Master's Level Clinicians who Transitioned To Doctorate Level

[feelings]

Hi all,
Long so main questions are bolded.

I've seen a couple of short threads on master's level clinicians going back for a PhD or Psy.D later, but I'm really interested to learn more about this path, as a soon-to-be MSW graduate. While I enjoy the flexibility of the SW field, I am much more attached to clinical work than I thought I would be, and I'm (justifiably) wary of the quality of my education and training in a master's level program. Even with the additional trainings and fellowships I'm looking at post-graduation, and will work toward independent clinical licensure, I think I might reach a point where I need more depth, skill, and knowledge in clinical interactions with clients.

For those of you who were once master's level licensed clinicians and went back for a doctorate (preferably a clinical psych PhD or Psy.D), I'm interested in hearing more about your experience with that pathway. Would you recommend it to others? Do you maintain licensure for both degrees, if different disciplines & licensing bodies? Was it worth the opportunity cost for you?

I know this is not the most optimal path to take, but is there any upside at all to taking this path? I'm not necessarily married to this path for my future, I may explore the idea of branching out into less clinical areas- Human Resources and management, clinical director positions, or even healthcare administration/working towards a decent MBA program if it feels like the right move. I would be just as happy taking my existing clinical skills and knowledge (at time of independent licensure of course) to another field or to consulting, working on a new model for mental healthcare or improved DEI training in the workplace, things like that.

Between breadth of knowledge/application across fields & disciplines and depth of knowledge in clinical mental health, I think I could be satisfied pursuing either path. What is your opinion on these two (broad) career paths, either pursuing additional depth of knowledge, or amassing skills & experience across a breadth of disciplines and being able to bring clinical knowledge to different fields such as healthcare administration and Human Resources, etc?

Grateful for any input or opinions on this! Thank you.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PikminOC]

Lots of people do this. Esp at for profit psychology schools. If your application is weak they have you do the masters first. More money for them too.

 

[feelings]

Lots of people do this. Esp at for profit psychology schools. If your application is weak they have you do the masters first. More money for them too.

This answered exactly 0 of my questions, lol, but thanks

 

[PsyDr]

1) Many doctoral programs have rules about MA level licensure, due to concerns about who is licensed during supervised training. This is a program by program basis.

2) I would HIGHLY recommend against masters of healthcare administration. I have seen numerous unsolicited employment applications with this degree. All of them have a completely online education, from bachelors to masters.

 

[feelings]

1) Many doctoral programs have rules about MA level licensure, due to concerns about who is licensed during supervised training. This is a program by program basis.

2) I would HIGHLY recommend against masters of healthcare administration. I have seen numerous unsolicited employment applications with this degree. All of them have a completely online education, from bachelors to masters.

Thank you!
I would definitely be looking into those rules should I pursue further.

I've heard similar about the MHA which is why I decided against it after looking into it briefly. It seems like it doesn't have a great ROI, either. While think I would enjoy the degree, I'm going to be much more strategic about any additional education I pursue, and a decently-ranked MBA would just be much more impactful as far as master's degrees go.

 

[Cantab109]

I did this path- and I would not recommend it to most people. Unless you want to get your doctorate because there is a specific thing you want to do that requires it or requires additional training that you cannot get otherwise (research, assessment, etc), it is a waste of time and money. If you want to do clinical or administrative work, then do not do it. I made more money with my masters than my friends with doctorates are making now as they enter the field for general clinical work (of course, there is more room for growth and supervisory roles with a doctorate, etc, but with a masters you do not have the same level of debt generally, and do not have those 5-7 years of lost income). So for what you want to do, I cannot imagine that is worth the lost income and cost (if you don't get into a fully funded program), and I cannot imagine you would need that additional training.

 

[foreverbull]

I can’t speak to being dual licensed, but I got my master’s degree in counseling and then went straight into a doctoral PhD psychology program in another city/state. I had planned it that way, though. I realized I needed more training and wanted the option to teach early in my graduate education so I just kept going.

A word of advice: HR and other fields may use counseling/therapy soft skills, but are so specialized now that you must have the requisite experience and education to get into them or you are locked out forever unless you know someone who can get you in the door directly. I say this as someone who has “looked outside of the box” at many different jobs that emphasize soft skills and/or other skips I have from my lengthy training with my doctoral degree (and have emphasized how my skills tie in in cover letters), but have seen my applications get ignored or just flat out told that my experiences don’t match up with what they want at times. Heck, it’s challenging to get into the door sometimes at jobs that hire psychologists, but doing slightly different tasks than just clinical work all day.

Point being, you will want to take some time to really nail down which path you want because many doors are closing fast due to the increasing specialization in jobs.

Another point is that it would be tricky to practice with your master’s license unless you had a VERY flexible part-time job while in grad school because you’ll be doing 16-20 clinical hours that are supervised already per week in a doctoral program on top of classes and research and assistantships. There won’t be a lot of time to see clients for money under your master’s license. But some folks have done it in here, so hopefully they’ll weigh in.

 

[Sanman]

IMO, getting a PhD or PsyD is a poor investment of time and money. You are largely working for years to get a largely redundant license if you want to be a therapist. Your time and money are better spent getting licensed, figuring out what you enjoy, and getting better training/experience in that area. You don't need a masters in HCA to be a clinical director.

So, what exactly do you want to do?

 

[feelings]

I did this path- and I would not recommend it to most people. Unless you want to get your doctorate because there is a specific thing you want to do that requires it or requires additional training that you cannot get otherwise (research, assessment, etc), it is a waste of time and money. If you want to do clinical or administrative work, then do not do it. I made more money with my masters than my friends with doctorates are making now as they enter the field for general clinical work (of course, there is more room for growth and supervisory roles with a doctorate, etc, but with a masters you do not have the same level of debt generally, and do not have those 5-7 years of lost income). So for what you want to do, I cannot imagine that is worth the lost income and cost (if you don't get into a fully funded program), and I cannot imagine you would need that additional training.

Thank you for your input. As much as I think I would like to pursue clinical training and engage in research at a doctoral level, I agree that it's probably not worth it without a compelling reason I need the doctorate over my master's licensure. I don't regret taking the path I did, but I do feel bummed knowing that completing a doctorate would have been challenging, stimulating, and rewarding in ways that my master's degree simply isn't. But I know there are plenty of other opportunities to challenge myself in this field, and to push myself to get the training I need to provide excellent care.

 

[feelings]

I can’t speak to being dual licensed, but I got my master’s degree in counseling and then went straight into a doctoral PhD psychology program in another city/state. I had planned it that way, though. I realized I needed more training and wanted the option to teach early in my graduate education so I just kept going.

A word of advice: HR and other fields may use counseling/therapy soft skills, but are so specialized now that you must have the requisite experience and education to get into them or you are locked out forever unless you know someone who can get you in the door directly. I say this as someone who has “looked outside of the box” at many different jobs that emphasize soft skills and/or other skips I have from my lengthy training with my doctoral degree (and have emphasized how my skills tie in in cover letters), but have seen my applications get ignored or just flat out told that my experiences don’t match up with what they want at times. Heck, it’s challenging to get into the door sometimes at jobs that hire psychologists, but doing slightly different tasks than just clinical work all day.

Point being, you will want to take some time to really nail down which path you want because many doors are closing fast due to the increasing specialization in jobs.

Another point is that it would be tricky to practice with your master’s license unless you had a VERY flexible part-time job while in grad school because you’ll be doing 16-20 clinical hours that are supervised already per week in a doctoral program on top of classes and research and assistantships. There won’t be a lot of time to see clients for money under your master’s license. But some folks have done it in here, so hopefully they’ll weigh in.

Thank you for your thoughtful response! I remember you mentioning trying to break into other fields in another thread, actually. Interesting trend re: fields that are becoming more and more specialized and restricted from the "outside". Professionalization is good in some ways- standardizing a field and requiring more training- but as it's happening in more and more disciplines, it's kind of depressing to think it can restrict movement across fields like it did for you. I've also heard this about HR. I would be interested to hear from you which "soft skills" fields you had a better experience with, but maybe that's not appropriate for the thread topic.

 

[feelings]

IMO, getting a PhD or PsyD is a poor investment of time and money. You are largely working for years to get a largely redundant license if you want to be a therapist. Your time and money are better spent getting licensed, figuring out what you enjoy, and getting better training/experience in that area. You don't need a masters in HCA to be a clinical director.

So, what exactly do you want to do?

This is definitely the message I'm getting and I largely agree. I think it can be hard to ignore the folks on SDN who look down on master's level clinicians as a whole compared to psychologists, and generalize that we're less competent (as psychotherapists) or not capable of handling anything "complex". I know the kind of person and clinician I am, and I know that I'm going to work hard to get all the training and education I need beyond my MSW- heck, I have a whole folder I'm already collecting of training institutes and clinical "fellowships" for after I graduate. Seems like those voices on here don't care much what kind of training you have- if you don't have Psy.D or PhD behind your name, you're simply lesser than and the inferior option for any and every client, end of story.

And that is a great question and something I really need to figure out before I go much further. My initial questions are for years and years from now, btw- I would never jump into something as serious as a doctorate without being sure I was ready to commit and that it made sense for me!

 

[Sanman]

This is definitely the message I'm getting and I largely agree. I think it can be hard to ignore the folks on SDN who look down on master's level clinicians as a whole compared to psychologists, and generalize that we're less competent (as psychotherapists) or not capable of handling anything "complex". I know the kind of person and clinician I am, and I know that I'm going to work hard to get all the training and education I need beyond my MSW- heck, I have a whole folder I'm already collecting of training institutes and clinical "fellowships" for after I graduate. Seems like those voices on here don't care much what kind of training you have- if you don't have Psy.D or PhD behind your name, you're simply lesser than and the inferior option for any and every client, end of story.

And that is a great question and something I really need to figure out before I go much further. My initial questions are for years and years from now, btw- I would never jump into something as serious as a doctorate without being sure I was ready to commit and that it made sense for me!

If you were straight out of undergrad the question is how do I get the most comprehensive training, the answer might be PhD or PsyD. As it is, there are more w-2 jobs for MSWs than PhD/PsyDs doing psychotherapy. You also aren't going to get 200k more in value out of a second degree or another 10 years of not earning money back. Handing complex patients is more about training and experience than anything else. Plenty of MSWs working in suicide prevention and other complex areas. If all you want to do is therapy, you have the correct degree IMO.

 

[feelings]

If you were straight out of undergrad the question is how do I get the most comprehensive training, the answer might be PhD or PsyD. As it is, there are more w-2 jobs for MSWs than PhD/PsyDs doing psychotherapy. You also aren't going to get 200k more in value out of a second degree or another 10 years of not earning money back. Handing complex patients is more about training and experience than anything else. Plenty of MSWs working in suicide prevention and other complex areas. If all you want to do is therapy, you have the correct degree IMO.

Thank you for that perspective. As it is, it took me some time to choose the MSW path for myself, so at this point I would really like to be done with formal schooling and get started in the field, working on additional certification & training, and getting some more work experience. I know you're right about the clinical social workers who trained and specialized well and are able to do the kinds of thing they want to be doing. It's good to hear a reminder of that!

 

[BuckeyeLove]

There were a handful of people at my program who had been previously licensed and practicing at the masters level. Most had to start at square one, but there were a few that were able to come in and do a 3 plus one kind of thing if they could show they met certain requirements and if their research mentor was cool with it. True story though, i swear with each of them it kind of hampered them in terms of their own confirmation bias. They all came in kind of thinking they knew it all since they had been practicing already. And this ran the gamut in terms of theoretical orientation. Honestly, most of them did i think solely to have the doctor title and then go back into practice, as many told me they felt disrespected by other counselors and social workers above them in administrative positions at prior jobs. Some of them also had family money, so it wasn't really a big thing for them to keep wasting time.

 

[PsyDr]

This is definitely the message I'm getting and I largely agree. I think it can be hard to ignore the folks on SDN who look down on master's level clinicians as a whole compared to psychologists, and generalize that we're less competent (as psychotherapists) or not capable of handling anything "complex". I know the kind of person and clinician I am, and I know that I'm going to work hard to get all the training and education I need beyond my MSW- heck, I have a whole folder I'm already collecting of training institutes and clinical "fellowships" for after I graduate. Seems like those voices on here don't care much what kind of training you have- if you don't have Psy.D or PhD behind your name, you're simply lesser than and the inferior option for any and every client, end of story.

And that is a great question and something I really need to figure out before I go much further. My initial questions are for years and years from now, btw- I would never jump into something as serious as a doctorate without being sure I was ready to commit and that it made sense for me!

1) I don’t think I look down on masters level people. I look down on masters level people who step outside their areas of competence and avoid engagement in the evidence base. I think some of that is the difference between what you are legally ALLOWED to do, and what you SHOULD do based on training.

All physicians are legally allowed to perform surgery, but only those trained in that domain should perform surgery.

2) Usually, it’s easier to imagine your ideal work day and then work backwards from there. It’s also a good idea to talk to active professionals about the bad parts of that job.

 

[Justanothergrad]

I'm going to steal PsyDr's style, because its too early to be original

1. Yes, I was licensed and worked for a few years as a MA level clinician. Recommend it prior to going to graduate school? No. It's fine if thats the path you end up on, but I wouldn't set out planning for it. The clinical work doesn't make you more competitive for graduate school. I was fortunate and used it to pay for my continued research work, which is what they care about

2. No, I wouldn't keep two licenses at different levels. There is no benefit to the lower license, and just increases cost/etc. Its akin to asking if its worth framing your high school transcript to put beside your graduate degree. No one cares. You bill for more at a PhD level and there are more job openings for you, so why would you ever want the lower license/training to represent you?

3. Programs will often not accept much of the graduate degree as transfer. There are a variety of reasons for this, many of them very legit (I say this as a person who primarily recruits MA/MS level students for assessment research - I simply find their motivation and drive to be better for that area, and their research ideas are more formed). Included in the reasons are (1) different supervision of practicum hours by a level of supervisor that isn't sufficient (i.e., not doctoral); however, if sufficient, many may allow you to transfer experiences to APPI for internship but it wont change your program course, (2) your courses may or may not cover the same depth / breadth. There are also issues with courses making and an expectation that if you are going to have a degree from Whatever University, that you should have been trained and taken the courses at Whatever University

4. I dont think people on SDN look down on MA. Like PsyDR said, the issue is largely one of competence and bounds of competence not being observed. This is fairly rampant, particularly in certain masters program types where 'I wasn't trained on it' means 'anything I think must work'.

5. You are asking about entirely different job types (i.e., psychologist and HR personnel).

 

[Peacemaker36]

People on SDN do not speak for the field of psychology.

 

[PikminOC]

I think the training is very important. You don't know what you don't know

 

[foreverbull]

Thank you for your thoughtful response! I remember you mentioning trying to break into other fields in another thread, actually. Interesting trend re: fields that are becoming more and more specialized and restricted from the "outside". Professionalization is good in some ways- standardizing a field and requiring more training- but as it's happening in more and more disciplines, it's kind of depressing to think it can restrict movement across fields like it did for you. I've also heard this about HR. I would be interested to hear from you which "soft skills" fields you had a better experience with, but maybe that's not appropriate for the thread topic.

Ask me in five years! I haven’t crossed over into another field—it’s not easy to do. I own a private practice and started to offer nonclinical services, but I have a small child and a special needs pet as of this year and don’t have the time to invest in marketing at present, so clinical services it is for the time being.

 

[smalltownpsych]

This is definitely the message I'm getting and I largely agree. I think it can be hard to ignore the folks on SDN who look down on master's level clinicians as a whole compared to psychologists, and generalize that we're less competent (as psychotherapists) or not capable of handling anything "complex". I know the kind of person and clinician I am, and I know that I'm going to work hard to get all the training and education I need beyond my MSW- heck, I have a whole folder I'm already collecting of training institutes and clinical "fellowships" for after I graduate. Seems like those voices on here don't care much what kind of training you have- if you don't have Psy.D or PhD behind your name, you're simply lesser than and the inferior option for any and every client, end of story.

And that is a great question and something I really need to figure out before I go much further. My initial questions are for years and years from now, btw- I would never jump into something as serious as a doctorate without being sure I was ready to commit and that it made sense for me!

I only look down on them because I am better than they are.
Seriously though, it annoys me when someone says something like this. Psychologists have more extensive training and education and that means something. Does it mean that every psychologist is a "better" clinician than every master's level clinician? Obviously not. Actually parsing this type of question is part of our wheelhouse as being trained to do research. We do tend to be better at that part, but again I know an MA school counselor who had more research experience than I did. Its all about understanding overlapping distributions.
I have hired psychologists, LPCs, LCSWs, and MFTs and all of them bring different experiences and perspectives to the table. Some of the variation is personal and some of it is related to the path chosen.
Ultimately, I prefer psychologists and think they are the best choice overall for a number of reasons including my own bias, but most of the time I have been unable to hire them because they are more expensive and harder to find. It doesn't mean that I think that the other therapists are "inferior".

 

[feelings]

There were a handful of people at my program who had been previously licensed and practicing at the masters level. Most had to start at square one, but there were a few that were able to come in and do a 3 plus one kind of thing if they could show they met certain requirements and if their research mentor was cool with it. True story though, i swear with each of them it kind of hampered them in terms of their own confirmation bias. They all came in kind of thinking they knew it all since they had been practicing already. And this ran the gamut in terms of theoretical orientation. Honestly, most of them did i think solely to have the doctor title and then go back into practice, as many told me they felt disrespected by other counselors and social workers above them in administrative positions at prior jobs. Some of them also had family money, so it wasn't really a big thing for them to keep wasting time.

Thank you for the interesting info!

 

[feelings]

I only look down on them because I am better than they are.
Seriously though, it annoys me when someone says something like this. Psychologists have more extensive training and education and that means something. Does it mean that every psychologist is a "better" clinician than every master's level clinician? Obviously not. Actually parsing this type of question is part of our wheelhouse as being trained to do research. We do tend to be better at that part, but again I know an MA school counselor who had more research experience than I did. Its all about understanding overlapping distributions.
I have hired psychologists, LPCs, LCSWs, and MFTs and all of them bring different experiences and perspectives to the table. Some of the variation is personal and some of it is related to the path chosen.
Ultimately, I prefer psychologists and think they are the best choice overall for a number of reasons including my own bias, but most of the time I have been unable to hire them because they are more expensive and harder to find. It doesn't mean that I think that the other therapists are "inferior".

lol! No, nothing against acknowledging the more extensive education and deeper & expanded skillset that psychologists have. Not everyone wants to (or is able to) attain knowledge on that level. As I'm sure you know, projections show that across all levels of education & licensure, we will see major shortages of psychotherapists continue in the next few decades, and the need will be stronger than it is now. Master's level clinicians have their own role to play just like psychologists do, and it's great to see them working as a team in different settings and practices where everyone respects one another's scope of practice

 

[feelings]

Ask me in five years! I haven’t crossed over into another field—it’s not easy to do. I own a private practice and started to offer nonclinical services, but I have a small child and a special needs pet as of this year and don’t have the time to invest in marketing at present, so clinical services it is for the time being.

That makes sense. I hope when/if that transition comes for you, it is relatively smooth and successful. I love hearing about the changes people go through in life, especially in careers, so thanks for sharing!

 

[feelings]

I think the training is very important. You don't know what you don't know

Completely agree. While I'm unsure now about whether I'll ultimately go back to school and earn a doctorate in psychology, I plan without a doubt to continue education and training post-graduation. I see our education at this level as more of a foundation, and then it's our responsibility to actually gain the specific therapeutic skillset we need. I also love learning and I hope I'm able to keep training and learning new things throughout my life

 

[feelings]

People on SDN do not speak for the field of psychology.

In what sense do you mean this, specifically? I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I think an issue with this can be potentialy having to unlearn bad habits or practices clinically. For example, having fallen into psuedo-science-y stuff like EMDR, qEEEG, etc, as a master's-level clinician and having to confront that what you were doing, while well-intentioned, might not have been the best idea.

 

[feelings]

I think an issue with this can be potentialy having to unlearn bad habits or practices clinically. For example, having fallen into psuedo-science-y stuff like EMDR, qEEEG, etc, as a master's-level clinician and having to confront that what you were doing, while well-intentioned, might not have been the best idea.

Hmm, interesting. I do feel that my faculty has done a pretty good job of sticking to evidence-based treatments. I'm actually in a placement where I'm directly supervised by a lot of PhD psychologists who are doing a great job of educating and instructing. But I can see what you mean.

I happen to be pretty research-oriented and was originally in a STEM field before switching to social work, but I know most of my peers don't think like I do or have similar strengths, and I think many will be susceptible to those less evidence-based practices.

 

[Pragma]

Hmm, interesting. I do feel that my faculty has done a pretty good job of sticking to evidence-based treatments. I'm actually in a placement where I'm directly supervised by a lot of PhD psychologists who are doing a great job of educating and instructing. But I can see what you mean.

I happen to be pretty research-oriented and was originally in a STEM field before switching to social work, but I know most of my peers don't think like I do or have similar strengths, and I think many will be susceptible to those less evidence-based practices.

That’s ultimately the rub. I view my master’s level colleagues as experts in what they do. It is when they reach problematically that I become concerned - just as I do with doctoral providers that reach problematically.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Hmm, interesting. I do feel that my faculty has done a pretty good job of sticking to evidence-based treatments. I'm actually in a placement where I'm directly supervised by a lot of PhD psychologists who are doing a great job of educating and instructing. But I can see what you mean.

I happen to be pretty research-oriented and was originally in a STEM field before switching to social work, but I know most of my peers don't think like I do or have similar strengths, and I think many will be susceptible to those less evidence-based practices.

As someone who supervises a lot of masters-level students, I think most of us really do try to emphasize EBPs when we teach. It’s just that there’s only so much content you can cram into two years, and so some students graduate and pick up poor practices via FB groups, bad CEUs, etc. Of course, this can happen to doctoral-level practitioners too, but I think the longer training and greater emphasis on research can act as somewhat of a deterrent against falling in these traps. Again, neither is exclusive to either group.

 

[Pragma]

As someone who supervises a lot of masters-level students, I think most of us really do try to emphasize EBPs when we teach. It’s just that there’s only so much content you can cram into two years, and so some students graduate and pick up poor practices via FB groups, bad CEUs, etc. Of course, this can happen to doctoral-level practitioners too, but I think the longer training and greater emphasis on research can act as somewhat of a deterrent against falling in these traps. Again, neither is exclusive to either group.

Yep! I used to teach more than I do now but I always would use some Lilienfeld and talk about iatrogenic effects of poor intervention strategies regardless of whether I was teaching doctoral or masters students. There is a lot of bad therapy out there and the financial model doesn’t help.

 

[feelings]

That’s ultimately the rub. I view my master’s level colleagues as experts in what they do. It is when they reach problematically that I become concerned - just as I do with doctoral providers that reach problematically.

As someone who supervises a lot of masters-level students, I think most of us really do try to emphasize EBPs when we teach. It’s just that there’s only so much content you can cram into two years, and so some students graduate and pick up poor practices via FB groups, bad CEUs, etc. Of course, this can happen to doctoral-level practitioners too, but I think the longer training and greater emphasis on research can act as somewhat of a deterrent against falling in these traps. Again, neither is exclusive to either group.

These responses were both really helpful for me, I feel like I *get* it now in a way I didn't before. I see how all practitioners at all levels need to be mindful of their scope, and whether they're practicing safely or going beyond that. The picture is bigger than just master's-level clinicians, though there may be issues unique to this group, and the same rules apply everyone, essentially. So so helpful for me to see it that way.

Thank you again for taking the time to respond to me! This is my first post here and I am so grateful you've all gone out of your way to help me with my questions. In real life, I always offer to compensate people if I want to chat with them for some professional guidance.

 

[summerbabe]

Lots of great info. I'll add a couple of thoughts I don't think I saw in the above:

- If you want to be a great therapist, I would advocate for figuring out a specialty area (OCD, DBT, PTSD, etc) and pursuing advanced trainings that includes thorough follow-up clinical consultation with experts in that subfield. For people who prioritize this goal and put in the work, I generally don't see significant differences via degree type.

- Where I think a PhD/PsyD is of benefit is being more ready to work in a greater variety of clinical contexts competently since they've likely gained a greater quantity of training in more settings alongside the additional focus on assessment than LCSW/LPC/MFTs. Outside of full neuro assessments, I feel confident that I can probably be plugged into any role at my VA and I can likely avoid harming patients while doing reasonably competent work. But how important is that skill really given most of us work in defined roles and can gain specific training to further enhance our abilities within that scope?

- A PhD/PsyD program will assume that every new student has zero therapy and assessment skills whatsoever and start from the ground up. Unless you're in a program that emphasizes a specialty and also has built-in resources to provide advanced training in that area (think UW Clinical Psych continuing to build upon the DBT roots that Linehan established), you'll primarily be working on generalist skills. So it's quite possible that if your therapy skills growth would be more gradual than drastic if you were to enter a PhD/PsyD program (as opposed to diagnostic/assessment skills).

- Since keeping the doors open for future opportunities outside of clinical practice like HR sounds important to you right now, that wouldn't necessarily align with pursuing a PhD/PsyD given the time/costs involved. You might also be seen as both over-qualified via degree and under-qualified via experience for some of these roles with a doctorate.

- As for management roles within a clinical setting, there are tons of LCSWs in admin roles all around the country. Even in the VA system where I work, I know of multiple LCSWs who hold the highest position in their facility's entire mental health service line (Associate Chief of Staff of Mental Health) where PhDs and MDs also being eligible for consideration (now whether it's worth the hassle is a totally different question). If that's a path you want to keep open, pursuing relevant work experiences and being able to demonstrate results-oriented actions might be more important than the degree itself.

Good luck to you in the future!

 

[feelings]

Lots of great info. I'll add a couple of thoughts I don't think I saw in the above:

- If you want to be a great therapist, I would advocate for figuring out a specialty area (OCD, DBT, PTSD, etc) and pursuing advanced trainings that includes thorough follow-up clinical consultation with experts in that subfield. For people who prioritize this goal and put in the work, I generally don't see significant differences via degree type.

- Where I think a PhD/PsyD is of benefit is being more ready to work in a greater variety of clinical contexts competently since they've likely gained a greater quantity of training in more settings alongside the additional focus on assessment than LCSW/LPC/MFTs. Outside of full neuro assessments, I feel confident that I can probably be plugged into any role at my VA and I can likely avoid harming patients while doing reasonably competent work. But how important is that skill really given most of us work in defined roles and can gain specific training to further enhance our abilities within that scope?

- A PhD/PsyD program will assume that every new student has zero therapy and assessment skills whatsoever and start from the ground up. Unless you're in a program that emphasizes a specialty and also has built-in resources to provide advanced training in that area (think UW Clinical Psych continuing to build upon the DBT roots that Linehan established), you'll primarily be working on generalist skills. So it's quite possible that if your therapy skills growth would be more gradual than drastic if you were to enter a PhD/PsyD program (as opposed to diagnostic/assessment skills).

- Since keeping the doors open for future opportunities outside of clinical practice like HR sounds important to you right now, that wouldn't necessarily align with pursuing a PhD/PsyD given the time/costs involved. You might also be seen as both over-qualified via degree and under-qualified via experience for some of these roles with a doctorate.

- As for management roles within a clinical setting, there are tons of LCSWs in admin roles all around the country. Even in the VA system where I work, I know of multiple LCSWs who hold the highest position in their facility's entire mental health service line (Associate Chief of Staff of Mental Health) where PhDs and MDs also being eligible for consideration (now whether it's worth the hassle is a totally different question). If that's a path you want to keep open, pursuing relevant work experiences and being able to demonstrate results-oriented actions might be more important than the degree itself.

Good luck to you in the future!

Thank you for the amazingly thoughtful post. All really great points. I can definitely understand what you're saying re: the ability to develop competence & further skill in a specific role- much different than developing greater competence overall, and probably much more realistic, and kind of a win-win-win in the sense that you would be specializing, focusing on keeping clients safe and serving them well, and being the best you can be in your current position.

Ironically enough, I was at UW for a spell, and wish I would've stayed to explore their behavioral health programs, of which social work is especially strong. Alas, it just wasn't the right time or place for me to be!

You sound like a wonderful person and clinician, and thank you for taking time out of your day to share your thoughts with me.