I am opposed to this petition. I feel that the original poster has petitioned for this change based on marketing issues in his own practice and not because of an ethical issue in regards to residents advertising.

As I am building my clientele, I work multiple jobs. It is a slow process. It is difficult to build clients when insurance cannot bevaccepted. I have a Psychology Today page, where I state that I am a resident in counseling and list my office location, supervisor, and supervisor’s license number. When clients contact me, I explain my status as a resident. When clients come into the practice, I reiterate my status as resident and what that means and have them complete an informed consent stating the same. I am competent enough to know when I am unqualified to work with someone. I also receive regular supervision, where my clients are discussed and any concerns are addressed.

I also provide a service to people who cannot afford a licensed clinician, due to income or or insurance issues. I provide a low cost solution to people who have limited options. There are plenty of people who choose to use insurance, and plenty of people who can and will pay more and want a licensed clinician.

For the clients I do see, I see change and progress. I have rapport and a solid relationship. These clients would not have found me without advertising.

Don’t take this away from the residents in Virginia. We are learning, we are competent, and we know our limitations. Advertising and seeing clients allows us to develop our counseling identity.