect the patient or client’s choice in what they want-ed to do with their records, including the raw psychological test data. Eventually, there was an exception made to the HIPAA requirement indicating that the practitioner could withhold the data if they believed that release of the data would result in substantial harm to the patient or substantial misuse of the data. However, they also needed to recognize that HIPAA might prevail and the data might need to be released.

While many states do not have any law regard-ing the release of raw psychological test data,

there are some very distinc-tive trends in several of the other states. There does seem to be, at times, a diz-zying array of combinations and permuta-tions of the law in regard to this data.

Some states do not have any law regarding the release of such data.

While it is nowhere specified in the laws in these states, presumably psychologists should follow the Standards in the A.P.A. Ethics Code. It should also be noted that in considering those states that do have such laws, there is some commonality, as well as some differences, often making each state law quite unique.

Patient or Client may request records and/or designate another individual to whom the

psychologist may provide the data. The raw data may be withheld if the psychologist believes that release of the raw data may result in substantial harm to the client or substantial misuse of the data. Ultimately, law may determine what is released (HIPAA).

Several states speak about the issue of avoiding a public release of raw data and that there cannot be a reproduction for public use of psychological tests or other assess-

TABLE 1

States with No Laws Regarding Raw Data

Alaska Massachusetts OregonArkansas Michigan Rhode IslandColorado Mississippi South DakotaConnecticut Nebraska TennesseeDelaware New Hampshire West VirginiaDistrict of Columbia New Jersey UtahIdaho New York VermontIndiana North Carolina VirginiaIowa North Dakota WisconsinKansas Oklahoma WyomingLouisiana


ment devices because they may invalidate the technique. Therefore, access is limited to people with a professional interest who will safeguard their usage. Some states refer to the fact that the recipient of the data must be another li-censed psychologist, while others do not specif-ically refer to the need for a licensed psycholo-gist.

In these states there is no public release of raw data and no reproduction for public use of any psychological test or other assessment devices, due to the fact that such release may invalidate the technique. Therefore, access to the data is limited to people with a professional interest, who will safeguard their usage. Some states refer to the fact that the recipient of the data must be a licensed psychologist (Maine and Florida), while others do not. Some states will allow the reproduction of simulated or “mock” test data (Hawaii and Ohio), while others do not

mention this.

In what follows, I will try to discuss the unique aspects of the law in those states that do have such laws.

In the State of Arizona (ARS 32-2061-2013), it states that the patient may request in writing release of everything, including the raw data

and with the client’s consent it may go only to another licensed psychologist.

As noted above, California (1396.3) speaks about the need to avoid public release because of possible invalidation of the techniques.

In Florida, release of this data can be only to another licensed psychologist, or by court

order (64819-18004). The psychologist needs to make all reasonable efforts to maintain the integrity of the protocols, modalities and in-struments.

In the State of Hawaii (WCHR 16-987-2013), the entire law has to do with the caution against releasing to a public source, but it does have a provision that if items resembled, but are not identical to the actual tests, they may be placed in popular publications.

The State of Illinois has perhaps the most ex-tensive protection for such raw psychological test data (740 ILCS 110/3). It states that psy-chological test materials ( such as test ques-tions) may not be disclosed to anyone, includ-ing the patient or client, and it is not subject to disclosure in any administrative, judicial or legal proceeding. This is an interesting state-ment, in that release of raw data as distinct from test materials may be required under HIPAA and also by court order. The distinction between test data and test materials is not clearly specified in the law.The law goes on to state that any subject of the psychological test has the right to have it released to anyone des-ignated by the recipient.

TABLE 2

States Explicitly Following A.P.A. Code

Alabama

Georgia

TABLE 3States Prohibiting Reproduction of

Records in Public Forum

California NevadaHawaii New MexicoKentucky OhioMaine South CarolinaMinnesota TexasMissouri Washington (State)

TABLE 4

States With Unique or Idiosyncratic Requirements

Arizona New Mexico

Florida Ohio

Illinois Pennsylvania

Maryland Texas

Minnesota Washington (State)

Montana

The Commonwealth of Kentucky (201KAR26:145) merely talks about refraining from disseminating psychological testing in any way that may invalidate it.

This is also found in the initial statement in the law from the State of Maine. Maine then goes on to state that it is not subject to disclosure in an administrative, judicial or legal proceeding (much like the State of Illinois). However, the subject of the testing has the right to release it only to another qualified psychologist and the psychologist receiving the data cannot disclose it to any other person.

In the State of Maryland (COMAR 10.36.05.06), the law states that the data may be released to patients and clients as appropriate (presum-ably following HIPAA) and that they will not be released to any unqualified individuals except as required by law. The Maryland law does not appear to specify that the recipient must be a licensed psychologist.

In Minnesota (Minnesota Stat. 148.965-2013), again there is the statement of prohibiting release if it would compromise the objectivity of the testing and then states that release may be made only to another qualified provider, or “provide a summary to the patient or to a third party designed by the patient” (something quite unique to Minnesota).

The State of Missouri, as noted before, speaks merely about avoiding release of data if it would invalidate the test (20 CSR 2235-5.030).

The State of Montana has a very unique law (Mont. Admin R.24.189.813). The psycholo-gist may provide judges, attorneys and other appropriate parties access to the results of the evaluations but make reasonable efforts to avoid release of notes, test booklets, raw test data and structured interviews to people who are untrained in their interpretation. The law in Montana goes on to state that if the psychol-ogist is legally required to release the data to an untrained individual, they must first offer an alternative, such as a report or releasing the data to another qualified psychologist who will discuss or provide a written interpretation of

the data with people seeking the data.

In Nevada, there is again the prohibition against reproducing or disseminating test data in a popular publication because of the possi-bility that the tests may be invalidated (NAC 641.234).

In the State of New Mexico (16.22.2.16 NMAC-2013), psychologists are prohibited from the general distribution of any psychological test or assessment procedure, “the value of which depends on the naivete of the subject”, that might invalidate the technique. Access is lim-ited to people with professional interests who will safeguard their use and will take all reason-able steps to protect the test manuals, stimuli or raw test data from disclosure to unqualified individuals. They may release the data only to licensed and qualified psychologists. It goes on to state that if a subpoena or discovery request is made, the psychologist needs to seek a pro-tective order to maintain test security and if the court rules against this, then the psychologist may follow the court order. This appears to be the only state that speaks about the necessity to seek a protective order when there is a subpoe-na for raw psychologist test data.

The State of Ohio (OAC ANN.4732-17-01), as noted earlier, also speaks about not reproducing psychological tests in popular publications in ways that may invalidate them. Access is lim-ited to people with professional interests who will safeguard the test data and again simulat-ed items are allowed.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (49 PA Code 41.61) also has some very unique aspects. It states that the examinee has the right to re-ceive and the psychologist has the responsibili-ty to explain the nature and purposes of the re-sults and the interpretation of the assessment. This must be provided to the client or patient in understandable language and the psycholo-gist is to avoid giving unnecessary information that could possibly compromise test security but may explain the basis for discussions/deci-sions that may have an adverse impact on the person or their dependents. Of some interest is this does not really address the raw data itself,


Opinions and Policy

Pat DeLeon

“Ooh-Ooh-Ooh. Somewhere Over the Rainbow. Way Up High”

The Prescriptive Authority (RxP) Move-ment – A Personal View: A long-time

friend and former APA Education staff member who is one of the original Department of De-fense (DOD) Psychopharmacology Demonstra-tion Project (PDP) trainees, Anita Brown: “When recently addressing the Ohio Psychological Association, with its long track record of a push for prescriptive authority, I was so happy that they are not giving up! I applaud their per-sistence and encourage others to continue in the same manner. I think back to my graduate and post-graduate experiences at the VAMC, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, Pres-byterian Hospital Chronic Pain Center and var-ious neighborhood health centers in Pittsburgh and realize that I had already acquired a pretty solid working knowledge of behavioral medi-cine (now health psychology) and the impact of medications in treatment. I did not fully realize all of this until actually in the PDP training, but when as President of the Pennsylvania Psycho-logical Association, it came time to support hospital privileges for psychologists and the DOD/PDP program, we knew this represented the future of psychology.

“Other preparatory experiences I had includ-ed having staffed both the APA Task Force on Prescriptive Authority and the first two cohorts of the PDP as an Assistant Executive Director at APA in both the Practice and Education Direc-torates. Had I not been so closely involved with the PDP, I would never have imagined enlisting to become a Fellow when the Army ‘made me an offer I couldn’t refuse!’ What followed were experiences that altered both my profession-al and personal life dramatically, and opened doors in my ability to address patient needs in a more comprehensive and integrated manner. So important is the support given by colleagues

in the military, the profession and my per-sonal life – I could not have achieved any of it without that.

“The PDP end-ed as intended with success in demonstrating that the doctor-al level psy-chologist could train to include psychotropic medication in treatment. All ten of the graduates from that program remained as active prescribers, some for longer periods than others. I imagine that each of us has an interesting and different story to tell. Since 1999, I have stepped away from clinical work for periods of time but was able to become credentialed as a civilian prescrib-ing psychologist in two military treatment facilities and helped to develop curricula and provide training in psychopharmacology for other psychologists. I have also honed skills in advocacy for this and other areas that created opportunities for the expansion of psychologi-cal practice.

“One of the most exciting areas of growth from my perspective is the emergence of various ap-plications of technology (eHealth and mHealth, for example) and the understanding that can be gained from data that is correctly and appropri-ately analyzed. Aside from my current posi-tion as the Director of Professional Affairs for the Georgia Psychological Association, my last position was with the DOD Center of Excellence for Telehealth and Technology (T2). While

or the issue of people who may legitimately receive it. It appears to be more of a statement that is consistent with HIPAA. However, it is the only state that explicitly deals with the issue of possible adverse test results.

In South Carolina (SC Code Regs. 100-4), the psychologist once gain cannot reproduce or de-scribe in any public forum psychological tests, assessments or assessment data that could possibly invalidate them.

Texas also has an exceedingly detailed law (22 TAC 465.16). It states that a psychologist who conducts testing, maintains and releases test protocols and data in a secure manner that does not compromise validity; further, they must maintain control over the records and test data to the extent necessary to ensure compliance with Board rules and State and Federal laws. When impossible to do so, they must arrange transfer to another licensed psychologist in compliance with all Board rules, State and Fed-eral laws. The law goes on to say that test data (namely the raw data) are part of the patient or client’s record, and not subject to subpoena, and will be made available only to a qualified men-tal health professional and only upon written release from the patient or pursuant to a court order. It goes on to say that test materials are not part of the client’s file, the test materials being the questions, for instance, on an objec-tive test. These may not be copied or distrib-uted unless it is permitted or required by State and Federal law. In addition, the law states that if test data is commingled with test materials (such as on the Wechsler test), the psychologist must inquire whether the patient will accept a summary or narrative in lieu of having to either redact the test material or extract the test data from the tests materials in order to comply with a request for records.

Finally, the State of Washington (WAC 246-924-365) also repeats the prohibition against releasing test data in any popular publication

that might invalidate tests, and also maintain the integrity and security of the tests and other assessment techniques consistent with con-tractual obligations and the law. It goes on to state that the psychologist may not provide raw test data to non-psychologists but may provide it to a psychologist or other individual qualified to interpret it with proper authorization from the client or their attorneys, and it may also be provided as directed by the court.

In summary, then, we see that most states do not have actual laws regarding the issue of release of raw psychological test data and some common themes appear in other, though they may be combined in very different ways. Some of these are the rights of the patient to their own records, the need to maintain test validity by not disseminating the test data or test re-sults in a popular publication, and the need for release to be only to those qualified to interpret it. Some states specify that this must be a psy-chologist while others are silent on the issue.

References1. Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Con-

duct (2002, 2010, 2016). Washington, D.C.: APA2. Georgia (Comp. R. and Regs. 510-4.02, 2012)3. Arizona (ARS 32-2061-2013)4. California (1396.3)5. Florida (64819-18004)6. Hawaii (WCHR16-987-2013)7. Illinois (740 ILCS 110/3)8. Kentucky (201IKAR26:145)9. Maryland (COMAR 10.36.05.06)10. Minnesota (Minn. Stat. 148.965-2013)11. Missouri (20 CSR 2235-5.03)12. Montana (Mont. Admin R24.198.813)13. Nevada (NAC 641.234)14. New Mexico (16.22.2.11 NMAC 2013)15. Ohio (OAC ANN. 4732-17-01)16. Pennsylvania (49 PA Code 41.61)17. South Carolina (S.C. Code Regs. 100-4)18. Texas (22 TAC 465.16)19. Washington (WAC 246-924-365)


there we worked on very innovative and excit-ing tools for support of the clinician’s work in assessment and treatment and stemming from this experience my growing appreciation about ways in which we should use our many tools to shape a future direction for the profession.

“We have developed some of the best approach-es and skills for understanding and predicting and influencing behavior, while also consider-ing the impacts of complex systemic and cul-tural influences. Although we still have roads to travel to incorporate this knowledge into our own personal behaviors and organizational procedures, as psychologists we can appreciate the value of collecting data, analyzing it appro-priately and using it to evaluate and predict outcomes. I am very excited about the news from the International Movement for Prescrip-tive Authority for Psychologists (IMPAP) and the perspectives from long-time friends Beth Rom-Rymer and Steve Ragusea and more recent activities aimed at expanding training, measur-ing impact and advancing the psychologists’ authority to treat the whole person.” Anita personifies the all-important Culture of Men-torship.

Reflections: Steve Ragusea, who has been a supporter of RxP since his graduate school days, recently moved back to Pennsylvania. “Psy-chologists have prevailed because our training model is superior to that of psychiatry and we shouldn’t be ashamed to proclaim that fact. Psychiatrists are trained to be medical doc-tors. Psychologists are trained to be doctors of psychology. Past medical school, psychiatrists spend thousands of hours in emergency rooms, learning to deal with gun shots, set broken bones, deliver babies, stabilize heart attack patients, and administer steroid injections for severe cases of poison ivy. But there is research showing that 5 years post medical school, most psychiatrists no longer feel competent to con-duct a basic physical exam!

“Beyond superficial exposure during their residency, psychiatrists are not trained in psychotherapy, psychological testing, family dynamics, research, group dynamics, etc. A psychologist has as many years of education as

a physician, learning all of the things psychia-trists don’t. All psychologists are taught a little medicine. Prescribing psychologists learn con-siderably more about medicine. These specially trained psychologists have now been prescrib-ing safely and effectively for 25 years. As once appeared in a Dear Abby column, ‘Psychiatrists are trained for a profession they don’t practice and practice in a profession for which they are not trained.’ Psychology’s training model is su-perior and that’s why psychiatry is dying while psychology flourishes around the world. The most important contribution of Anita’s PDP ex-perience is that she and her colleagues proved to psychology that we can learn to safely and effectively utilize psychotropic medications in a holistic and culturally competent manner.”

Why Is It Taking So Long? Within the public policy/political world, substantive change al-ways takes time; frequently, far longer than one might anticipate. In May, 2008, Randy Phelps, Deputy Executive Director for Professional Practice at APA, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Veterans Af-fairs on behalf of RxP. “Professional psychology as a discipline was ‘born’ as a result of the needs of this nation’s returning World War II heroes, and psychologists are acutely aware of the debt we owe to those Veterans and to the brave men and women who have followed in their foot-steps…. VHA is the single largest employer of psychologists in the nation, and has been for many years. Yet, VA continues to recognize the need to increase its psychology staffing levels in response to ever-increasing needs for services to Veterans….

“One of the most difficult current challenges for VHA is how to extend care into those areas, particularly in rural America, where VA facil-ities do not exist or are at great distance from the Veteran. One option that VHA has long resisted, but should more carefully consider, is granting expanded authority for appropriately trained psychologists to provide both psycho-logical and psychopharmacological care to Veterans in these underserved rural areas. Ex-perience in both states where licensed psychol-ogists have this expanded statutory authority to prescribe (New Mexico and Louisiana), as

well as a decade of data from the original DoD psychopharmacology program [PDP], have shown these practices to be safe and effective….

“Furthermore, a federal demonstration project set up nearly two decades ago has set a clear precedent that psychologists can successfully prescribe in a large federal health system…. These psychologists treated a wide variety of patients, including active-duty military, their dependents and military retirees, with ages ranging from 18 to 65. The PDP was highly scrutinized. The American College of Neuro-psychopharmacology (ACNP) conducted its own independent, external review of the PDP and in 1998 presented its final report to the DoD. Likewise, the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a positive report on the PDP. Both reports repeatedly stressed how well the PDP psychologists had performed, and noted that with prescriptive authority, psychologists were able to offer holistic, integrative treatment, which includes psychotherapy and medication, where appropriate.”

Steady Progress In Illinois: Beth Rom-Rymer: “Our bill to remove some of the constraints from our original Prescriptive Authority stat-ute (including broadening our prescriptive authority to include children under the age of 17 and older adults over the age of 65, and the authority to prescribe the Schedule II psycho-stimulants) passed unanimously in the State Senate Behavioral and Mental Health Commit-tee. Many kudos to our bill sponsor, Senator David Syverson; our IAPP (Illinois Association of Prescribing Psychologists) lobbying team; the President of our State Senate, Don Harmon, who is our longtime RxP legislative champion. Our bill will next go to the Senate floor, where we will continue discussions with State Sena-tors and Members of the Committee who had suggestions for strengthening the bill and its impact on patients.

“With the many challenges that COVID-19 restrictions have placed on moving legislation, and with the large number of new legislators whom we must educate about our work as prescribing psychologists, the strong show-ing in the Senate Committee is an indication

of the strength of our arguments. As one can imagine, this was not an easy victory, as we addressed the complex issues of: health dispar-ities, the dangers of over-medicating, the exist-ing constraints on our prescribing for severely medically compromised patients, and the comprehensive training requirements that our prescribing psychologists have met. Above all, we emphasized our commitment to thoroughly assess the need for, as well as the risks of, pre-scribing to the vulnerable child and older adult populations. This is, indeed, an exciting jour-ney upon which we have chosen to embark!”

Major Progress In Health Service Psychol-ogy Education: Although controversial for some, I personally have been pleased with the presentations over the past several APA annu-al conventions by Linda Campbell, now APA President-Elect Frank Worrell, and Catherine Grus on the vision within APA to accredit Mas-ter’s level psychology education. Accordingly, it was particularly nice to learn that one of the most significant events in the history of health service psychology education and training oc-curred at the February, 2021 Council of Repre-sentatives meeting. At that meeting, Council members voted to approve Standards of Accred-itation for Master’s Programs in Health Service Psychology, with 78% of those voting in favor. Supporters of APA taking this action note that it will mitigate the negative impact that recent changes in the standards for accrediting coun-seling programs has had on counseling psy-chology faculty and similar efforts to restrict access to licensure for psychology graduates. “This historic vote establishes the foundation for quality assurance of master’s programs in health service psychology. It has the potential to provide the thousands of students who earn a master’s degree in health service psychology each year greater confidence that their program has been peer reviewed and determined to meet standards for quality education and training” notes APA’s Chief Education Officer Catherine Grus.

While several steps need to occur before pro-grams can begin to apply to be accredited by APA, approval of these standards was a crucial step forward. Next steps include developing


operating procedures to guide how the process of accrediting programs will work and devel-oping a series of guidance documents known as “implementing regulations” that provide greater detail about the standards and what programs must do to demonstrate that they meet the standards. Before these documents can be approved, they will be subject to a period of public comment to inform the final drafts. In the future, APA will also apply to the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation to have their scope as an accreditor broadened to include accrediting master’s programs. For years, it has been noted that APA promulgates guidelines for the teaching of high school psychology and for the undergraduate psychology major as well as accrediting doctoral, internship, and post-doctoral programs in health service psychol-ogy, but was silent with respect to quality of training at the master’s level. Finally, with the recent action of Council, that has now changed.

Progressing Step-By-Step: Over the years, we have observed that our nation is best served when educated professionals venture outside of their historical comfort zones (isolated silos) and address complex societal problems with a multi-disciplinary approach. In August, 2019, the American Bar Association (ABA) raised for its members what the courts and counsel can do to stop the school-to prison pipeline, in which a disproportionately large number of U.S. young people of color are funneled out of public schools and into the criminal justice system. The ABA described how representa-tives of law enforcement, the judiciary, the

defense bar and prosecution came together to share pipeline-busting successes during a panel at their annual convention in San Fran-cisco. The proposed solution to this “disturb-ing national trend” involved youth diversion programs, which have lowered both the num-ber of juvenile crimes and referrals to juvenile court. “These diversion programs are examples of how ABA standards adopted in 2017 can be used as a tool to create and reinforce best prac-tices” and how those engaged “Have been able to deter schools from referring students to law enforcement for routine matters involving bad behavior and other minor offenses.”

Recently, Ashley Batastini, chair of the APA Division 18 (Public Service) Criminal Justice section, announced their proposed Excellence in Criminal Justice Psychology Research Grant initiative. Principle investigators must be a graduate student in psychology or an early career professional whose program of psycho-logical research is related to justice-involved populations or settings. Competitive proposals will be expected to use scientifically rigorous methodology and statistical methods to ad-dress a contemporary issue in criminal justice psychology, which will have direct impacts for psychological service provision, as well as those that incorporate factors relevant to social justice, diversity, and division intersectionality. “Why, oh why can’t I ? Ah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah” (Israel “IZ” Kamakawiwo’ole). Aloha,

Pat DeLeon, former APA President – Division 42 – May, 2021

APA DIV42 Independent Practitioner Special Feature: We are delighted to highlight our DIV42 members’ presentations for the 2021 APA Convention. Check out this impressive

array of offerings – Don’t miss out on these amazing learning opportunities!

Presidential Address Elaine Ducharme, PhD

What a year to be DIV42 President!!! Here’s an opportunity to hear from Dr. Elaine (Laney) Ducharme her reflections on the challenges of the year past, her/DIV42 accomplishments, and her hopes for DIV42 in the year to come.

Psychology Practice in the 21st Century: What It Takes to Thrive vs. Survive

Traci Bolander, PsyD, Barbara Ward-Zimmerman, PhD, & Melissa Duplantis, PsyD

Want to sharpen your practice development/management skills so your practice can flourish? This session is a must-attend!

Insurance: In-Network, Out-of-Network, or Out of Practice

Russell M. Holstein, PhD, Gordon I. Herz, PhD, Elaine A. Rodino, PhD, & Dana C. Ackley, PhD

Considering providing services in- or out-of-network…or perhaps doing something entirely different? Don’t miss this session!

Working Remotely, Yet Closely: Telesupervision and Teletherapy During the Pandemic and Beyond

Amy Van Arsdale, PhD & Jacqueline Jacobs, BS

Contemplating the benefits and challenges of remote clinical supervision? Be sure to be present for this conversation!

Attachments in Turmoil: Relationships, Substance Use, and Parenting Through COVID-19 and Beyond

Amy Van Arsdale, PhD, Lauren Cruz, BA, & Carly Girnun, BA

Seeking additional resources for complicated attachments and relationships? This presentation is for you!

APA Summer 2021

Division 42 at the APA

The Independent Practitioner proudly welcomes LaKeita Carter, Psy. D. as an Associate Editor. LaKeita has a strong background in writing and publishing. We are glad to have her onboard!


Parent Coordination: Experience From the Trenches From the Office to the Court Room Nancy M. Vrechek, PhD & Leticia Lopes, PsyD

Searching for guideposts to navigate Parent Coordination challenges? Reserve your spot for this discussion!

Exploring Compassion Training as Burnout Inoculation for Healthcare Professionals Bornali Basu, PhD, Erika Rosenberg, PhD, Karen Mott, RN, & Sara Owens Woodard, PhD

Need to recharge and reconnect? Learn here how to cultivate compassion and prevent burnout!

Practice InnovationsCall for Submissions

We are looking for thoughtful articles relevant to clinicians in practice.

For more information contact:

Jeff Zimmerman, PhD, ABPP Editor [email protected]

My name is Krystal and I am a cisgen-der woman and my pronouns are

she/they. How would you answer this question if you were asked? Would you know how to engage a client who has questions about their gender identity? In this article I will provide an overview of gender identity and various terms relating to gender/gender identity and will briefly discuss tips for how you can become a more affirming therapist.

Each child born in the U.S. is assigned a sex at birth based on whether their genitalia align with male or female bodies (West & Zimmer-man, 2009); the parlance for this is assigned female at birth (AFAB) or assigned male at birth (AMAB; New York Presbyterian Hospital). It is important to note that babies who are born with genitalia that are not clearly male or fe-male (e.g., intersex individuals) have historical-ly been assigned either male or female at birth and have been subjected to surgeries in infancy and/or early childhood to make their genitalia conform to what is typical for either male or female bodies. There are intersex activists, such as those in the Intersex Justice Project and In-terAct, who want such surgeries to end and ad-vocate for intersex-affirming medical education and care and mental health support. For the past several years I have been following a few intersex activists on social media (e.g., @sai-faemerges and @pidgeon on Instagram). They have shared their own and others’ stories of some of the long-term physical and psycholog-ical effects of surgeries and other interventions performed prior to being able to consent to them (e.g., painful surgeries in childhood, mise-ducation and misunderstanding about one’s gender and body, lifelong hormone treatment, and inadequate medical care). Medical, legal, and human rights organizations are increasing-

ly drawing atten-tion to the need for intersex-affirming treatments and care (Ejiogu, 2020; InterAct & Lambda Legal).

Sex differs from gender in that gender is socially constructed. West and Zimmerman (2009) discuss the idea of “doing gender” and state, “Gender means creating dif-ferences between girls and boys, women and men, differences that are neither natural nor essential or even biological. Once the differences have been produced, they are mobilized in return to promote the “naturalness” of the genre.” In their view, societies decide which behaviors, roles and physical characteristics are assigned to each sex and individuals are encouraged and expected to conform to them. Some individuals find that the sex they were assigned at birth aligns with the gender constructs assigned to that sex and these folks are referred to as cisgender (or cis). Others find that the sex they were assigned at birth is incongruent with their gender identity and identify as transgender (or trans). And then there are others who do not identify with the gender binary at all and identify as nonbinary (or enby). Additionally, under the nonbinary umbrella, there are individuals who do not identify with a gender at all (agender), those who identify with both genders (bigender, or “two spirit” in Native American culture), and people who identify with multiple genders (pangender). Genderqueer (or gender queer) and gender non-conforming are terms that de-scribe anyone whose gender falls outside of the gender binary (National LGBTQ Health Educa-

Focus on Diversity

Gender Identity: A PrimerKrystal Stanley


tional Center).

Pronouns are the way that we refer to individ-uals when we are not using their name. We generally associate he/him/his with individ-uals who are AMAB or who identify as male/masculine and she/her/hers with individuals who are AFAB or who identify as female/fem-inine. Individuals who identify as nonbinary may elect to use they/them/theirs, ze/zir/zirs, or ze/hir/hirs (New York City Department of Social Services). You also may find that some individuals, such as myself, use multiple sets of pronouns interchangeably. One important final note regarding gender and gender identity: you cannot make assumptions about an individu-al’s sexual orientation based on their gender or gender identity.

So, where can you start to become a more af-firming therapist? There are a few simple ways that you can begin to make your practice more gender inclusive: (1) A few years ago, I updated the intake paperwork for my practice to include a blank space where clients can self-identify their gender and specify their preferred pro-nouns. Of note, since I updated my paperwork, the phrasing “preferred pronouns” has been updated to simply “pronouns”. (2) Addition-ally, office staff (e.g., receptionists, billers, and schedulers) can be instructed to avoid using gendered greetings (e.g., “yes, sir or ma’am) and instead opt for gender-neutral language (e.g., “Hi there”) or use a general greeting (e.g., “Good

morning”, “How are you today?”; Goldhammer et al, 2018). In sum, the overall goal is to create an ever safer and more affirming space for cur-rent and potential clients.

ReferencesEjiogu, N. (2020). Conscientious Objection, Intersex Sur-

geries, and a Call for Perioperative Justice. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 131(5), 1626-1628.

Goldhammer, H., Malina, S. & Keuroghlian, A. S. (2018). Communicating With Patients Who Have Nonbinary Gender Identities. Annals of Family Medicine, 16(6), 559-562.

InterAct & Lambda Legal. Intersex-affirming hospital policies: providing ethical and compassional health care to intersex patients. https://www.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publications/downloads/resource_20180731_hospital-policies-intersex.pdf. Accessed on May 17, 2021.

National LGBTQ Health Educational Center. Providing Affirmative Care for Patients with Non-binary Gender Identity. https://www.lgbtqiahealtheducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Providing-Affirma-tive-Care-for-People-with-Non-Binary-Gender-Identi-ties.pdf. Accessed on May 17, 2021

New York City Department of Social Services. Gender Pro-nouns: How to Take Important Steps in Becoming a TGNC Ally! https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hra/down-loads/pdf/services/lgbtqi/Gender%20Pronouns%20final%20draft%2010.23.17.pdf. Accessed on May 17, 2021.

New York Presbyterian Hospital. LGBTQ+ Terminology/Vocabulary Primer. https://www.nyp.org/documents/pps/cultural-competency/Understanding%20Dispar-ities%20-%20LGBTQ%20Terminology.pdf. Accessed on May 17, 2021.

West, C. & Zimmerman, D. (2009). Doing Gender. Gender & Society 1(2), 125-151.

Good Books!Read any good books, lately? Was it engaging? Or old wine in a new bottle? Was the book about a new technique? Ground-breaking? A big yawn? We, at the IP, would love to know what you thought about it. Why not write a book review?

For more information, contact Eileen A. Kohutis at [email protected].

Focus on Clinical PracticeLifelong Learning: Maintaining Competence Beyond Formal EducationTori K. Knox-Rice, Hannah E. Wadsworth, & Mona A. Robbins

As early career psychologists attempt to find their footing and establish them-

selves in the profession, all while keeping up with basic job demands, it can be difficult to find time to devote to learning. This can re-sult in establishing an unintended pattern of neglect towards continuing education. Early career psychologists have been found to re-port greater work-related demands which can include fewer opportunities for professional development (Dorociak, Rupert & Zahniser, 2017). The experience of being overwhelmed or unable to maximize professional development can easily transition into the later stages of one’s career as well. Unfortunately, when com-mon avoidance of learning or the perceived lack of time to engage with new material persists, it can lead to feelings of disconnect or heightened imposter syndrome fears (Clance 1985). More importantly, it can greatly affect the ability to maintain competence and continue growing as a professional. This leaves the question: how do we as psychologists maintain lifelong learn-ing and foster professional growth, especially when tasked with so many clinical (and person-al) responsibilities?

Lifelong LearningThe term “lifelong learning” refers to a dedica-tion to learning beyond formal educational set-tings (Laal, Laal & Aliramaei, 2014). In the con-text of psychology, continuing to obtain new knowledge post-formal education is invaluable due to the constant evolution within the clini-cal field. As a profession, we focus on the con-struct of life-long learning and we have incor-porated this principle into our education and training standards. Despite this, practitioners may tend to only rely on knowledge obtained during graduate training, with supplemental

information acquired through workshops or upon review of current literature in the ear-ly years of their career. The act of obtaining continued education units (CEUs) is the most typical and formal method of increasing knowl-edge after the completion of graduate training. Although continued education is mandated within the field, it is important to consider how personal and professional development can and should occur outside of this requirement for years well beyond the “early career pro-fessional.” We must continue to acquire skills and adapt to the ever-changing world/field of psychology, especially in the expansion of tele-health and virtual communication. However, we are mindful that many personal and profes-sional responsibilities create time restraints for psychologists, at all levels, that makes pursuit of this goal more challenging. While it is widely agreed that psychologists need to participate in continuing education, there is very little agree-ment about how one should go about learning the most up-to-date methods and research (Wise et al, 2010).

The Limits of Self-ReflectionCompetence is not a static state of being. Even after degree attainment and licensure, con-tinued competence requires a commitment to self-reflection (Knapp, Gottlieb & Handelsman, 2017). For many, structured self-assessment is only completed at specific intervals, often as a requirement within a system. Trainees across various job types experience routine, objective assessment in order to ensure learning and the development of foundational competencies needed for their roles (e.g., completing a com-petency self-evaluation at the end of a clinical rotation or a 360◦ performance evaluation). This practice serves to stimulate intentional

https://www.lambdalegal.org/sites/default/files/publications/downloads/resource_20180731_hospital-policies-intersex.pdf



https://www.lgbtqiahealtheducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Providing-Affirmative-Care-for-People-with-Non-Binary-Gender-Identities.pdf




https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hra/downloads/pdf/services/lgbtqi/Gender%20Pronouns%20final%20draft%2010.23.17.pdf



https://www.nyp.org/documents/pps/cultural-competency/Understanding%20Disparities%20-%20LGBTQ%20Terminology.pdf



mailto:eileen%40drkohutis.com?subject=


Tori K. Knox-Rice

Mona A. Robbins

reflection of strengths, weaknesses, and how to best cultivate continued growth. With the end of formal education, so goes formal self-assessments. It becomes the psychologist’s respon-sibility to introduce a new form of self-reflecting and skill development.

Despite being well-educated professionals, we are not im-mune to having clinical blind spots. In being human, we are all susceptible to meta-ignorance; not knowing what we don’t know, thereby failing to take action to learn (Dunning, 2011). Unfortunately, people do not always recognize the full scope of their limitations or intellectual shortcomings, which can cause difficulty in assessing clinical weaknesses with the intention to gain more knowledge. The concept of self-assessment and re-flective processes, although crucial skills, can be ineffective at accurately measuring professional competence as people tend to evaluate themselves as being “above average” (Dunning, Heath, & Suls, 2004). Blind spots in self-assessment can result in an individual being unable to recognize their limits or un-derstand how to improve. The importance of utilizing various methods of reflection are key to avoiding instances where we unintentionally overlook or undervalue new and important as-pects to a patient’s care that may not have been emphasized in previous training (e.g., cultural diversity with respect to race, ethnicity or sexual orientation; Meyer & Zane, 2013; Borough, Bedoya, O’Cleirigh & Safren, 2015).

One clear way to assist in uncovering personal blind spots is to introduce an outside perspective. This can be done in a variety of ways, albeit some may feel uncomfortable. In structured hospital and clinic settings, practitioners can request annual or biannual performance reviews from their superiors. If this is not an option or is unhelpful, one could request feedback from consultation groups or peers. Finally, many settings are equipped with surveys and ratings completed by patients (e.g., Press Ganey scores; Mao, Gigliotti & Dupree, 2020). All these options may expose clinical and professional shortcomings; however, incorporating these tools can help generate feedback with an open mind and objective stance while attending to requirements of our field and improvement of ourselves as clinicians.

Opportunities for Professional GrowthWhen considering how to maintain competence, the concept of CEUs is often the first method to be identified. The obtain-ment of CEUs is a well-known requirement for psychologists seeking license renewal. Yet, there is a lack of data supporting the effectiveness of CEUs alone towards enhancing competen-cies. Furthermore, little evidence supports the idea that more CEUs contributes to higher levels of perceived professional competence (Neimeyer, Taylor, Zemansky & Rothke, 2013).

Hannah E. Wadsworth

Therefore, we have to consider additional ave-nues for educational growth.

Let’s admit it…we have all worked diligently to achieve what we wanted from our profession. Now that we have reached the light at the end of the tunnel, many of us are structuring our days to stay afloat in our new, unsupervised environment: having a daily schedule, seeing clients, being a fully functioning psychologist, and trying to include moments for self-care. In the midst of these day-to-day responsibili-ties, we may fall into a routine, which helps us become more efficient but may also makes us prone to losing ability and motivation to make space in our day for other important profes-sional development activities, such as contin-ued learning.

Informal Education Strategies & TipsConsider that learning comes in numerous forms. Formal, informal, day-to-day, struc-tured, unstructured, and personal edification can all be an important part of this process. Meaning, there are many experiences that psy-chologists can learn from that may not qualify for CE credit. Such experiences may include consulting with colleagues, presenting case conferences of conceptually challenging pa-tients, and informal discussions about other’s experiences and/or observations. These sorts of learning opportunities are important to pro-fessional development and can be sought out by clinicians within and outside of “academic” settings. These experiences could include con-sultation groups or journal clubs, both of which have become more accessible with increased reliance on virtual meetings (Laura, Clayton, Jeremy & Kate, 2020). More formalized means such as didactic series offered by professional organizations (local and national), universities, and professional conferences are also great sources of educational material.

We propose the following as additional informal strategies and tools that can be used to build on the pre-existing foundation of competence.

• Know your limitations – Recognize that you cannot be knowledgeable about all subjects, or even have enough time to learn every-

thing about any one subject. It is often more helpful and realistic to accept that you possess a set of foundational skills that you work to update over time that can be sup-plemented by updates in the field.

• Read – Perhaps this comes as an obvious suggestion, but sometimes it can feel like a chore to pick up a research article after graduate education. Think of how to get the most bang for your buck. Find a topic that genuinely interests you, perhaps a narrow subject that aligns with some aspect of clinical care that you considered learning in the past. Another consideration could be to pick a subject area where you have a gap of knowledge in your own practice. Consider discovering a newer intervention, or review updated data on a well-used protocol. Read-ing even just a few times per week can put you well on your way towards becoming a lifelong learner!

• Create structure – We all had to be more organized in graduate school, so dust off some of those skills to maximize your time and efficiency: 1) Keep a calendar to track current, future, and pending tasking, 2) allow more time for tasks than you think you need…deadlines sneak up faster than we expect, 3) include extra “quick” tasks that can be completed in case another project is finished faster than you initially planned, 4) set manageable goals that can be reasonably completed, and lastly 5) acknowledge when you have successfully completed your goals. Giving yourself credit for a job well done feels good no matter what stage of development.

• Think outside of the box – You don’t need to obtain knowledge in a way that seems “clas-sic”. Think of other ways to continue the learning process and be inventive with how you may now need to learn, understand, and store new information. Also, utilize the technology at your fingertips. Maybe you choose to follow important writers on social media; this could serve as a backdoor portal to new information and networking.

• Seek discomfort and learn to be okay with not being okay - Choose clinical training formats that help you focus on your clinical weak-

20 Summer 2021 Independent Practitioner

nesses, skill deficits, and blind spots. Pursue consultation when you get stuck and iden-tify designated persons you can rely on to discuss various aspects of your professional identity.

• Set Alerts – try setting citation alerts (e.g., Google scholar, keywords). Use technology to also keep track of updates and the newest information on a given topic. These plat-forms allow automatic recognition of specif-ic keywords, citations, or topics that can later be added to your reading or reference lists.

Closing ThoughtsFor psychologists who feel they have limited time to devote to both formal and informal methods, we suggest simply starting some-where. This strategy is akin to behavioral activation, where if one sets small, achievable goals, the internal reinforcement of accom-plishment and a positive learning experience will help drive continued attempts to make time for learning (Kanter et al, 2010). The goal is to eventually create a “habit” of lifelong learning. Most importantly, we encourage you to stop waiting for the “right time.” Started by setting manageable goals and making mindful decisions to not overcommit yourself, but give yourself permission to start small and build up to a more formalized means of learning that works for you.

ReferencesBoroughs, M. S., Andres Bedoya, C., O’Cleirigh, C., & Sa-

fren, S. A. (2015). Toward Defining, Measuring, and Evaluating LGBT Cultural Competence for Psycholo-gists. Clinical psychology : a publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association, 22(2), 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12098

Clance, P.R. (1985). The impostor phenomenon: Overcom-ing the fear that haunts your success (p. 25). Atlanta: Peachtree Publishers.

Dorociak, K. E., Rupert, P. A., & Zahniser, E. (2017). Work life, well-being, and self-care across the professional lifespan of psychologists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 48(6), 429.

Dunning, D. (2011). The Dunning–Kruger effect: On be-ing ignorant of one’s own ignorance. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 44, pp. 247-296). Academic Press.

Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-as-sessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological science in the public interest,

5(3), 69-106.Kanter, J. W., Manos, R. C., Bowe, W. M., Baruch, D. E.,

Busch, A. M., & Rusch, L. C. (2010). What is behavioral activation?: A review of the empirical literature. Clini-cal psychology review, 30(6), 608-620.

Knapp, S., Gottlieb, M. C., & Handelsman, M. M. (2017). En-hancing professionalism through self-reflection. Pro-fessional Psychology: Research and Practice, 48(3), 167.

Laal, M., Laal, A., & Aliramaei, A. (2014). Continuing edu-cation; lifelong learning. Procedia-social and behavior-al sciences, 116, 4052-4056.

Laura, L., Clayton, O., Jeremy, S., & Kate, S. (2020). How COVID-19 Has Pushed Companies over the Technology Tipping Point and Transformed Business Forever. McK-insey & Company, 5.

Mao, G., Gigliotti, M. J., & Dupre, D. (2020). The use of hospital consumer assessment of healthcare services and the Press Ganey medical practice surveys in guid-ing surgical patient care practices. Surgical neurology international, 11, 192. https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_29_2020

Meyer, O. L., & Zane, N. (2013). The influence of race and ethnicity in clients’ experiences of mental health treatment. Journal of community psychology, 41(7), 884–901. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.21580

Neimeyer, G. J., Taylor, J. M., & Cox, D. R. (2012). On hope and possibility: Does continuing professional devel-opment contribute to ongoing professional compe-tence?. Professional psychology: research and practice, 43(5), 476.

Neimeyer, G. J., Taylor, J. M., Zemansky, M., & Rothke, S. E. (2013). Do mandates matter? The impact of continu-ing education mandates on participation in continu-ing professional development activities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 44(2), 105.

Taylor, J. M., & Neimeyer, G. J. (2017). The ongoing evolu-tion of continuing education: Past, present, and future. In T. Rousmaniere, R. K. Goodyear, S. D. Miller, & B. E. Wampold (Eds.), The cycle of excellence: Using delib-erate practice to improve supervision and training (p. 219–248).

Wise, E. H., Sturm, C. A., Nutt, R. L., Rodolfa, E., Schaffer, J. B., & Webb, C. (2010). Life-long learning for psychol-ogists: Current status and a vision for the future. Pro-fessional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41(4), 288.

Tori Knox-Rice, PhD, is a Psychologist in the Colora-do Blood Cancer Institute at Presbyterian/St. Luke’s Medical Center. Hannah Wadsworth, PhD, is a Clinical Assistant Professor at the University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine. Mona Robbins, PhD, is an Assistant Professor and Psychologist in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

New Member Resource Area on Division website

Do you have a favorite Form, or practice Template that you would like to share with your colleagues. How about an online resource that you frequently utilize?

You are invited to contribute forms, templates and other documents to share with colleagues, and to download documents that others have contributed.

You are also invited to submit annotated links of books, movies, TV series and other media that you have found helpful in your work, or that you have enjoyed in your leisure time.

If you would like to share a resource or take advantage of what others have shared, log in to the Division website and go to the Member Resource page under the Resources tab.

Disclaimer: The resources and links below are provided by individual members of Division 42. They are not produced or endorsed by Division 42 or by APA. To ensure compliance with the laws and ethics in your jurisdiction, you are advised to consult with your own attorney and/or insurance risk manager prior to adopting them for your practice.

independent practitioner

Documents