Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Health Professions
 
Board
Board of Psychology
 
chapter
Regulations Governing the Practice of Psychology [18 VAC 125 ‑ 20]
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
9/11/24  10:39 pm
Commenter: Dr. Sarah Buetow (Psy. D.); Psychologist with full APA-Accredited Training

I Support This: Please Help Address the Mental Health Crisis NOW!
 

I want to use this space to amplify the words of Dr. Haynes: “it cannot be understated [the EPPP] does not have the psychometrics to support the level of power it has” and Dr. Tracy’s words that “a thorough independent investigation into the EPPP part 1 and 2 and ASPPB’s professional practices” is needed.

Moreover, Dr. Tracy’s entire comment deserves full, thorough reading (and a second reading after reflecting upon the first time it is read), and I cannot emphasize enough that, with Dr. Tracy’s words “I ask that the VA State Board consider if the cutoff score to pass the EPPP should be decreased (i.e., to 400). Furthermore, I ask that all State Board authorities take a strong stance against EPPP Part 2-Skills and follow the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists’ lead in urging ASPPB to amend its bylaws so that Part 2 can be put to a vote for member jurisdictions.”

I am Dr. Sarah Buetow: a Licensed Clinical Psychologist (Psy. D.) practicing in the state of Texas and have APIT through PsyPact. As such, I have the freedom (which I have already been using) to serve residents of Virginia and residents of other PsyPact states who do not have access to the mental healthcare they need and deserve. A huge reason for this dearth in accessibility of services is directly related to the archaic, stringent, and at times explicitly harmful test items which are required of the EPPP. Of which, we as practitioners do not even have full right or freedom to openly discuss and critique due because the EPPP is layered in legal protection which serves to silence the very individuals intended to represent its efficacy and validity (of which, it has yet to adequately or satisfactorily demonstrate).

I cannot understate the personal harm and professional dissatisfaction I have experienced throughout the process of taking and eventually passing the EPPP, which auspiciously, was one year ago today for me. After 3 official attempts and several VERY expensive practice exams. I have spent thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours focused solely on the EPPP, and as such am confident in the gravity of the words I speak and critical need for change. An entire year has passed, and I have not once faltered in my stance on how harmful and farcical this exam is as a required measure for doctoral licensure. The EPPP is not an effective pre-requisite, it is an outright barrier to practitioners who are otherwise capable of effectively servicing individuals in need of mental healthcare.

Changes must be made and each day that passes in which they are not enacted, is another day that capable psychologists – many of whom are marginalized – are forced to sit by unable to serve populations in need throughout our national mental health crisis. I have jumped through the required hoops, I have done ALL the work necessary to proudly and openly bear the title of DOCTOR - with the entirety of my education and training from APA-accredited programs - and I urge the state of Virginia to hear my professional concerns, to hear myself and fellow psychologists who are speaking out in service of our field’s true purpose: in service as empirically-based healers to the populations we serve. I ask Virginia to please be a trailblazer in its decision to make the passing score for the EPPP in Virginia be decreased to be 400. This is a critical moment of change and opportunity, and it is my greatest hope that Virginia will make the choice to support its psychologists and residents. I eagerly and anxiously await to see if the changes myself and other psychologists have so, so, SO desperately been advocating for are finally made into a reality.  I thank you for your time and consideration.

CommentID: 227787