THE

Volume 24, No. 2

Specialist Summer 2005

Special Section:
GEROPSYCHOLOGY AS A SPECIALTY
Guest Editor: Victor Molinari, Ph.D., ABPP (See pp. 6-10)

ABPP 2005 Convocation at APA Convention

By Russell J. Bent, Ph.D., D.Sc., ABPP

P lease attend the Annual ABPP

Convocation to honor our new
specialists and to hear the address of
our last year’s Distinguished
58th Convocation & Social Hour
Saturday, August 20, 2005 • 1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m.
Contributions to the Profession Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel • Constitution Ballroom A
Awardee: Dr. Russell Barkley. The Year 1000 H Street, NW • Washington, DC 20001
2005 recipient of this award shall be
Dr. Ted Packard. The ABPP
Distinguished Contributions to the Open Invitation to the 58th Convocation.
American Board of Professional Please come out and support our new Board Certified Specialists.
Psychology Award shall be conferred
upon Dr. William Amberg. A social Governance Day Governance Hospitality
hour hosted bar with hors d’oeuvres
and good fellowship shall start the Activities Meeting Rooms
Saturday, August 20, 2005 Wednesday, August 17, 2005-
Convocation at 1 pm. The ABPP
8:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Friday, August 19, 2005
schedule of activities during the APA
Breakfast/Meeting 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
Convention is to the right.
Marriott at Metro Center Wyndham Washington, DC
775 12th Street, NW Westover Room
Washington, DC 20001 1400 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005

APA Convention
Thursday, August 18 – Sunday, August 21, 2005
9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. (Thurs.-Sat.)
9:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. (Sunday)
The Washington Convention Center
Exhibit Hall D&E
Booth 639

Dr. Simon congratulates new specialist at Pick your ribbons up here!

last year’s convocation
 CONTENTS
THE ABPP
Specialist GOVERNANCE

Vol. 24, No. 2 Summer 2005 A Message From the President ..................................................Norma P. Simon 3

ABPP BOARD OF TRUSTEES Perspectives .................................................................................... Russell J. Bent 4

Norma Simon, Ed.D.
President, 2004-2005
A.J. Finch, Ph.D.
President-Elect, 2004-2005
Thomas J. Boll, Ph.D.
SPECIAL SECTION: GEROPSYCHOLOGY AS A SPECIALTY
Past President, 2004-2005
Joseph C. Kobos, Ph.D. Introduction ................................................................................ Victor Molinari 6
Treasurer, 2004
Group, 2001-2004 A Brief History of Specialty Training and Related Issues
William F. Amberg, Ed.D. In Geropsychology .................................................................. Bob G. Knight 6
Organizational & Business Consulting,
2003-2006 Geropsychology: Old and New.................................... Steve Sohnle & Lee Hyer 7
George D. Goldman, Ph.D.
Psychoanalysis, 2004-2007 Specialty Status for Geropsychology?
Alan M. Goldstein, Ph.D. Informal ‘Survey’ of Geropsychologists .............................. Victor Molinari 8
Forensic, 2002-2005
Florence W. Kaslow, Ph.D. Is Clinical Geropsychology Ready to Be a Specialty?......... Peter A. Lichtenberg 9
Family, 2002-2005
Nadine Kaslow, Ph.D. Geropsychology as an ABPP Specialty:
Clinical, 2003-2006 Reflections of a Past APA President .................................... Norman Abeles 10
Philip C. Kendall, Ph.D.
Clinical Child & Adolescent,
2003-2006
Sandra Koffler, Ph.D.
Clinical Neuropsychology, FEATURED ARTICLES
2004-2007
John C. Linton, Ph.D.
ABPP 2005 Convocation at APA Convention ............................. Russell J. Bent 1
Clinical Health, 2004-2007
David E. McIntosh, Ph.D.
A Contrary View About Prescription Authority ...................... George W. Albee 11
School, 2002-2004
Christine M. Nezu, Ph.D.
AASP Invites Congressman and Psychologist Baird .......... Fredrick A. Schrank 13
Cognitive & Behavioral, 2005-2008
William D. Parham, Ph.D.
The ABPP Process: Calling All Training Directors .............................. Jeff Baker 14
Counseling, 2002-2005
Norman Penner, M.P.H.
Public Member, 2002-2005
Mitchell Rosenthal, Ph.D.
Rehabilitation, 2005-2008 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE
Russell J. Bent, Ph.D.
Executive Officer
Editor’s Corner ..................................................................... Robert W. Goldberg 5
Robert W. Goldberg, Ph.D.
Editor The Ethics Corner................................................................. Mary Ellen Olbrisch 12
David E. McIntosh, Ph.D.
Associate Editor Irwin Abraham Hyman, 1935-2005 ................................... Rosemary Flanagan 15
David Brydon, J.D.
Corporation Counsel Specialty Boards ..................................................................................................... 16
The ABPP Specialist is published Academy News ....................................................................................................... 18
twice a year by the
American Board of News From the Specialists ..................................................................................... 18
Professional Psychology, Inc.
300 Drayton Street – 3rd Floor New Specialists ...................................................................................................... 19
Savannah, GA 31401
(800) 255-7792

2 The ABPP Specialist Summer 2005

 A Message From the President
T his is my last message to you as
President of the Board of Trustees
of ABPP. It seems odd to write this
now since my presidency continues
until December 31; however, we have
two issues of The Specialist a year and
this is the second one.
It has been an honor and privilege
to serve as your president. I believe in
our mission to have psychologists
become more aware of board
certification and its importance in the
field and to the public. I believe in
competency based examinations. I
also believe that we have a fine board
of directors and central office staff
which we need to keep the
organization on track and to reach
more of our colleagues.
The Board has many committees
that work during the year on various
topics of importance to the
organization. Al Finch (president
elect) and Bernie Brucker (former
Rehabilitation trustee) set our
marketing effort into action a few
years ago. They have developed a plan
that includes a major marketing effort
in each year for the profession and
agencies that affect psychology. They
have contacted hospital
administrators who are responsible
for hospital privileges as well as
developing means of attracting more
of our colleagues to become board
certified. We hope you noticed the full
page ad in the April Monitor (page
25), listing the names of all new
board certified specialists for 2003-4.
It was an excellent presentation.
Norman Penner, our public
Summer 2005
By Norma P. Simon, Ed.D., ABPP
member, is chairing a task force to
look into vanity boards. If you have
information that he and his
committee should see, please send it
to central office for Norm or to me.
We are also working on a mobility
effort to have ABPP recognized in all
jurisdictions in the US and Canada.
We now have recognition at various
levels for mobility in 31 jurisdictions.
We hope to work with the others,
especially in Canada, to have all
provinces recognize ABPP as a means
of mobility for psychologists.
We have established liaison
relationships at APA with the Board of
Educational Affairs and the Board of
Professional Affairs. Dr. Finch is our
representative of these bodies. We
already have liaisons with ASPPB and
APAGS. Russ Bent, our executive Dr. Simon
officer, attends a number of
professional meetings representing licensed, become Board Certified. This
ABPP. He has been particularly active acknowledges competence. We need
in his liaison role with COS (the your help to educate our colleagues
Council on Specialties) and as a about the importance of board
member of CCOPP (the Council of certification for all psychologists
Credentialing Organizations in today.
Professional Psychology) and PER I know that when Al Finch takes
(the Psychology Executives over the presidency in January 2006
Roundtable). The President and our organization will be in excellent
Executive Officer of each psychology hands. I hope that I have fulfilled my
organization attend PER. All of this is pledge to help bring ABPP into the
to say that ABPP has a prominent 21st century, and have our
place in psychology and presents a organization be more responsive to its
point of view that is more and more members and to applicants. We have
important for psychologists to hear. come a long way together. I hope to
We are hopeful that our message is see all of you at the Convocation on
getting across to the profession, and August 20 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in
especially to graduate students, that Washington, DC, 1 p.m. Please come
the three-step route to take is: be up and say “Hello.”
awarded the doctorate, become Best wishes to one and all.
The ABPP Specialist 3

By Russell J. Bent, Ph.D., Psy.D., D.Sc.
From the Executive Officer
W orking as your Executive
Officer over the past year-and-
a-half in our new Savannah office has
given me the opportunity to be
imbedded in the full-context of the
organization and to appreciate the
organization’s strengths, limitations, and
key challenges.
Certainly, the ABPP continues to be
a growing and evolving organization.
Going on 60 years of operation the
inertia of old ways is there and we do
want to keep those foundations that
have defined us. As a contemporary
organization we must also move in new
directions to meet current and future
challenges.
I have been involved for several
decades with the governance of ABPP,
from the old regional boards, to the
Board of Trustees (BOT) as a Trustee and
President, to my position as Executive
Officer. From my broad perspective I
have seen the CO provide a most basic
service with minimal professional
direction. The organizational structure
moved from a single, central unit more
concerned with 4 poorly defined
specialities and “club-like” standards of
“excellence,” to a confederation of 13
specialty boards, now moving from a
confederation to a unified specialty
certification organization. The unified
organization provides stronger central
service and standard setting functions
while also being more inclusive of SBs
and Academies.
This unified organization direction
has been made possible by changes in
the ABPP structure since the late ’80s
and ’90s and by the advantages and
possibilities of the wonders of new
electronic communication/support
technology and applications. This
unifying direction is reflected in our first
ever, real Web site and the possibilities it
provides for communication of
positions, policies, procedures,
coordination, information/announcements,
directories, organizational charts, and on
and on.
As a major reality of unification
please navigate our Governance main
heading on the ABPP Web site
www.abpp.org. Go to the Operations
Information area where you shall find
an edited for the Web site compilation
of key documentation of the ABPP as an
organization, from Bylaws, to position
4 The ABPP Specialist
Perspectives
statements as an organization, to
policies and procedures, and manuals
describing our certification standards
and the affiliation process to be
recognized as a specialty and a specialty
examining board of the ABPP.
In the past, before electronic posting,
these documents and information were
narrowly distributed only to key
governance persons e.g. Trustees, SB
Presidents. Hard copy of these
documents made changes slow, often
difficult to track. In effect,
communication of the major guidelines
of what we are about had limited
diffusion among governance and
certified specialists. Now, for the first
time, communication of the operating
information of the ABPP is widely
available for application. Dr. Bent
Parallel to the OM, the Central Office
(CO) has organized services to begin to • “Rosters” of the governance (SBs,
keep pace with our modest in size, but BOT) with organization charts, can
in many ways overly complex be easily emailed and are readily
organization. accessible.
• The Operations Manual (OM) is
We now have:
available on-line.
• For the first time, an operating,
• Application, reimbursement,
“real-time” online Certification
annual fee/maintenance, and CO
Process Information Base. About
30 variables are tracked from procedural documents are online
with some of our first interactive
application, to candidacy, through
documents.
examination components (written,
• Progress in validating active
practice sample, oral). The system
certified specialists and retirees in a
is available to governance involved
Directory accessible by specialty
with coordinating/operating the
and State has been made.
certification process. • List serves, a number of them are
• Updated SB Brochures for all available, can be made available,
specialties can be read (using and include an “announce only”
Word) and easily, quickly printed listserve for all certified specialists.
(HTML) from the ABPP Web site. • A financial reimbursement unified
Many Brochures needed more with CO management, SB
clarity and alignment with Treasurers, and the Finance
standards. The reasonable full-set Committee with full electronic and
of brochures is a first for us, and a CPA support. Clear, bi-monthly
great step forward. financial reports with increased
• Examination Manuals, rather what dollar support to SBs.
should be Board Certification • A clearer, closer relationship to
Procedure Manuals geared toward Academies has been recommended
the applicant/candidate for and a number of initiatives have
certification are variously posted been accomplished thus far.
and not adequate. The EO shall The Board of Trustees, under the
devote the next several months to leadership of President Simon, has
improving these manuals, and made a concerted effort to increase the
when improved, moving key parts communication and cooperation among
of the manuals to then “quick the SBs, Academies, BOT, and CO. Our
access” links on the SB Web pages. new office manager Nancy McDonald’s
Overall compliance with the enthusiasm, responsiveness, and good
manual template standards need
improved compliance. (continued on page 5)
Summer 2005
 Editor’s Corner
By Robert W. Goldberg, Ph.D., ABPP

For this issue, there is a Special Section of articles on Geropsychology. As a

Specialty, coordinated by Victor Molinari, Ph.D., ABPP, serving as Guest Editor
for the Special Section. Dr. Molinari is a long-time clinical expert in geropsychology
and is currently Professor in the Department of Aging and Mental Health at the
University of South Florida. Previous to that, he spent many years at the Houston
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, specializing in geropsychology. In
the past, he has also served as Associate Editor for Geropsychology of The APPIC
Newsletter and thus seemed an ideal choice for this issue’s Section. He and the
authors have not disappointed. I want to thank Vic very much once again for taking
Dr. Goldberg this on, as well as all the authors for their contributions.
Also in this issue is a response to Dr. Pat DeLeon’s enthusiastic support of
prescriptive authority for psychologists, authored by Dr. George Albee who presents the other point of view. I want to
thank both Dr. DeLeon and Dr. Albee for contributing to this dialogue.

Perspectives (continued from page 4)

will together with similar staff support
by Alicia Gale and Yasmine Chaney have
moved us to a more cohesive
organization.
Without the same language,
unification is hardly possible. Simply
defining key words goes a long way. For
example an “applicant” for certification
has been confused to include inquiries
and is not the same as a candidate. CO
has dropped certification process
descriptions variously used by SBs such
as phases, steps, stages adding I, Ia, II, III
and so on to a simple
application/candidacy part of the
process followed by the examination
(with written [by 2 SBs], practice
sample, and oral components). Under
ABPP P&P: O such standard terms are
defined as below:
1. An Applicant is an individual who
has submitted application
materials, paid the application fee
and seeks candidacy for specialty
board certification. The
application process is designed to
establish that the applicant has
met the rigors of preparation
required by the specialty.
2. An applicant is rejected if he or
she does not present adequate
training credentials or evidence of
licensure as required.
3. Inquiry. A person inquiring about
ABPP related to any of its
missions receives as reasonable a
response as practical. There is no
unsolicited follow-up on inquiries.
There is no user ID for inquiries
on the Web site. The privacy of
inquiring is respected.
4. A Candidate is an individual
whose application and credentials
have been found to meet the
generic and specialty specific
requirements for candidacy. Such
an individual is admitted to
candidacy and is invited to
proceed with the examination
process. An individual who has not
passed an examination and who
has requested a new examination
in a timely manner remains a
Candidate.
5. A Candidate is Terminated if he or
she does not follow through on
the requirements (which includes
time-lines) of candidacy.
6. The Examination follows after the
applicant establishes candidacy. It
is a unified process consisting of
several components which may
include a written examination
component, and includes a
practice sample component (and
usually a related professional
practice description) and an oral
examination component. Each SB
establishes the parameters of these
examination components.
7. Diplomate is a psychologist who
has been granted a specialty
diploma from the ABPP. In most
instances, the organization prefers
the descriptor Board Certified
Specialist or Certified Specialist to
denote a psychologist who has
met the preparation and
examination requirements of the
specialty.
This may seem simple enough, but
the use of this and other such guidelines
now readily available to all makes life
simpler for us all.
A major first for ABPP are the
reasonably completed SB Brochures now
viewable (using Word) and quickly
printable (HTML) on the ABPP Web site.
I started revision of these brochures
several years ago with “boilerplate”
language for common requirements and
progressive revisions to have SB
descriptions move toward compliance of
functional definitions, competency
assurance terms, and so on.
The movement towards a unified
certification process manual (not exam
manual) is the next step on the EO
agenda – easier talked about than
accomplished. Of several SBs I have
worked with, one manual is way out of
sync, another several have been over a
year in the revision process (still not
completed) and several manuals
completed in an acceptable way. We had
an ABPP national conference (one of
our few over 60 years!) and approved a
template for the construction of
manuals. We are moving slowly toward
compliance, but with our electronic
dissemination slow is not good enough.
The Web site has “quick access” links to
the major requirements (practice
samples, oral exam) of each specialty.
Such a feature has been continually
requested by candidates to avoid going
through perhaps 50 or 60 pages of a
manual to find such information. The
CO has set-aside much of June to post
content on the quick access links and to
request plans and time-lines of SBs who
have not revised “manuals” over the past
decade.
Please begin to review the ABPP Web
site and the “OM” materials. See us at
our Booth 639 at APA. We look forward
to seeing you in DC .

Summer 2005 The ABPP Specialist 5

 SPECIAL SECTION:

GEROPSYCHOLOGY AS A SPECIALTY
INTRODUCTION By Victor Molinari, Ph.D., University of South Florida; Guest Editor

‘younger’ and ‘older’

T his series of articles brings

together the thoughts of some
experienced ABPP-level psychologists
on the topic of whether
geropsychology should pursue
specialty status via APA and/or ABPP
routes. The first article by Bob Knight,
former president of Division 20
(Adult Aging & Human
Development) and Division 12,
Section 2 (Clinical Geropsychology)
contains a succinct history of the
professionalization of
geropsychology. Steve Sohnle and Lee
Hyer (psychologists practicing in a
large urban medical setting) then
present more personalized accounts
of the history of geropsychology by
providing contrasting impressions of
early and recent developments in the
field from the viewpoints of a
geropsychologist. The next article by
Victor Molinari (former president of
Division 12, Section 2 and
Psychologists in Long Term Care)
recounts the results of an informal
survey of geropsychologists. Peter
Lichtenberg (former president of
Psychologists in Long Term Care)
follows with a discussion of why he
believes geropsychology is distinct
from rehabilitation psychology, and
the importance of unique
geropsychology expertise. Finally,
Norm Abeles reflects on his tenure as
APA president, and how advances in
geropsychology over the intervening
years (spurred, I might add, by his
tireless efforts) allow him to conclude
that geropsychology is now at a stage
in its professional development to be
ready to obtain specialty status. Dr. Molinari

A Brief History of Specialty Training and

Related Issues in Clinical Geropsychology
By Bob G. Knight, Ph.D., University of Southern California

applied learning theory principles to The VA system also became interested in

P sychologists have been

involved in working with older
adults since at least the 1920s when
Lillien Martin, a retired psychologist,
developed the Martin Method, a
constructive approach to aging based on
life review and changing dysfunctional
thoughts and behavior patterns. The
development of a specialty field in
mental health and aging starts
considerably later. In the 1960s, there
were parallel developments. On the one
hand, Erik Erikson (1963, 1968)
outlined an initial conceptualization of
important psychological development
continuing past childhood into
adolescence and onward through
adulthood and into old age. Robert
Butler (1963) argued that reminiscence
was a normal aspect of aging rather
than a sign of dementia and later
developed life review therapeutic
approaches. On the other hand,
behaviorally-oriented psychology
modifying behavior problems in
geriatric wards of psychiatric hospitals
with patients in nursing home settings
(e.g., Cautela, 1966; Lindsley, 1964).
The 1970s saw increasing attention
to older adults at the national policy
level with the passage of the Older
Americans Act of 1973 and the
formation of the National Institute on
Aging in 1974. In psychology, life span
developmental psychology was
becoming a major research paradigm
and was beginning to influence
psychological services (e.g., Gentry,
1977). Some of the earliest programs
offering specialty training in clinical and
counseling psychology and aging were
established in the 1970s. Of these, some
continue (e.g., University of Southern
California, Washington University,
Michigan State University), and others
closed after their founders retired (e.g.,
University of Notre Dame,
Northwestern University, Texas A & M).
the health and mental health of aging
veterans, and began to develop specialty
services and training programs in the
1970s (Cooley, 1995). The earliest
mechanism for this training was
through Interdisciplinary Team Training
in Geriatrics grants which started in the
late 1970s. The emphasis on
interdisciplinary team training points to
the need for interdisciplinary
collaboration in solving the complex
problems of older adults. Early sites
included Portland, Palo Alto and
Sepulveda in California, and Little Rock,
Arkansas (Antonette Zeiss, personal
communication, 2005). Many of these
sites are still training geropsychologists.
There have been two national
training conferences on preparing
psychologists to work with older adults:
Older Boulder I and Older Boulder II,
the first actually taking place in Boulder,
Colorado in 1981, the second in
(continued on page 19)

6 The ABPP Specialist Summer 2005

 Geropsychology: Old and New
By Steve Sohnle, Psy.D., ABPP, and Lee Hyer, Ed.D., ABPP, University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey
T he idea of a new subspecialty of
geropsychology would likely have
met with disdain, laughter at best, just a
few decades ago. Many people,
including psychologists, believed that
older people (“older” having a variety
of definitions and chronological cut
offs) possessed neither the malleability
of character nor the openness to the
idea of change to undergo any sort of
meaningful treatment. Older
psychologists have witnessed the young
childhood of a discipline: new
psychologists are now able to reap its
legacy so as to apply its canons. In fact,
geropsychology is really a young
science, but one that is expanding
geometrically as evidenced in the
growing number of articles and journals
devoted to the psychology of the older
adult, specialized training programs in
all areas, funding for research, etc.
Geropsychology has truly come of
age having evolved against the backdrop
of professional clinical psychology as a
science and practice to its new
manifesto, “Guidelines for the
Psychological Practice with Older
Adults.” Newer practitioners are often
the last to know of the historicity of a
movement. They are after all in the fray.
The newer professional is more likely to
accept these realities as self-evident,
perhaps avoiding the “learning curve,”
but often absent a full appreciation of
the issues. If reflective at all, they
wonder and are surprised that specialty
certification is not as well established
for geropsychologists as for those
specializing in work with children and
adolescents. Geropsychology has
importance, content, sections in
departments, and most of all a coterie
of skilled scientist practitioners. Recent
cohorts are more aware of and open to
the ideas of ‘healthy and unhealthy
aging,’ and what distinguishes them.
They can wonder about, marvel at, and
apply the abundance of evidence that
describes/explains the complexity of
age. Current psychologists now have the
benefit of being taught, mentored and
guided by those who have been ‘around
the block’ and have experienced
changes in recent years. What seems to
come as second nature was minted by
the slow, steady discoveries of
established psychology. Although guild-
biased, the argument for
Summer 2005
geropsychology as a subspecialty is now
compelling.
As in most identity processes, first
there was the establishment of a niche,
a discipline, a code of data, and the
requisite science for its base. As in
working with children or adolescents,
delving into geropsychology required its
own set of particular skills,
understanding and body of knowledge.
Next came the demonstrations of merit
through journals and books,
commensurate societies, and even
committees and interest groups. All the
while, the umbrella organization (APA)
and relevant divisions and sections
fostered its existence. Standards of
training, best practices, and the
integration of the technology of the
science are now unfolding or extant.
Indeed, lobbying is encouraged. We
have arrived.
Just as our culture changed its focus
to reduce infant deaths in 1900, our
society has grayed and the
phenomenology of aging has become
both visible and vexing in the last three
decades.More than any other discipline
in psychology, “gero” psychology
practices integrated care and translates
the data from many disciplines to form
its corpus of work. Below, we mention
some of the most salient features and
challenges of the geropsychologist and
discuss perspectives from an older and
younger professional.
Geropsychologists walk a fine line
between understanding the issues
common to later life, such as adjusting
to retirement and multiple losses
(spouse, friends, family, health status,
athletic ability, etc.), while not losing
the individuality of the person. For the
newer psychologist, it is a challenge to
keep these issues in mind while being
fully open to the person. Nowhere is
the empirically supported rubric of
therapy, “love and work,” more
challenging. Knowledge of the
ineluctable physical decline at later life
or the uniqueness of a
psychopathological disorder must mix
with the particulars of this older adult.
The empathic skills that allow us to see
through another’s eyes develop over a
lifetime and career. They are particularly
important when relating to someone
who has had a lifetime of experience –
a challenge for an older professional to
bear witness and join; a moment of
truth for a younger professional to
appreciate and to provide context and
direction. This titrated response can be
as difficult for the seasoned psychologist
as it is for the neophyte. An additional
challenge for the young psychologist is
being secure in her or his skills,
knowledge and ability, and the
requirement to be open to the reality
that she or he will likely learn from the
older patient. It is in this context, where
age may or may not have meaning, that
the whole person of the older adult is
accepted, monitored, changed, and
made better.
Psychologists who work with older
people must learn to blend an
optimism of what can be with the
reality of what is. Often the gero-
transcendence of the experience of late
life is occult but there. On the ‘common
factors’ hand, this is a prizing of the
patient’s ability to grow, solve problems
and adapt, but, on the technology side,
it is also a dollop of reality, of what has
passed, and what needs tampering. If
anything, geropsychology has practiced
a lifespan model of the person that
actuarially anchors what was with what
is and will be. This view upholds an
assessment that parses apart the skills
and deficits in the complex domains of
the person, and trumpets treatments
that address the needs of the person
with several empirically supported
therapies. Geropsychologists, too, must
be able to expand roles; to
accommodate the common physical
challenges, such as hearing and vision
loss, difficulty or inability to walk, etc.,
and to be an advocate in a life that may
often need more than psychotherapy.
And then there is death. In the last
decade the understanding of the
biopsychosocial impact of the death of
a loved one has changed from a one-
size-fits-all to a fuller appreciation of
those with complicated grief and those
who require support or soft monitoring.
Prior to this event, the guidance of
families and patients alike through end-
of-life issues is now usual care in long
term care and in dementia clinics. The
encouragement of advance directives,
treating psychological stress with death,
and guiding families through difficult
decisions now take equal footing with
the assessment of dementia and
competency.
(continued on page 21)
The ABPP Specialist 7
 Specialty Status for Geropsychology?
Informal ‘Survey’ of Geropsychologists
A few years ago I informally
posed a question re the
positives and negatives of ABPP
specialty status first to some executive
committee members of Division 12,
Section 2 (clinical geropsychology),
and then to the entire 12, 2 LISTSERV
membership. The pros and cons
responses by both groups were so
similar that I combined the main
talking points for this article.
On the negative side, a strong
minority wondered how many
psychologists would actually apply for
the ABPP given the cost, and some
might even say its declining relevance
and elitist connotations. Although
most of the dissenters did not appear
to be against the ABPP per se, they
disagreed about the extent to which
the ABPP will further geropsychology’s
professional and practice goals,
questioning the use of scarce resources
towards this end.
Some were uncertain whether
Section 2 had the resources to ‘pull it
off’, given the costly and lengthy
process to achieve this ambition,
requiring a dedicated core group of
people, a 3-5 year time frame, and
significant expenditures of both
money and thoughtful planning. A
few people felt that the value would
accrue only to those private
practitioners who needed to establish
their credentials for gero-forensic
testimony. Otherwise it was asserted
that academics or geriatric service
providers still would be able to
practice their trade without such
credentials; therefore few
geropsychologists would be motivated
to get the ABPP. Indeed, one person
said that very few people even
understand the difference between
psychologists and psychiatrists, let
alone between psychologists with and
without ABPP status. Relatedly, a few
pointed out that there is a dearth of
places of employment that offer extra
reimbursement for those who attain
the ABPP (as I understand it, the VA
has this on the books, but has never
funded it as a priority). Another
argument made was that psychologists
have not even been accepted as full
8 The ABPP Specialist
By Victor Molinari, Ph.D., ABPP
members of geriatric health teams in
many places, and that we would be
‘bucking the tide’ of some healthcare
professions (like nursing) trying to de-
specialize. A couple of others felt that
geropsychology was not ready in its
development, that we needed to be
more introspective about our history
and prospective about where we want
to be as a profession, but that we
might be ready in five to ten years
(the survey was conducted in late
2002). A final position was that with
so few trained geriatric mental health
professionals, we should employ our
resources to focus on the education of
non-geropsychologists who are
already working with older adults,
and not on designating a specialty
that may feel exclusionary to some
professionals and that might even be
used by insurance companies to
disallow reimbursement for needed
geriatric mental health services for
those who do not achieve the
credential.
The above concerns
notwithstanding, most of the
executive committee members and
senior geropsychologists appeared
positively disposed towards at least
taking the initial step in identifying
what exactly may be involved in
advancing ABPP status. However, one
of the senior geropsychologists wisely
noted that it would be a mistake to
gain ABPP status without having
geropsychology first designated as a
specialty within APA. Another senior
geropsychologist argued that the
specialty imprimatur would make
geropsychology more visible to the
wider APA community, encouraging
more program development and
conference planning, and
strengthening linkages between APA’s
Practice Directorate and our
Committee on Aging. Surprisingly,
some of the main support for this
idea came from the more ‘junior’
geropsychologists, many of whom
said if available that they would
definitely consider becoming an ABPP
in geropsychology (but perhaps not in
any other area). They hold the belief
that the ABPP and APA specialty status
will authenticate geropsychology in
the eyes of consumers, other health
professionals, and courts of law. It
would promote professionalism of the
field by furthering the identification
of the practice skills and competencies
necessary for one to be called a well-
trained geropsychologist. Specialty
recognition might thereby trigger an
increase in the number of training
programs, as has happened with
neuropsychology and rehabilitation
psychology.
Specific comments were made
related to the idea that
geropsychology lags far behind
medical practice in terms of
specialization, and it would be a
boost to our profession to carve out
our own ‘turf’ to validate ourselves. At
some point specialization may even
make it easier to serve as a provider
on HMO or PPO panels. It would also
allow practitioners to feel satisfied
that they have achieved the highest
standard of recognized advanced
practice, and perhaps become a
stepping stone for hospital privileges
in some states.
My over-arching sense from all the
above comments is that the ABPP
credential may not offer substantial
benefits to individual practitioners in
the short run. But in the long run it
would be good for the aging field, and
at least proactively jump-start our
professional development. Although
geropsychology was recently re-
confirmed as a proficiency by CRSPPP,
the APA Professional College nixed
the idea of awarding a proficiency
certificate for geropsychology. The
process of re-examining our field may
be just as important as the final
product. For this reason, we are at
least committed to obtaining specialty
status within APA. Down the road, I
personally hope that this ultimately
leads to the planning for the larger
resource investment necessary to
obtain ABPP specialty status for
geropsychology.
Summer 2005
 Is Clinical Geropsychology
Ready To Be a Specialty?
By Peter A. Lichtenberg, Ph.D., ABPP/ABRP; Wayne State University
B oard certification provides an
important level of
specialization and documented ability
for a specific field of Psychology, as well
as the clinicians working in that field.
Psychology has lagged behind many
other fields in focusing proper attention
to issues related to aging. The American
Psychological Association has been
exceptionally slow to dedicate itself to
older adults. Indeed, when advocating
for inclusion as independent providers
for Medicare reimbursement in the early
1990s, APA focused its arguments, not
on the needs of older adults, but rather
general inclusion for psychology in the
Clinton administration’s efforts for
universal health care. Today, APA has a
committee on aging, but it is located
within the public policy and not the
practice office. Ageism, which leads to
the belief that older adults do not have
unique capacities for change and
improvement, is found in many of the
neuropsychological writings about
geriatric depression. In a presidential
address for the International
Neuropsychological Society, Linas
Bielauskas described depression in
older adults with neurological
impairment as something other than
depression, and something untreatable.
Geriatric psychiatry and psychology
have demonstrated the lack of credence
to this perspective. Rehabilitation
Psychology pays scant attention to
geriatric rehabilitation. Despite the fact
that older adults constitute the great
majority of rehabilitation patients, the
field is still dominated by practitioners
in brain and spinal cord injury. Indeed,
the lack of geriatric content in the
annual rehabilitation psychology
diplomate preparation course
underscores the field’s lack of focus on
older adults. Even within the fields of
brain or spinal cord injury there is a
lack of focus on older adults, despite
the growth in the number of new onset
cases among aging Americans. In this
article I will offer some perspectives on
my beliefs that geropsychology is ready
for specialization by virtue of three
things: (1) the significant knowledge
base that now exists in the field; (2) the
substantial numbers of graduate,
internship and/or post-doctoral
Summer 2005
fellowship pathways to obtaining
training; and (3) the opportunities for
practice for geropsychologists. In the
last part of this article I will speculate
on some of the challenges and barriers I
perceive to be in place for the
development of an ABPP awarded
specialization in clinical
geropsychology.
Aging is a dynamic process, filled
with both normal and age-related
pathological changes, and experienced
with considerable individual
heterogeneity. Psychologists having
identifiable and specific expertise in
aging have led to many advances in the
proper assessment and treatment of
older adults. For example, the symptom
constellation of depression among
older adults differs from younger adults.
In creating the Geriatric Depression
Scale, its authors compared 100 items
between depressed and non-depressed
elders. In contrast to the experience of
depression in younger adults, vegetative
symptoms of depression were not
found to be particularly effective in
identifying older adults with depression
due to their overlap with experiences
common to normal aging. Similarly,
advances in the treatment of behavioral
disorders in those persons suffering
from dementia came from
geropsychology. While geriatric
neuropsychology should receive
substantial credit for advances in the
assessment of dementia, it has largely
ignored treatment approaches for those
with dementia. Spaced-retrieval,
environmental change to reduce
agitation, and behavioral treatment of
depression in dementia are examples of
the application of psychological
principles to help older adults
experiencing dementia. The
geropsychology field has generated
knowledge about the exceptional toll
that caregiving to persons with
dementia exacts, and about the
psychological treatments available to
reduce caregiver stress. These are but a
few of the many examples that can be
given in support of how much
specialized gerontology knowledge
there is. Other examples include (but
are not limited to) capacity evaluations
and interventions, sexuality and sexual
dysfunction, alcohol and substance
abuse, anxiety disorders, delirium, sleep
and sleep disorders, and pain
assessment and control.
Tremendous progress has been made
over the past two decades in creating
pathways for training in clinical
geropsychology. My training, similar to
many of my era, was cobbled together
through coursework and supervised
clinical experiences. I obtained my
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from
Purdue University in 1986 and while
there completed a minor in aging. My
advisor, Professor Clifford Swensen, like
many geropsychologists at that time,
became interested in aging and older
adults well after his training was
completed. Wanting to formalize
geropsychology training for his
students, Dr. Swensen obtained training
funds by the NIMH to train graduate
students in geropsychology. Today, there
are many strong training programs in
geropsychology at multiple universities,
and a variety of supervised clinical and
research opportunities through
internship sites and postdoctoral
fellowships. Dr. Greg Hinrichsen leads
an effort to identify these programs and
keep them up to date each year on the
Division 12 section 2 (Clinical
Geropsychology), and Division 20
(Adult Development and Aging)
websites.
Practice opportunities continue to
increase for geropsychologists. The
demography of the older population is
instructive here as well. The
combination of increased life
expectancy across the lifespan (e.g., life
expectancy 100 years ago for someone
65 years old was 10 years, and today has
increased to 18 years) has led to
consistent and substantive growth of the
older adult population. At the same
time, there is an increase in living with
chronic disease. Death due to stroke,
and heart disease, in particular has
declined, despite a small increase in
prevalence. Rates of dementia double
every five years starting at age 60, such
that, 30-35% of those over age 85 and
40-55% of those over age 90 experience
dementia. Dementia care, similar to
most chronic disease, only begins with
the detection and assessment of the
(continued on page 22)
The ABPP Specialist 9
 Geropsychology as an ABPP Specialty:
Reflections of a Past APA President
By Norman Abeles, Ph.D., ABPP, Michigan State University
I t was only a short ten years ago
that I attended the 1995 White
House Conference on Aging in
Washington, D.C. I had just been
elected President of APA and I was very
excited to be going to this conference.
Lots of good ideas were discussed and
there were great hopes that we would be
submitting ideas for legislation dealing
with aging (White House Conference
on Aging, 1996). What were some of
those issues? Here are some examples:
Keeping social security sound for now
and the future; Reforming the health
care system; Prevention/wellness
throughout one’s Life Span; Enforcing
Laws against age discrimination;
Support for caregivers; Preventing elder
abuse, exploitation and neglect;
Developing alternative options for
funding long-term care; Ensuring the
availability of a broad spectrum of
services; and, Meeting mental health
needs. As fellow psychologists, you
should be able to comment on the
extent to which some of these
resolutions have been met, with
particular emphasis on whether or not
mental health needs have been met.
Later this fall there will be another
decennial White House Conference and
I will again be a delegate. Hopefully we
can make further significant progress.
Let me now comment on issues
within APA. When I became President
of APA in 1997 I decided that aging
would be my focus. I established a work
group to prepare a brochure on “What
the Practitioner Should Know about
Working with Older Adults” (Abeles, et
al, 1998). The governing body of APA,
the Council of Representatives, passed
‘Guidelines for the evaluation of
dementia and age related memory
decline’. I also edited a special issue of
Psychotherapy dealing with aging issues
(at that time the journal Psychotherapy
was published by the Division of
Psychotherapy). Finally I helped to
establish and advance the Committee
on Aging (CONA) of the American
Psychological Association. This coming
fall there is another White House
Conference on Aging and I am again a
delegate to that meeting.
All this should remind us that aging
has moved along a good bit within
10 The ABPP Specialist
psychology. There are more training
programs with a geropsychology
emphasis and there are more students
choosing geropsychology as a field of
study. Division 12 (Society of Clinical
Psychology) has a section devoted to
geropsychology and a section devoted
to assessment (an important part of
geropsychology). Furthermore, Division
20 (Adult Development and Aging) has
been most helpful in encouraging
efforts to publicize the field of
geropsychology through the
dissemination of vital research and
convention programming dealing with
state of the art issues in aging.
But perhaps the most important
effort on behalf of geropsychology was
the recent passage by APA Council of
the Guidelines for Psychological
Practice with Older Adults. This was a
report spearheaded by a distinguished
task force co-chaired by Linda Teri, PhD
from the University of Washington and
George Niederehe, PhD from the
National Institute of Mental Health.
These guidelines suggest or recommend
specific behaviors for psychologists that
are designed to facilitate the continued
progression of our field. The origins of
these Guidelines go back to 1992 when
a national conference was organized by
APA which dealt with clinical training
and improving services for older adults.
The task force report notes that in 1998
the Commission for the Recognition of
Specialties and Proficiencies in
Professional Psychology (CRSPPP)
recommend that clinical
geropsychology be recognized as a
proficiency in professional psychology
designed to help older adults maintain
well being, overcome problems and
achieve maximum potential. Guidelines
approved by APA council fit within six
sections which are titled (1) attitudes,
(2) general knowledge about adult
development, aging and older adults,
(3) clinical issues, (4) assessment, (5)
intervention and related services, and
(6) education. Let me comment on
clinical issues as discussed in these
Guidelines. It is noted first that for most
older adults changes in cognitive
functioning do not really interfere to a
significant degree with every day living
activities. On the other hand, it is true
that older adults have a greater amount
of more severe cognitive disorders.
Differentiation between mild symptoms
of forgetting, age associated memory
impairments, and early dementia are
important diagnostic landmarks which
are important to geropsychologists and
other specialists dealing with older
adults. All of us have heard only too
often of the common types of
dementia, namely Alzheimer’s disease
and vascular dementia. There also exist
reversible cognitive impairments in
older adults which may be impacted by
depression and or anxiety, the report
continues. The public is entitled to
know which practitioners are judged to
possess advanced competence in
dealing with older adults. This includes
advanced knowledge about assessment
as well as knowledge about specific
psychotherapeutic interventions
including the adaptation of
interventions that can be used with this
age group. Within the context of
assessment and intervention,
geropsychologists need to be familiar
with ethical standards of conduct and
they need to be well-informed about
research and general knowledge
concerning this particular population.
A subset of our older adults are
Veterans. You may also know that the
Veterans Health Administration is the
largest employer of psychologists in this
country. It is clear to many of us that
the VHA needs qualified
geropsychologists to work with the ever
increasing population of older Veterans.
I currently serve on the geriatric and
gerontology advisory committee to the
secretary of the Veterans Administration
but I am the only psychologist serving
on this committee. Some of the work of
this advisory committee is to evaluate
and advise the various Geriatric
Research Education and Clinical Centers
(GRECC’s); I have been working to
encourage the utilization of more
geropsychologists in GRECCs across the
country.
Another sector that can utilize the
services of geropsychologists is nursing
homes. In a recent report from the
National Nursing Home Surveys
(Decker, 2005), it is noted that there
has been an increase in assisted living
(continued on page 22)
Summer 2005
Special Article:
A Contrary View About Prescription Authority
D espite my longtime
friendship with Pat DeLeon,
I must state clearly that he, and the
other supporters of prescription
privileges for clinical psychology, are
just plain wrong. I say this with no
illusions that the current all-out effort
to get the legal right for psychologists
to prescribe can be stopped or
reversed. In a world where money and
profits call the tune, the outcome is
certain. The powerful pharmaceutical
companies are supportive of
psychology’s efforts. Other non-
medical health professions prescribe
– nurses, podiatrists, dentists, etc. In
many countries most medications are
available for purchase over the
counter by the public.
A major reason for the ultimate
success of psychology’s efforts to
prescribe drugs as part of practice is
the united front presented by the APA
governance. Dissension and
disagreement have been suppressed.
No candidate for the APA Presidency
can be elected if they oppose
prescription privileges.
The APA Council has been captured
by Practice. The capture, while legal, is
poisonous. Over the long haul APA is
doomed. A voting Council seat has
been given to every state, every
Canadian province, to U.S.
commonwealths and possessions
(Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam).
All of these are donated by people in
Practice, who also control the practice-
dominated Divisions. Issues like
prescription privileges are guaranteed
majorities. The older Divisions, long
the home of scientists and academics,
are declining in numbers and their
numbers are aging. Few young people
are joining the “science Divisions.” A
majority of young recruits to
psychology are “educated” in the
expanding number of “professional
schools” – places that give degrees
without benefit of qualified university
faculty in psychology or other
disciplines, and without libraries, or
research laboratories. State
associations attract these new, young
practitioners because they influence
the bread-and-butter issues.
According to data from APA’s
Summer 2005
by George W. Albee, Ph.D., ABPP
Research Office “health service
providers” now occupy 76% of all
Council seats. “Research and other
sub-fields” constitute 20%. Of this
latter group 18 are in social,
developmental, and I-O, leaving only
10% in the old General/-
Experimental/Physiological/
Quantitive areas.
The pattern for new members of
APA is quite similar to Council
membership. Those joining in 2003
were 70% “health service providers”
and 17% “research and other sub-
fields.” This latter group included one
comparative psychologist, one
physiologist, four experimentalists,
and three generalists.
Dr. DeLeon tells us of progress
being made, state by state. He does
not tell us why we should prescribe.
Let me tell you why we should not.
The most important reason is that
most mental disorders are not
diseases.
Our errors began right after the end
of World War II. The Veterans
Administration was desperate for
people to help staff VA hospitals and
clinics to treat the large number of
veterans with mental/emotional
problems. Physicians, and especially
psychiatrists, were scarce. The VA
offered general stipends for
psychology trainees and paid generous
salaries to clinical psychologists to
take staff positions. The Boulder
Model had insisted that clinical
psychologists have training in
research, but it made the fatal error of
approving medical-psychiatric settings
as the proper locus of clinical training.
(Albee, 2000).
Clinical psychology has survived
and flourished by accepting the myth
that mental/emotional distresses are
organic problems. It acquiesced to
metrazol convulsions, insulin coma,
electric shock to the brain, and
surgical destruction of the frontal
lobes of the brain, as “treatment” for
people with serious emotional
problems. In the 1950s two drugs –
reserpine from India and thorazine
from France – were reported to
“tranquilize” people with severe
psychoses. The race for “drug
treatments for the mind” has
Dr. Albee
expanded into an incredibly profitable
industry.
Clinical psychology has also
accepted the myth that psychiatric
diagnoses are reliable and valid. It has
held its nose and swallowed
psychiatry’s Diagnostic and Statistical
Manuals despite their unreliability
and lack of validity. (See Kutchins &
Kirk, 1997).
It has approved many doctorate-
granting programs that have no
admission standards, and little contact
with the broad field of psychological
knowledge. They employ largely
spare-time teachers, with little
research experience, many in non-
university – “professional” schools. In
a kind of Gresham’s Law, bad degrees
are driving out good legitimate
degrees.
It is difficult to sort out who is
granting doctorates for psychological
practice. The APA Research Office
(2005 APA Graduate Study in
Psychology) divides doctoral level
“health service providers” into
Traditional and Professional
programs. In 2003-2004 there were
12,147 doctoral level students in
professional schools and 11,918
enrolled in “traditional academic
settings.” But some of the former were
(continued on page 23)
The ABPP Specialist 11

By Mary Ellen Olbrisch, Ph.D., ABPP
I t is easy to think that the Ethics
Committee spends its time
reviewing the misdeeds of
psychologists who are “bad apples.”
These corrupt and malevolent
individuals somehow made it into the
profession and then used their
positions as psychologists to prey
upon weaker persons in powerless
positions, to take advantage of the
system, to collude in fraud or to
commit other misdeeds to their own
gain. Sadly, this is sometimes the case,
but it is the exception rather than the
rule. Just as the worst parts of life
often come from the best, the ethical
lapses of our colleagues often spring
from an excess of their most positive
characteristics. Psychology is a
demanding profession, and the more
we devote ourselves to serving the
profession and our patients, the
greater is the chance that we can
unknowingly become impaired in
living up to our highest ideals.
Overwork and lack of balance are
easy enough to fall into. We are
flattered when people need us and
depend on us. It is ego-boosting to be
the only person other professionals
feel comfortable referring patients to.
We enjoy finding that others are
willing to pay well for our
contributions. The anxiety of
neophyte practitioners wondering if
they will ever build a caseload big
enough to ensure they can make a
living and support their families may
persist in spite of having too much to
do and being in high demand for
services. Like anyone else in any other
line of work, a psychologist may fall
into the trap of believing that it is
more important to put money away
for a child’s education than to attend
today’s soccer game or ballet recital.
The pursuit of professional success
can result in lack of attention to our
important relationships, those that
provide us with purpose, renewal and
emotional sustenance.
Compassion can sometimes be a
12 The ABPP Specialist
The Ethics Corner
Chair, ABPP Ethics Committee
stumbling block. The urgent-sounding
request to be seen on the other end of
the phone will often inspire us to
make time in an already busy
schedule rather than to refer the
patient elsewhere or provide an
appointment weeks down the road.
We may sell or even give away our
lives hour by hour out of a dedication
to helping others while neglecting our
own personal needs. We have learned
to look out for the people who refer
to us and strive to meet their needs to
have their patients taken care of. We
come to believe that some of our
patients are so needy that they cannot
tolerate us taking time away for more
than a few days, and so vacations
come to be seen as a luxury rather
than a necessity.
Overwork and neglect of our own
physical and mental health make us
vulnerable to mistakes in judgment
that can result in ethical violations. If
we fall into the hubris of believing
that those of us who provide
psychological services should be
above needing them ourselves, we can
allow our personal difficulties to
progress to a point of serious
dysfunction in our relationships and
in how we take care of ourselves. We
can sometimes forget that it is better
for us to say no than to take on more
work than we are too stretched to do
well.
Many of our colleagues who come
before the Ethics Committee with
serious violations are good people
and good psychologists who fell into
the trap of giving too much to work
and neglecting other important areas
of their lives. Troubled marriages not
attended to made them vulnerable to
inappropriate relationships with
people who made them feel
appreciated and admired. Financial
stress and under-compensation for
services provided in an overly
demanding but not richly paid
profession made them feel it might be
okay to take advantage of inside
information that they learned in their
Dr. Olbrisch
professional role to make investment
profits. Fatigue coupled with a desire
to help others led them to let
themselves become run down and
provide services that were not up to
the standard of care. Inability to set
limits put them in the position of
taking on work with people who
would have been better off if referred
elsewhere.
The role of state licensing boards
and the ABPP Ethics Committee is to
protect the public even when acting
with understanding and compassion.
A psychologist whose impairment has
led to ethical lapses will have to go to
significant lengths to demonstrate
rehabilitation and readiness for the
enormous trust placed in members of
our profession. Prevention is
preferable. That means taking time to
assess ourselves and our lives and to
attend to personal difficulties that
may make us vulnerable in the
professional sphere. A good starting
point is to examine the things that we
don’t have time for. If we don’t have
time for regular medical and dental
examinations, if we don’t have time
for exercise, if we don’t have time to
prepare nutritious meals, if we don’t
(continued on page 13)
Summer 2005
 AASP Invites Congressman and Psychologist
Baird to Speak at APA
By Fredrick A. Schrank, Ph.D., ABPP
President-Elect
American Academy of School Psychology

ongressman and psychologist Brian Baird will

C present his unique perspective on psychology and

politics at the 2005 convention of the American
Psychological Association (APA) in Washington, DC.
Congressman Baird’s talk is entitled “The politics and
science of psychology and the psychology and science of
politics.”
A clinical psychologist, Baird, 48, has a remarkable
depth of knowledge on critical issues of national and
international importance. He is an outspoken advocate for
health care issues, and has provided significant leadership
in combating the plague of methamphetamine. Formerly,
Baird practiced as a clinical psychologist in Washington
State and Oregon. He taught at the university level and was
chairman of the Department of Psychology at Pacific
Lutheran University, Tacoma, Washington. Baird has also
worked in state and Veterans Administration psychiatric
hospitals, community mental health clinics, substance
abuse treatment programs, institutions for juvenile
offenders and head injury rehabilitation programs.
Baird has been a member of Congress since 1998,
representing the Third Congressional District of the state of
Washington. He currently serves as a Senior Democratic
Whip and holds membership on the House Science,
Budget, and Transportation and Infrastructure committees.
Congressman Baird’s invitation to speak at the APA was
made by the American Academy of School Psychology
(AASP) and Division 16, School Psychology. Psychologists
from all divisions are encouraged to attend. Dr. Baird

The Ethics Corner (continued from page 12)

have time to get to a PTA meeting, if
we don’t have time for a weekend
getaway with the person we love, or
for two weeks away from everything,
then maybe we are giving too much to
our work and not enough to ourselves
and our families, and we are
vulnerable indeed. We need to take
the same advice we dispense to our
patients, that it is okay and even
essential to be selfish in some ways,
and that we need to keep a balance,
taking care of ourselves while we
devote ourselves to take care of
everyone else. If alcohol or pain
medicine or illicit drugs or even fast
food becomes the thing we most look
forward to at the end of the day, we
need to assess whether a substance
has become more important than the
things we say we value and determine
whether we need help to manage
stress more appropriately. We have
learned from our patients that good
people can develop serious problems
and that shame and fear of being
judged can perpetuate problems that
can be solved. We must learn to treat
ourselves with the same compassion
we bring to our work with others.
Until next time, take good care of
yourselves.
Thanks to ABPP president Norma
Simon, Ed.D., ABPP and to Ethics
Committee members Lois Condie, Ph.D.,
ABPP; John Linton, Ph.D., ABPP; Paul
Lipsitt, Ph.D., LL.B., ABPP; and John
Robinson, Ed.D., M.P.H., ABPP for
comments and suggestions on an earlier
draft of this column.

Summer 2005 The ABPP Specialist 13

 The ABPP Process: Calling All Training Directors
University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston
imagine all Training Directors
I are well aware of the
importance of obtaining the
ABPP in your respected field. APPIC
asks for “credentials of excellence”
and this is one way to meet that
criteria. I know that each of you
understand that being involved in
training exposes you to the
importance of meeting requirements
for specialty practice and the ABPP is
one way for each of you to
demonstrate this competency. What I
don’t think a lot of you are aware of is
how the process for obtaining the
ABPP has been streamlined and has
become user friendly. If you are like
me, it is one thing that I put off and
did not see the immediate need to
obtain this elevated credential. I
believed it was something that only a
few people wanted and who in the
world would want to put themselves
through one more grueling and
somewhat meaningless credential.
After all, does it really do anything for
my career or does anyone outside of
psychology really know what this
means or care what it means? I would
like to take a few minutes to clarify
the process and how you as a training
director should be interested in this
credential and what it can possibly do
for you.
First, the process is not as daunting
as I remember hearing about early in
my career. Fortunately (and
unfortunately) I qualified for the
senior examination in clinical
psychology. If you have been licensed
for more than 15 years this may be an
option for you. It offers a streamlined
procedure for moving through the
process. Even if you are not at the
“senior” level, I hope you will revisit
the ABPP website and review the
application and credentialing process
at www.abpp.org. The ABPP oversees
and authorizes the credentialing
activities of thirteen specialty boards.
The clearest and most responsible way
for a psychologist to represent
herself/himself to the public, third-
parties, and the profession as a
14 The ABPP Specialist
By Jeff Baker, Ph.D., ABPP
specialist is to be certified through an
organized peer process as meeting the
standards and demonstrating the
competencies required in the
specialty.
Second, the process is not as
dreadful as one may imagine. It is a
process that allows you to do your
own self-study. Similar to what APA
requires of your internship or
postdoctoral program, the ABPP is a
private self-study that asks you to
reflect on your contributions to
psychology and how your career has
evolved and which now includes the
role of training director. Training
directors are responsible for shaping
and developing advanced students
who have completed all of their
coursework and are completing either
their internship or postdoctoral
Dr. Baker
program. Your experience and
expertise in supervision, consultation,
and administrative psychology will
questions where you will get to
most likely provide you the
discuss your practice sample and
preparation as a competitive ABPP
integrate ethical issues, legal issues
applicant. My own experience was one
and your method of intervention and
of self-reflection and an opportunity
treatment. I’ve given over 30 oral
to document my experience as a
exams for the practice of professional
training director, clinician,
psychology in the state of Texas and
academician, researcher, and
even with this experience, I was
instructor. As painful as your self-
nervous about this part of the process.
study is for you, we all know that at
I had been assured that this stage of
the end of the self-study you have a
the exam had been changed to a more
product that you are quite proud of
collegial type of discussion and
and most likely has led to some
moved away from a need to “grill”
changes in your training program. The
you with difficult and ambiguous
ABPP process can do a similar type of
questions. Even though I was anxious
self-awareness and may lead you to
there was indeed a collegial
choose or clarify your own career
atmosphere and discussing my
goals, aspirations, or
treatment recommendations, ethical
acknowledgement that you are a
dilemmas and experience in
product of hard work and quality that
psychology. I would agree that the
you can be extremely proud.
focus has changed for the better and
Third, after completing your
now seems to focus on the collegiality
application materials you then will
of the psychology profession and a
prepare a practice sample (this is
time for you to converse and discuss
waived for the senior application for
your thoughts on clinical practice,
most of the boards). The practice
current research, ethical dilemmas,
sample is reviewed by the
empirically supported treatments, and
examination committee. After passing
legal and professional issues. As a
this part of the exam you will then
training director this is exactly what
move to the next step, which is the
oral exam. This involves a series of
(continued on page 15)
Summer 2005
 Irwin Abraham Hyman
1935-2005
ith great sadness, the American Board of School Psychology (AASP) and the American Academy of

W School Psychology (ABSP) mourn the passing of Dr. Irwin Hyman on February 7, 2005. Irwin held
ABPP diplomas in both School Psychology and Clinical Psychology. His career was characterized by
scholarship, advocacy, and service to the profession. He served numerous professional organizations, of which
ABPP and its components were part. Irwin was the Treasurer of the AASP from 1996-1998 and its President
from 1999-2000. His service to the ABSP included mentoring candidates in the pipeline and service on
examination teams.
Irwin was an avid recruiter for the ABPP Diploma. He successfully encouraged former students to apply for,
and earn the diploma. Participation in AASP recruitment activities was a commonplace activity for Irwin at both
the APA and NASP conventions. These efforts included staffing exhibit booths, panel presentations on more
than one occasion, and direct efforts at the Division 16 Social Hour. Other service included two presentations
on the Diplomate at the Temple University School Psychology Conference. Both of these presentations, made
with other Diplomates, were videotaped and used as recruitment tools. Irwin took the lead on both
productions. He led the efforts that resulted in the AASP’s first position paper on psychoeducational assessment
and learning disability diagnosis. That paper was published in numerous national and state level school
psychology outlets.
One could not know Irwin and not be taken with his enthusiasm for, and commitment to bettering school
psychology. Irwin’s presence was unmistakable and enjoyable. His scholarship on corporal punishment has
made impact, but, perhaps more important, was his willingness to mentor and help students and younger
colleagues, who were very often co-presenters, or co-authors. Quite fittingly, a memorial fund has been
established at Temple University to fund student attendance at conventions. The AASP is establishing a
memorial scholarship for doctoral students.
Irwin will be missed.
Rosemary Flanagan

The ABPP Process: Calling All Training Directors (continued from page 14)

you are teaching all of those trainees
that go through your program every
year. More than likely, you are well
prepared for this part of the exam and
the exam process for me was
extremely friendly and almost (I said
almost) enjoyable. I felt as if the
examiners were not only collegial but
inviting and interested in my thoughts
on practice, research, etc. I walked out
of the exam feeling good about the
profession of psychology and felt the
process was extremely fair.
Lastly, I encourage all of you to
consider this process and assure you it
is not as overwhelming as most of us
perceived 10-20 years ago. The process
now is user friendly and all the
information you need is on the ABPP
website. I would even bet that any of
the current or recent ABPP examinees
would be more than willing to discuss
the application and exam process with
you. It is not about what you know or
don’t know, it is more about who you
are and how you apply all that
graduate school learning, practice
experience and training experience at
your APPIC and/or APA accredited site
that are synthesized by you for the
examiners. The ABPP credential
continues to be a “standard of
excellence” and training directors
should consider this as another way to
model for their trainees.
Editor’s Note: Dr. Baker is Chief
Psychologist and Training Director at the
University of Texas Medical Branch at
Galveston. He is a Board Member and
Treasurer of the Association of Psychology
Postdoctoral and Internship Programs and
a member of the APA Committee on
Accreditation. This article is reprinted
from The APPIC Newsletter, Volume
XXX, No. 3, July 2005 by permission of
the author and APPIC.

Summer 2005 The ABPP Specialist 15

 Specialty Boards
Forensic
Over the past year the American
Board of Forensic Psychology
(ABForP) has remained busy. The
Board last met in early March in La
Jolla, concurrent with the annual
meeting of the American Psychology-
Law Society, as well as continuing
education workshops offered by the
American Academy of Forensic
Psychology.
The revised examination procedure
has now been in place for
approximately three years and is
working smoothly. Once deemed
eligible, candidates complete a 200-
item written examination. Assuming a
passing score, candidates next submit
two practice samples, which, after a
preliminary review, are forwarded for
defense during an oral examination.
ABForP believes that the revised
process, which is streamlined and less
daunting, is partly responsible for the
significant increase in applications
that has been enjoyed. Interest in
ABForP remains strong and
applications continue to increase. At
the request of the President of the
Neuropsychology Division of the New
York State Psychological Association, a
brief piece describing ABForP, its
functions, its relationship to ABPP,
and the application and examination
process was submitted for publication
in the division’s newsletter.
New member Linda Berberoglu is
developing an ABForP “Operations
Manual” which will decrease reliance
on “institutional memory” and serve
as a handy reference for board
members as they go about meeting
their duties. ABForP Vice President
Eric Drogin continues to serve as
National Chair of Examinations, and
has done an excellent job of
organizing this office as well. Under
the able direction of Mary Connell,
ABForP is in the process of revamping
its web-page (www.abfp.com) and
expanding material that is available
16 The ABPP Specialist
on the site. In addition, some of these
materials and a link will be added to
the new and improved ABPP website
(www.abpp.org).
Revision of the Specialty Guidelines
for Forensic Psychologists (SGFP)
continues. Steve Golding and Stu
Greenberg represent ABForP, and are
joined by two representatives from the
American Psychology-Law Society, and
SGFP Revisions Committee Chair
Randy Otto. The first revised SGFP
draft was released in January, 2005
and a second revision should be
released in late spring or early
summer of 2005. The current SGFP,
the most recent draft of the revised
SGFP, and information regarding the
ABPsaP President, Dr. Dolores Morris,
revisions discussion e-list can be presents the ABPP special service award to
found at www.ap- Dr. Nathan Stockhamer
ls.org/links/professionalsgfp.html.
As always, ABForP enjoys a close
relationship with the American
Academy of Forensic Psychology
(AAForP). AAForP President Mary
Connell, who is responsible for
maintaining and restructuring
ABForP’s website, is doing the same
with the AAForP page. As noted above,
Alan Goldstein continues to find
ways to make the AAForP continuing
education workshop series rewarding
to presenters and attendees alike (go
to www.abfp.com for a listing of
2005-2006 locations, dates, and
topics). The March 2005 CE offering,
which was held concurrent with the
annual meeting of the American
Psychology-Law Society in La Jolla, Drs. Nathan Stockhamer and George
provided an opportunity for ABForP Goldman wee directly responsible for the
Diplomates and presenters to meet first CRSPPP recognition of Psychoanalysis
young students and new professionals as a specialty in psychology
alike.
Randy K. Otto during the Division of Psychoanalysis
25th Anniversary Spring Conference.
Board Members and Liaisons reviewed
the ABPP and CRSPPP views on
Psychoanalysis specialty inclusiveness and approved a
The Psychoanalysis Specialty Board revised specialty definition and the
(ABPsaP) and Academy of post-doctoral education and training
Psychoanalysis held Board Meetings
in New York City in April, 2005 (continued on page 17)
Summer 2005
Specialty Boards (continued from page 16)
guidelines for the specialty of
Psychoanalysis. A plan was reviewed
for the submission of the CRSPPP
renewal application for the specialty.
During the ABPsaP meeting, three
former Board members were
recognized by the ABPP and the
current ABPsaP Directors for their
long and devoted service to the
development of the specialty of
Psychoanalysis, and to Professional
Psychology in general. Drs. Bertram
Cohler and Kenneth Isaacs
(acknowledged in absentia), and Dr.
Nathan Stockhamer (personally)
were presented with certificates from
ABPP and ABPsaP.
The Board’s 2005 goals for
completing final revisions of the
Bylaws and the Examination Policies
and Procedures manual are
proceeding on schedule, as well as the
revision of the Director’s work
assignments. Academy members and
Directors also hosted an information
session for psychologists interested in
seeking Board Certification in
Psychoanalysis.
Specialty Board Directors and
Fellows of the Academy of
Psychoanalysis are planning the next
Examiner’s Training Program for
Academy Members during the
Division 39 Spring Conference in
Philadelphia in April of 2006.
Presently, a qualified group of
theoretically and geographically
diverse examiners are available for
new candidate oral exam committees.
By June of 2005, the Psychoanalysis
Synarchy Group expects to submit the
revised specialty definition of
Psychoanalysis in both public and
professional versions, and the
specialty’s renewal application to
CRSPPP.
Thomas W. Ross
School
The American Board of School
Psychology (ABSP) continues to work
hard to maintain the momentum
created at our November 2004 retreat.
Summer 2005
The ABSP also conducted a
governance meeting during the
Council of Directors of School
Psychology Programs conference in
January and a phone conference in
mid-April.
In January, we welcomed two new
Directors for three-year terms – Drs.
Giselle Esquivel and Irna Wolf. For
2005, Dr. Giselle Esquivel is serving
as Secretary, while Dr. Irna Wolf is
serving as Director of Mentoring and
as Liaison with the American Academy
of School Psychology (AASP).
Continuing on the ABSP is Drs.
Rosemary Flanagan (Exam
Coordinator and Treasurer), Jeffrey A.
Miller (Credential Reviewer), Hedwig
Teglasi (Practice Sample Coordinator)
and David McIntosh (President) for
2005.
A primary goal of the ABSP for this
year includes increasing our
participation and visibility in the Field
of School Psychology. We also are
working on updating the ethical
vignettes used during the exam
process, developing the ABSP
Operations Manual, and working with
the AASP in sponsoring a breakfast
during the APA convention to meet
with colleagues who may be
interested in pursuing the Diploma in
School Psychology. In addition, the
ABSP is continuing to schedule and
conduct exams.
Drs. Rosemary Flanagan and
Hedwig Teglasi attended the School
Psychology Synarchy (SPS) Board
Meeting during the Council of
Directors of School Psychology
Programs conference in January. SPS is
led by Walter Pryzwansky, and is
composed of representatives of the
major organization in school
psychology and provides a forum to
exchange information and seek
common ground in specialty matters
that are of an inter-organizational
interest. We are pleased to have ABSP
representation on the SPS Board. A
particular focus of this group is to
develop standards for post-doctoral
programs in school psychology.
During the annual conference of
the National Association of School
Psychologists (NASP) in April, Drs.
Giselle Esquivel and Rosemary
Flanagan participated in the School
Psychology Leadership Roundtable.
The Roundtable provides a forum
where the leaders of all the major
national and international school
psychology associations can
collaborate on projects addressing the
outcome goals of the Futures
Conference.
The ABSP and AASP co-sponsored a
booth during the NASP conference at
Atlanta, GA and met with potential
candidates. For the past three years,
the booth has disseminated
information about pursuing the
Diploma in School Psychology and in
answering questions related to the
application and exam process. Special
thanks are due to Dr. Linda Caterino
(AASP President) and the AASP for
funding and assisting in staffing the
booth. The booth continues to be an
overwhelming success and increases
the visibility of School Psychology
Diplomates. Two sessions on the
Diplomate process were offered at
NASP. The first was a special
informational session given by Linda
Caterino and Fredrick Schrank. The
second was a mini-skills workshop on
practice sample preparation, given by
Rosemary Flanagan and Hedy
Teglasi.
Two exams were conducted during
the NASP conference. The ABSP
extends our appreciation to Giselle
Esquivel, Rosemary Flanagan, and
Hedy Teglasi. Please join us in
extending a welcome to our new
Diplomates: Tony Crespi and Daniel
Miller. Also, our warmest appreciation
to their respective mentors: Barbara
Fischetti and John Desrochers.
David McIntosh
The ABPP Specialist 17
 Academy News
ACADEMY OF FAMILY
PSYCHOLOGY
In January a new slate of officers
began their two-year terms for the
Academy of Family Psychology: John
Northman, president; John Thoburn,
president-elect; David Terrell,
secretary; and Wes Crenshaw,
treasurer. In synchronizing with the
other specialty academies, the AFP
board voted that terms of office be for
the calendar year; previously the
change had occurred at the APA
convention in August.
Jerry Morris, the new editor of the
AFP newsletter, has already given that
publication a spiffier, up-to-date look.
William Lax, AFP webmaster, has
been doing the same for AFP’s
electronic communication.
In looking at the professional
landscape, there are at least four (and
perhaps more) organizations with
News from the Specialists
Patrick H. DeLeon is the newly
appointed Editor of Psychological
Services, the journal of APA Division
18, Psychologists in Public Service.
Deceased Notifications
Alvin S. Baraff, Ph.D.
Leonard Bernstein, Ph.D.
Russell N. Cassell, Ph.D.
Nancy Edwards, Ph.D.
18 The ABPP Specialist
overlapping goals and membership:
The Academy of Family Psychology,
the American Board of Family
Psychology (ABPP’s family psychology
board) Division 43 (Family
Psychology) of APA, and the Family
Psychology Specialty Council. AFP has
been exploring ways of building
strategic partnerships among these
organizations.
As one step, Mark Stanton,
President of Division 43, has
graciously agreed to make space
available for an AFP column in the
Division 43 quarterly newsletter, The
Family Psychologist. Through this
publication AFP can extend its reach
to the large Division 43 pool of
potential Diplomates.
As another step, AFP’s conference
calls now formally include
representatives from the American
Board of Family Psychology (Irene
Goldberg, president, was present on
E. Thomas Dowd was re-elected
Chair of the Kent State University
Faculty Senate for 2005-2006.
Robert W. Goldberg is serving as
David C. Fisher, Ph.D.
Leo Katz, Ph.D.
Martin I. Kurke, LL.B., Ph.D.
the first call), Division 43 (Mark
Stanton, president, was present), and
the Family Psychology Specialty
Council ( William Watson, chair, was
present).
In conjunction with the upcoming
APA convention in Washington, AFP
will host an information session
concerning the ABFamP application
and examination process at the
Division 43 hospitality suite (which is
still another example of coordinating
our groups’ efforts). At that time we
hope to have ready for preview a new
recruitment CD featuring Florence
Kaslow. Please encourage your
colleagues to attend.
Also in Washington, there will be
an open breakfast meeting open to all
AFP members; watch for the
announcement of time and place.
See you in Washington!
John E. Northman
Vice Chairman of the Geauga County
(Ohio) Board of Mental Health and
Recovery Services.
Laura H. Lewis, Ph.D.
Edward J. McLaughlin, Ph.D.
Frank O. Volle, Ph.D.
John J. Zarski, Ph.D.
Summer 2005

Cognitive & Behavioral
Psychology
Marvin B. Lew, Ph.D.
Clinical Psychology
John P. Billig, Ph.D.
Matthew J. Blusewicz, Ph.D.
Clark D. Campbell, Ph.D.
Margaret Charlton, Ph.D.
Roger G. Clark, Psy.D.
Barbara R. Cohn, Ph.D.
Joseph Delvey, Jr., Ph.D.
Robert A. deMayo, Ph.D.
Rafael Duenas, Psy.D.
Carol S. Ginandes, Ph.D.
Jane B. Gogan, Ph.D.
Doris S. Gordon, Ph.D.
Dana T. Grossman, Ph.D.
Ann P. Hazzard, Ph.D.
Robert K. Heinssen, Ph.D.
Richard H. Hunter, Ph.D.
Carol M. Kauffman, Ph.D.
Seth Kunen, Ph.D., Psy.D.
David Mahoney, Ph.D.
Hamid Mirsalimi, Ph.D.
Michael J. Moller, Psy.D.
John C. Norcross, Ph.D.
John Richard Paddock, Ph.D.
David Ryback, Ph.D., Psy.D.
James A. Stephenson, Ph.D.
A Brief History of Specialty Training and Related Issues in
Clinical Geropsychology (continued from page 6)
Washington, DC in 1992. Broadly
speaking, the first conference focused
on the knowledge base in
geropsychology and began the
discussion of how this knowledge base
can be taught to new geropsychologists
(Santos & VadenBos, 1982). The second
conference continued this discussion,
but with a greater focus on skills
training and more attention to the
various levels of clinical training
(Knight, Teri, Wohlford, & Santos,
1995).
Between the two conferences, there
was a rapid expansion of training
opportunities at the internship level
(Gallagher-Thompson & Thompson,
1995), but training at the on-campus
graduate school level remained steady
or perhaps experienced a slight decline
in number of programs. After Older
Boulder II, the expansion of predoctoral
Summer 2005
New Specialists
Emel D. Stroup, Psy.D.
Frank D. Weber, Ph.D.
Loren T. Wilkenfeld, Ph.D.
Clinical Child and Adolescent
Psychology
Barry S. Anton, Ph.D.
Brian J. Bigelow, Ph.D.
Samantha E. Carella, Psy.D.
Mitchell R. Gordon, Ph.D.
Christina Grand, Psy.D.
Fred Melowsky, Ph.D.
Laura A. Nabors, Ph.D.
Dennis K. Norman, Ed.D.
Steven D. Thurber, Ph.D.
Clinical Neuropsychology
Edward J. Barnowski, Ph.D.
Michelle L. Bengston, Ph.D.
Gary A. Burkhart, Ph.D.
Ty Scott Callahan, Ph.D.
Andrew Neil Colvin, Ph.D.
Joseph M. Cunningham, Ph.D.
Daniel L. Drane, Ph.D.
Kristin M. Fiano, Ph.D.
Jerry W. Halsten, Ph.D.
John King, Ph.D.
Donald J. Mabbott, Ph.D.
Susan McGlynn, Ph.D.
Robert H. Paul, Ph.D.
Michael P. Santa Maria, Ph.D.
and postdoctoral training opportunities
continued and additional graduate
school specialty programs have
developed (e.g., Ph.D. program at
University of Alabama and Psy.D.
programs at Yeshiva University and
Xavier University). Recently, a Ph.D.
program in clinical psychology and
aging has formed at the University of
Colorado in Colorado Springs and is
working on APA accreditation.
Since the Older Boulder II
conference, additional developments
have further enhanced the standing of
geropsychology as a specialty within
professional psychology. Clinical
geropsychology became Section II of the
Society of Clinical Psychology (APA
Division 12) in 1994. A joint task force
of Section II and of Division 20, Adult
Development and Aging, began working
on the development of guidelines for
Alexander I. Troster, Ph.D.
Daniel E. Zehler, Psy.D.
Counseling Psychology
Charissa C. Camp, Ph.D.
Robert A. McMackin, Ed.D.
Family Psychology
Joseph M. Cervantes, ph.D.
Robert A. Geffner, Ph.D.
Scott K. Shimabukuro, Ph.D.
Group Psychology
George S. Everly, Jr., Ph.D.
Nina D. Fieldsteel, Ph.D.
Suzanne B. Phillips, Psy.D.
Saul Scheidlinger, Ph.D.
Organizational & Business
Consulting Psychology
Virginia C. Mullin, Psy.D.
Psychoanalysis in Psychology
Anita Tenzer, Ph.D.
School Psychology
Tony D. Crespi, Ed.D.
Daniel C. Miller, Ph.D.
practice in geropsychology under the
leadership of George Niederehe. This
work culminated in the acceptance of
the Guidelines for Psychological Practice
with Older Adults, adopted by APA
Council in 2004 (APA, 2004).
When the APA Commission on the
Recognition of Proficiencies and
Specialties was formed, geropsychology
decided to apply for recognition as a
proficiency. This application was a joint
effort of the new Section and also of
APA Division 20. Clinical
geropsychology has been recognized as
a proficiency since 1998 and recently
was renewed as a proficiency. The initial
decision to apply as a proficiency was
based in part on early thinking that the
specialties would be the traditional “big
specialties” like clinical and counseling
(continued on page 20)
The ABPP Specialist 19
A Brief History of Specialty Training and Related Issues in
Clinical Geropsychology (continued from page 19)
psychology, and in part on the fact that
the number of training programs prior
to 1998 was not sufficient to support a
specialty application. As part of the
review for the recent renewal, specialty
status was discussed with CRSPPP and
the lack of a clear training model that
would transfer the knowledge and skills
defined in Older Boulder I and II was
noted. Section II and Division 20 are
currently collaborating on planning a
National Conference on Training in
Professional Geropsychology tentatively
planned for 2006.
What are some of the issues that
define geropsychology as a specialty and
that requires special training? As noted
above, professional geropsychology has
one set of roots in life span
developmental psychology. This
tradition emphasizes the importance of
research designs that address
developmental change over the adult
years and that can disentangle
developmental change from historical
time influences that affect everyone
during the same time period, and from
differences between successive birth
cohorts that influence the ways in
which generational groups differ (e.g.,
the World War II generation, the
Boomers, Generation X, etc.). This
tradition emphasizes the importance of
these methodologies and their
conceptual application to clinical
practice (e.g., Knight, 2004). It
highlights the importance of
understanding normal aging before
attempting to work with older adults
with psychological disorders. It also
includes both didactic training in
normative information about older
adults and training exposure to
normally and successfully aging
individuals, as well as clinical training
with older adults who have
psychological disorders.
Another set of roots in professional
geropsychology places considerable
emphasis on knowledge and skills with
one of the types of disorders that are
largely specific to later life: the pervasive
dementias of late life such as
Alzheimer’s disease, vascular dementias,
subcortical dementias, and the frontal
lobe syndromes. These training models
place considerable emphasis on
understanding the neuroscience and the
clinical neuropsychology of the
dementia. They also involve extensive
work with persons with dementia and
20 The ABPP Specialist
their families in research settings like
the National Institute on Aging funded
Alzheimer’s Disease Centers, and in
memory clinics in university hospital
medical centers or in VA health care
systems. This tradition makes clear that
a working knowledge of
neuropsychology as it relates to the
dementia of late life is important for
geropsychology expertise. Another
major influence on specialization in
geropsychology is the common
presence of chronic medical conditions
in older adults, a fact which makes
understanding the interactions of
physical and psychological symptoms of
critical importance and also makes
knowledge of the psychological effects
of medications for physical disorders (as
well as psychotropic medications)
essential to professional practice with
older adults. This tradition draws
attention to the need for expert
geropsychologists to understand the
health psychology of late life medical
disorders. These last two points, the
presence of pervasive dementia in late
life and the common presence of
comorbid medical disorders with
psychological ones, also point to the
greater complexity of psychological
assessment with older adults. Working
with both types of older adult patients
also calls attention to the importance of
being able to work with
interdisciplinary teams including
various medical specialties, nurses,
social workers, rehabilitation therapists,
and so on.
Another source of specificity in work
with older adults is the range of age-
specific environmental contexts in
which older adult clients are embedded.
A major example is that of long term
care settings. Psychologists in Long
Term Care have existed as an
independent organization of
psychological practitioners since 1983
and have called attention to the
complexities of working within long
term care institutions (e.g., Lichtenberg
et al, 1998). In addition to the complex
needs of the frail older adults in long
term care, the psychologist working in
the long term care setting must be
skilled in training all levels of staff from
nurses’ aides to administrators, must be
skilled in organizational consultation,
and must have the capacity to work well
within interdisciplinary teams.
This is not intended to be a
comprehensive listing of the knowledge
and skills needed to be an expert
clinical geropsychologist. It does
illustrate important ways in which
geropsychology as a specialty has
potential boundary disputes with other
specialties like neuropsychology and
health psychology. To date,
geropsychology (like most of child
clinical psychology) has existed as a
specialization within clinical psychology
and counseling psychology. So far, there
have been multiple training pathways in
geropsychology with two common ones
being either a combination of graduate
school plus an internship with specialty
rotations, or internship specialty
rotation plus a postdoctoral fellowship
in geropsychology. Some trainees have
done all three. The organizations within
the field have always been keenly aware
of the need for training pathways for
post-licensure psychologists who wish
to gain expertise in geropsychology, but
models for those pathways have not
been worked out, especially with regard
to the need for supervised clinical
experience with older adult clients.
Finally, it should be noted that
nothing in this article is intended to
argue that expertise in geropsychology is
needed to see any older adult clients. It
seems likely that most practitioners will
see some older adults who are similar
to the younger adults in their practice
and will do competent work with them.
As issues become more complex and
more specialized in their nature
(potential pressure of dementia,
complications from comorbid medical
problems, nursing home consultation),
the need for expertise increases. And it
seems likely that the greater the
proportion of older adults in one’s
practice, the higher the likelihood that
such complexities will occur. That is,
specialists are needed to ensure optimal
care for older adults with mental health
problems, but not every provider of
services to older adults needs to be a
specialist.
In short, the field of professional
geropsychology has been developing for
a number of decades and encompasses
several bodies of specialized knowledge
and specialized skill sets that support
the recognition of geropsychology as a
specialty field. The increasing aging of
the population and the increasing
demands for psychological services
(continued on page 21)
Summer 2005
A Brief History of Specialty Training and Related Issues in
Clinical Geropsychology (continued from page 20)
from older adults create a need for the
clear identification of expertise when it
is needed.
References:
American Psychological Association (2004).
Guidelines for psychological practice
with older adults. American Psychologist,
59, 236-260.
Butler, R. N. (1963). The life review: An
interpretation of reminiscence in the
aged. Psychiatry, 199, 721-728.
Cautela, J.R. (1966). Behavior therapy and
geriatrics. Journal of Genetic Psychology,
108, 9-17.
Cooley, S.G. (1995). Geropsychology
services and training in the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs. In B.G.
Knight, L. Teri, P. Wohlford, & J. Santos
(Eds), Mental health services for older
Geropsychology: Old and New (continued from page 7)
Where personal issues of death are
the focus, the psychologist is strangely
placed in the position of the priest,
rabbi, and meaning-making
philosopher. Here the comfort of denial
evaporates, but the challenge to the
alliance is made easier. Practically, the
newer (usually younger – but not
always!) psychologist needs to be
comfortable with mortality and death.
Older patients are facing death as a very
real and tangible thing, while the
younger psychologist can keep these
ideas at bay as theoretical constructs
safely cushioned by decades to spare
(hopefully). Can the newer psychologist
appreciate these things? With the right
perspective, usually taught them by their
patients, the natural affinity led by
clinical curiosity and existential interest
creates a profound experience. What a
privilege, as here more than any other
place in the field of psychology, the
geropsychologist becomes both a
scientific helper and soul mate.
In addition to outdated (but not
completely dead) misconceptions about
older adults being ‘set in their ways’ or
otherwise less amenable to change than
everybody else, geropsychologists swim
against the tide of many myths and
misunderstandings about older adults.
In fact, the myths are being
reformulated monthly. It is tough to
keep up. We are redefining retirement,
rethinking and retyping dementias, re-
looking at frailty, retargeting wellness at
Summer 2005
adults: Implications for training and practice
in geropsychology (pp. 11-20). Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Erikson, E. (1950/1963). Childhood and
society (2nd ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: youth and crisis.
New York: W.W. Norton.
Gallagher-Thompson, D. & Thompson, L.W.
(1995). Issues in geropsychology training
at the internship level. In B.G. Knight, L.
Teri, P. Wohlford, & J. Santos (Eds),
Mental health services for older adults:
Implications for training and practice in
geropsychology (pp. 129-142).
Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Gentry, W.D. (1977) Geropsychology: A model
of training and clinical service. Cambridge,
MA: Ballinger.
Knight, B. G. (2004). Psychotherapy with older
adults (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
late life, reestablishing chronic illnesses
as manageable and even curable, and in
general reinventing the variable age.
Depression, for example, has undergone
a revolution in the last decade. While
many still believe that depression is a
normal, inevitable part of aging and
overlook symptoms of a very treatable
condition, most professionals are awash
in the new typologies of sadness at late
life, and the mediating effects of health,
brain problems, personality, and age
itself. In fact, depression has once again
become a construct, an entity to be
defined and studied “all over again.”
To cite another example, sleep
problems, many believe, are perfectly
normal in older adults. They sleep
much less at night than they did when
they were younger. As such, the clinical
symptoms of excessive napping and
“nodding off” during the day are not
seen as problems. In reality, older adults
need as much sleep as they did when
they were younger. The grain of truth in
the myth is that older adults often do
sleep poorly at night, but not because
they need less sleep. Older adults have
problems initiating and maintaining
sleep due to increased vulnerability (to
noise, physical sensations,
environmental discomfort, etc.). As in
most problem areas at late life,
geropsychologists are situated well to
address the issue. Geropsychologists are
well versed in sleep data, fully respectful
of its importance and equipped with
Knight, B.G., Teri, L., Wohlford, P., & Santos,
J. (Eds), Mental health services for older
adults: Implications for training and practice
in geropsychology. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Lichtenberg, P.A., Smith M., Frazer D.,
Molinari V., Rosowsky E., Crose R.,
Stillwell N., Kramer N., Hartman-Stein P.,
Qualls S., Salamon M., Duffy M., Parr J.,
and Gallagher-Thompson D. (1998).
Standards for psychological services in
long-term care facilities. Gerontologist, 38,
122-127.
Lindsley, O.R. (1964). Geriatric behavioral
prosthetics. In R. Kastenbaum (Ed.), New
thoughts on old age. New York: Springer.
Santos, J. & VandenBos, G.R. (Eds.) (1982).
Psychology and the older adult: Challenges
for training in the 1980s. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
approaches, such as stimulus control
therapy, sleep restriction, and sleep
hygiene education. In our memory
clinics, for example, sleep suggestions or
referrals are the number one
recommendation.
We do not want to give short shrift to
memory. The issue of cognitive decline
has extended far beyond cognitive
aging. The axiom that there is more
variability within cohort than between
is nowhere more evident than with
cognition. In the last five years a
blistering array of emerging constructs
involving cognitive impairment, newer
scales and norms, as well as retraining
options, has descended on aging care.
Our predictor algorithms are just
sufficiently reliable and accurate as to
provide information that will assist in
the diagnosis and treatment, but also
variable enough to suggest humility in
tone. This area then mandates
integrated care and the phrase
“multidisciplinary” is now on
everyone’s lips.
That said, geropsychologists are again
best positioned to answer
questions/lead teams in this area. We
rely heavily on reliable and valid
cognitive assessments and are well
versed in the differences between
normal aging and cognitive decline.
Importantly, it is now clear that not
only does the central nervous system
(continued on page 22)
The ABPP Specialist 21
Geropsychology: Old and New (continued from page 21)
(CNS) produce behavior, but also
behavior can have an equally profound
reciprocal effect on the CNS.
Geropsychologists are generally facile in
navigating the tricky waters where
normal aging, mild cognitive
impairment, and early dementia are not
as easily distinguished as others might
think. The geropsychologist works daily
against the unfortunate effects on
society of these misperceptions and
fights with the most powerful weapons
in our armamentarium – education,
advocacy and persistence.
Another challenge for the
geropsychologist is gaining access to
some patients’ important issues while
maintaining respect for sensitive,
sometimes uncomfortable topics. This
applies, of course, to all psychologists,
and for those working with older adults,
it can be a matter of cultural clash.
Sexuality, for example, may be a much
more natural topic of discussion for the
younger professional than for the older
Is Clinical Geropsychology Ready To Be a Specialty? (continued from page 9)
condition. Optimizing function,
reducing behavioral disturbance and
assisting informal caregivers are but a
few of the contributions geropsychology
practice will continue to make. Stroke,
cancer, pain and diabetes are examples
of chronic diseases for which
Rehabilitation or Health Psychology lay
claim to expertise, but yet the greatest
prevalence of these disorders are among
older adults.
Why then are there such significant
barriers to establishing geropsychology
as a specialization given the population
trends, the statistics about chronic
disease, and the growing need for
geropsychology expertise? The American
Psychological Association recently
denied an application for
geropsychology to be recognized as a
specialty. There are at least two major
barriers to the recognition of
Geropsychology as an ABPP Specialty: Reflections of a Past APA President
(continued from page 10)
and other more community-based
settings as substitutes for Nursing Home
care. The question addressed is whether
there is still a place for nursing homes.
For long term care patients, there has
been evidence over the last 20 years that
nursing homes have increased in size
accompanied by an increase in the
22 The ABPP Specialist
adult client who may have come from a
time and place where “you just didn’t
talk about that – especially with a
stranger.” The young psychologist
especially must tread lightly when
talking to someone old enough to be
her or his grandparent about his erectile
dysfunction or her concerns about
diminished sexual desire. In the same
way we approach someone from a
culture different from our own, we must
be acutely aware of the unwritten rules
about what can be discussed openly
and what must be approached with
utmost caution.
There are several messages here. First,
our field has changed and done so
quickly. Competence is necessary for
this to be appreciated. Second and
implied in the first message, the
geropsychologist has as much data at
the ready for clinical decisions as any
professional in mental health. This
involves assessment for modal
problems of mood disorders,
geropsychology through specialization:
(1) lack of an aging focus throughout
health care; and (2) political
organization needed to achieve specialty
status. The face of health care remains
geared to white males. Indeed, women’s
health and health disparity recognition
and focus for minority populations are
both in their infancy. Older individuals
are primarily women, and increasingly
of minority status. The sentiments
against learning about the needs of
these historically ignored groups was
exhibited in the past year’s International
Neuropsychological Society presidential
address in which Jason Brandt ridiculed
the growth of “race-based” norms (e.g.,
norms for older African Americans).
Brandt never mentioned the
documented impact racism had on this
cohort of older adults’ educational
experience and their lack of experience
discharge rate and a decline in the
average length of stay. Results appear to
indicate that despite these changes,
nursing homes still have 60% of their
residents stay for one year or more.
Even though there has been an increase
of post-acute care within nursing
homes, the pattern appears to be that
somatization, adjustment issues of sleep
and sex, and of course memory decline.
In also entails the staples of concern in
adulthood; interests, personality, and
health choices, as well as treatment.
Third, aging is more exciting now than
ever. The application of disciplined
technologies in the context of a flexible
therapeutic stance is now necessary. We
need to be as humanly professional as
possible and as actuarially apt as
possible. Fourth, are we expanding into
primary care, oncology, behavioral
medicine and medicine in general as
well as refining our models of care in
the usual places, long term care and
geriatric clinics. Fifth, for the first time
in the history of our field, we are part of
the care team that can make a difference
in the care of older adults.
Finally, we have done this in centers
where, as always, the older professional
mentors the younger one. In this
process, we learn that you can teach an
old dog (and a new one!) new tricks.
with cognitive testing. Instead, Brandt
further argued that the use of traditional
norms were most appropriate, and
further, that by using matched norms,
clinicians were mislabeling older
minorities as cognitively intact,
implying that persons who are old,
poor and poorly educated, must be
demented too. Finally, geropsychology
itself will need to become a stronger
political force. I witnessed the
dedication of a core group of
rehabilitation psychologists, who
devoting time and resources for 5-10
years were able to make an ABPP in
Rehabilitation Psychology a reality.
Geropsychology will need to identify
their core group and begin the process
of planning and partnering to make an
ABPP in geropsychology a reality by
2015.
nursing homes still serve residents who
have greater needs for rehabilitation
and medical care. This means that there
is still considerable potential for the
work of geropsychologists in long term
care in general and in nursing homes in
(continued on page 23)
Summer 2005
Geropsychology as an ABPP Specialty: Reflections of a Past APA President
(continued from page 22)
particular. The difficulties for
psychologists have been in the area of
reimbursement for services, and the
APA Practice Directorate is quite aware
of this problem and work is being done
in this area.
So where does all this lead? It would
appear that in the last 10 years clinical
geropsychology has matured into a full-
fledged specialty. It is important to
provide specialty care to older adults,
and clinical geropsychologists are
qualified to do so. They should be
recognized as a full specialist by ABPP
A Contrary View About Prescription Authority (continued from page 11)
seeking Ph.D.s and some of the latter
PsyDs. And undoubtedly there were
fewer professional schools than
traditional (University?) programs so
they were undoubtedly more crowded.
Further, there has been an increase in
the number of “traditional” programs
and the meaning of this increase with
regard to quality is unclear. Who is
joining APA? Which Divisions? Who
is joining State, Provincial and other
practice groups?
For a time, as the “professional
schools” multiplied and expanded,
hundreds of new instant
psychotherapists were created. But as
health insurance companies learned
that psychotherapeutic treatment is
usually long, even unending, sharp
limits have been imposed on
reimbursement. As a result,
psychotherapists have suffered
economic hardship while more and
more young therapists are being
extruded into an oversaturated
market.
But a solution is at hand. Give
psychologists training in basic
psychopharmacology. Let them
prescribe drugs for their “patients”
with mental “diseases.” There is a
huge market for tranquilizers, and for
visits to tweak, adjust, and change
drugs and dosages. All reimbursable!
All backed by “science” and
underwritten by the drug companies
and by the most respected leaders in
American psychiatry.
The beauty of science, and the
respect for its findings, derive from its
adherence to falsifiability. No
scientific statement is ever accepted as
absolutely true – the Null Hypothesis
Summer 2005
so that our society can benefit and our
older adults can receive services from
practitioners with advanced
competence.
References
Abeles, N., Cooley S., Deitch, I., Harper, M.,
Hinrichson, G., Lopez, M., and Molinari,
V. What practitioners should know about
working with older adults (1998).
Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 29, 413-427
American Psychological Association (1998).
Guidelines for the evaluation of dementia
is rejected at different levels of
confidence. Where there is doubt,
strong and persistent efforts are made
to find contrary evidence. This is
seldom the case in psychiatry. The
keynote speaker at the White House
Conference on Mental Health
(Koplewitz, 1999) stated that
“psychiatric illnesses” in children are
“no-fault brain disorders” and not the
result of bad parenting or toxic social
environments. At that same
conference, Steven Hyman, then
Director of the National Institute of
Mental Health (and now Provost at
Harvard) boldly stated that “these are
real illnesses of a real organ, the brain,
just like coronary artery disease is a
disease of a real organ, the heart.” The
problem, of course, is that the elusive
physical defect has not been found. It
is safe to say that there is considerable
evidence that most mental disorders
are learned in toxic social
environments. Authoritarian
statements by psychiatry that are
unsupported by solid evidence should
make us extremely cautious about
prescribing drugs as treatment.
While individual, one-on-one,
treatment has little or no effect or
incidence (the number of new cases)
and little impact on prevalence (the
total number of cases) there is much
to learn from treatment efforts.
Successful psychotherapy shows that
recovery is possible without organic
intervention, and thus gives evidence
against the brain disease model. Why
then is APA so determined to focus
efforts and money on the state by
state battle to get the legal right for
practitioners to prescribe drugs when
and age related memory decline. American
Psychologist, 53, 1298-1303
American Psychological Association (2004).
Guidelines for Psychological Practice with
Older Adults. American Psychologist, 59,
236-260.
Decker, F. (2005). Nursing Homes, 1977-99.
Retrieved from www.mecf.org/articles/
national%20nursing%20Home%20
Survey%2077-99%20nursingHome
1977_99.pdf
White House Conference on Aging (1996)
The road to an aging policy for the 21st
century. Final report. Washington, D.C.,
Author
the evidence is so much more certain
about the damaging effects of poverty,
terrible housing, inadequate
parenting, terrible schools, etc. As
Marx pointed out long ago: the ruling
ideas of society are those that support
the Ruling Class (Albee, 1996).
Explaining emotional problems to be
a result of brain disease removes any
need for expensive social changes that
would be required to achieve social
justice.
References
Albee, G.W. (1996). Social Darwinism and
political models of mental/emotional
problems. Special issue. Journal of
Primary Prevention, 17, 1, 3-207.
Albee, G.W. (1998). Fifty years of clinical
psychology: Selling our soul to the
devil. Applied and Preventive Psychology,
7, 189-194.
Albee, G.W. (2000). The Boulder Model’s
fatal flaw. American Psychologist, 55, 2,
247-248.
Hyman, S. (1999). White House
Conference on Mental Health. Quoted
in CNN.com. p.2.
Koplewitz, H. (1999). White House
Conference on Mental Health. Quoted
in CNN.com. p.2.
Kutchins, H. & Kirk, S.A. (1997). Making
us crazy, DSM: the psychiatric bible and
the creation of mental disorders. New
York: The Free Press.
George W. Albee is Professor Emeritus of
Psychology at the University of Vermont.
He has retired to Longboat Key, Florida.
He is President-elect of Division I, the
Society for General Psychology.
The ABPP Specialist 23
 2005
ABPP Convocation
and
Awards Ceremony

Grand Hyatt Washington Hotel

Constitution Ballroom A

Saturday, August 20, 2005

1:00 PM to 3:00 PM

THE ABPP PRESORT STANDARD

Specialist
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
JEFFERSON CITY, MO
PERMIT NO. 210
American Board of Professional Psychology, Inc.
300 Drayton Street – 3rd Floor, Savannah, GA 31401

24 The ABPP Specialist Summer 2005