Regulation - the changes

In November 2010, we were pleased to be able to tell you that our Head of Qualifications, Fiona Ballantine Dykes, had been invited to represent CPCAB on the Health Professions Council's new Professional Liaison Group (PLG) for psychotherapists and counsellors.

Fiona has undertaken to report all developments as they happen. For the latest update either scroll down or use the quick link section to the right.

Regulation update (January 2012)

The government is opposed to the statutory regulation of counselling and psychotherapy and has abandoned plans to regulate the profession via the HPC (Health Professions Council). However they are keen on voluntary registration and have charged CHRE (Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence) with developing a system for achieving this.

The CHRE will be re-named the Professional Standards Authority (for Health and Social Care) and is in the process of agreeing standards for organisations wishing to establish Assured Voluntary Registers (AVRs). CHRE will pilot their quality assurance scheme this year with a view to launching it more widely in November 2012.

Although this is not a statutory system it is almost certain that practitioners will need to be on an AVR to work in the public sector. There is no limit on the number of AVRs that might be approved and is it clear that there will be several in our field.

CPCAB has attended the CHRE workshops as an interested party and is exploring the possibility of either becoming a register holder ourselves or entering into a partnership to establish a register. Our aim would be to provide a clear, direct and inexpensive route for candidates with CPCAB qualifications to join an AVR. We will keep you updated on developments.

CPCAB responds to HPC Consultation on revised generic standards of proficiency (July – Oct 2010)

HPC has launched an important consultation revising its generic Standards of Proficiency which were so disliked by counsellors and psychotherapists. This consultation represents a significant shift away from the ‘medical model’ and addresses many of the concerns raised by practitioners about HPC not being an appropriate regulator. The new proposed standards have been considerably reduced from 26 (subdivided into 53) standards to 15 high level standards which seem to provide an appropriate framework for professional practice. CPCAB welcomes the revised standards as evidence that HPC is a listening regulator and can accommodate counselling and psychotherapy. Click here to view CPCAB response to this consultation.

MIND report: The protection we deserve - 28th July 2010

You may be interested in the results of a survey of service users recently commissioned by MIND, the mental health charity. 'The protection we deserve’ publishes findings from the survey undertaken earlier this year and provides an account of views on and experiences of regulation.

Key findings from this very interesting report include:

• 75% of respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the service they received from their counsellor or psychotherapist;
• Less than two thirds of respondents knew whether or not their therapist was a member of a professional body;
• Only 20% of respondents who felt they had been abused actually made a complaint;
• Of those that complained, almost three quarters of respondents were either not satisfied or very unsatisfied with the complaints process;
• 85% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with statutory regulation;
• Over two thirds wanted an independent regulator.

MIND has kindly given us permission to share the report with CPCAB service users - for a full copy please click: The Protection We Deserve - survey report

PLG reconvenes to approve new programme of work 12th May 2010

The PLG met on 12th May to review the results of the HPC December 2009 consultation and to set out a work plan for the next phase. The HPC council had acknowledged that there was still a lot of work to be done in order to move towards an acceptable formulation for the regulation of psychotherapists and counsellors. HPC President Anna van der Gaag chaired the meeting because Diane Waller was not well. Carmen Ablack represented UKCP in place of Kathi Murphy and Peter Bell attended for Relate. CPCAB was represented by Fiona Ballantine Dykes.

Individual group members were invited to reflect on the current situation before reviewing a discussion document prepared by Michael Guthrie (HPC) which is available on the HPC website. A number of people requested that the concerns expressed by those opposed to regulation by HPC should be considered by the PLG as part of the ongoing work.

HPC confirmed that the generic standards for all HPC regulated professions (black rubric) are being revised and that the problems of the “medical model” language are being addressed. The HPC are also reviewing their current requirement to specify a ‘type’ and level of qualification for entry to their register.

The group was invited to suggest what further work might help to resolve the areas of difference – particularly:

• The difference between counselling and psychotherapy
• The qualification entry level for counselling and psychotherapy
• The Standards of Proficiency
• Whether there is a need for separate standards of proficiency for those working with children and young people

The group all agreed that the client’s perspective has not been sufficiently considered and that the PLG should hear more from clients who have been happy with their service not just those who have been hurt. The group were reminded of the importance of keeping protection of clients at the centre and to keep asking what effect particular standards would have on the services offered to clients and to their protection.

The group wanted more information on what happens in other countries in terms of differentiation and standards – especially Europe, given the emerging European Qualifications Framework.

There was also general agreement on the importance of taking account of the diversity of the client group and diversity of ways of delivering services (including private practice).

There was some discussion about the centrality of the therapeutic relationship in counselling and psychotherapy and a suggestion that this could be stated in a preamble to the standards of proficiency. HPC agreed to look at this.

There was some discussion on the “entry levels” for psychotherapy and counselling and the difficulty of capturing the work of counsellors and psychotherapists in the SOPS. CPCAB pointed out that many of those who responded to the consultation did not appreciate that the SOPS are only intended to identify what a practitioner needs to know and be able to do at the point they go on to the register; they do not describe everything that someone does and are not learning outcomes. There was a suggestion that standards of education and training should take account of more than SOPS and perhaps consider other requirements eg. training hours and personal therapy. Not all participants agreed.

CPCAB specifically requested that any proposed change to SOPs or SETs should not lead to a closing down of diversity in the profession.

All agreed that the difficult decisions should not be left until the last minute as happened last time.

What next?

The PLG will continue to meet until February 2011. In addition there will be 4 stakeholders meetings (one in each home country). The crucial HPC Council meeting is in May 2011.

The mood of the meeting was generally positive despite the continued areas of difference. CPCAB has been told that the areas of difference are also being discussed by meetings of the main professional bodies.

Fiona Ballantine Dykes
Head of Qualifications (CPCAB representative on the PLG)

Regulation update - April 2010

The HPC council met on 25th March and reached a number of conclusions relating to further work on the statutory regulation of counselling and psychotherapy. The programme of work includes the reconvening of the PLG which is due to meet on 12th May and further public consultation throughout the next year. The council also recognised that the standards of proficiency need further work and will need to take into account the revisions to the general HPC standards of proficiency which are currently underway.

CPCAB Head of Qualifications Fiona Ballantine Dykes will continue to represent CPCAB on the PLG.

Further details can be found on the HPC website.

Meeting for the HPC Council - 10^th December 2009

Fiona Ballantine Dykes attended this meeting of the HPC Council as an observer in order to hear the council reach their conclusions following the consultation on the recommendations of the PLG. A number of other PLG members and the professional bodies were also in the observers’ gallery. The report on the consultation response report was introduced by Michael Guthrie, Director of Policy and Standards for the Policy and Standards Department. After discussion, the conclusions were voted on.

Key points
Michael Guthrie said this was the biggest response they had ever had to a consultation apart from the setting up of the HPC in the first place. He reminded the council that they had two tasks:

• to decide whether the HPC’s ‘building blocks’ are suitable for regulating counsellors and psychotherapists;
• to decide whether the outcome would be detrimental to the wider body of the HPC’s members.

In answer to a specific question as to whether therapists were asked if they wanted to be regulated by the HPC he replied “No – it was not part of the remit”. Apart from this there was no further direct reference to the opposition against HPC regulation, although it was clear that council members had heard the concerns and raised a number of points in relation to them.

Many people spoke up in favour of there needing to be further work on differentiation between counselling and psychotherapy and education entry levels. These are the two most contentious areas of difference in the response. Some very important points were made on this issue. A summary of the consultation response is available on the HPC website.

Points raised by those present included:

• the arguments about differentiation and level are not related to public protection;
• there should be differentiation;
• the threshold level issue has not been clearly understood and if there was no differentiation it would disenfranchise all the level 4 counsellors who are working ethically and safely.

So in summary – even though the response to the consultation did not agree with the form of differentiation proposed, the council members were given a strong message that there should be differentiation

In conclusion, it was agreed by all that if psychotherapists and counsellors are regulated:

• an additional part of the HPC register will be established to accommodate them;
• modalities should not be reflected in the register;
• the PLG should continue its research into issues such as differentiation, Standard Operating Procedures, Standards of Education and Training etc;
• the council had noted the discontent about the membership of the PLG and would look at expanding it to include others;
• the two titles “psychotherapist” and “counsellor” should be protected (without prejudging any decisions about entry level and SOPs);
• the grandparenting period should be 3 years because of potential numbers in this sector;
• any further work on draft SOPs will be deferred until the council has concluded its review of the generic HPC standards, which aroused so much antipathy during the consultation
• the approach proposed for ‘dual’ registration should be adopted. This means that those already registered with a PLG or another regulator who then register with HPC or another part of the HPC register must meet standards for both titles eg psychiatrist/psychotherapist, nurse/counsellor etc. Such an approach would not be needed, though, where a nurse uses counselling skills or similar.

It was agreed that no conclusion about SETs could be reached at this time and the HPC would consult further after the Section 60 Order has been published. However, the problem created by HPC having to identify a level and qualification type is being addressed and could potentially be changed. This has been a problem in other professions too.

The final conclusions were:

• the HPC’s systems are capable of accommodating and meeting the regulatory needs of psychotherapists and counsellors;
• the Registrar would inform the Secretary of State of the Council’s conclusions.

So whatever happens on a Parliamentary level – Conservative or Labour, opposition or not – it looks as though the move towards regulation will continue.

This would appear to be a very positive outcome for CPCAB and our stakeholders. However, entry level could be Level 4 rather than Level 5, judging by the consultation response and the HPC member comments. However, as currently recommended, the concept of level could be irrelevant. There is also likely to be further delay because of the further consultations and other work, plus the general election and the wait for the reform of the generic HPC standards. The PLG will be reconvened after its membership has been renewed and a new work plan established, probably not before March 2010.

HPC presentation - 12^th November

On 12th November Fiona Ballantine Dykes gave a presentation to staff at the Health Professions Council, at their invitation, as a means of sharing professional background information with non-specialist members. The presentation was well received - download the powerpoint presentation (with notes).

UKCP election results - 9^th November

Professor Andrew Samuels, a leading member of the Alliance against Statutory Regulation, has been elected as the new chair of UKCP after a controversial election process. He stood explicitly on a ticket to take UKCP out of the HPC regulation process. The ramifications of this result are not yet clear. Visit the UKCP website for further details.

PLG November Meeting postponed

HPC has written to all the PLG members saying that the PLG meeting scheduled for November 18-19 has been postponed. Because of the overwhelming number of responses to the consultation they have agreed that they need more time to complete the analysis. The president Anna van der Gaag has also committed to further consultation in the months ahead, particularly in view of the opinions expressed at the Westminster debate. We will, of course, continue to keep you updated when more information becomes available.

Westminster debate

On Monday 2nd November representatives of CPCAB attended a debate chaired by MP Anne Milton, Conservative Shadow Minister for Health. Many therapeutic groups were present including those from the Alliance against Statutory Regulation. Ms Milton said she had never before been so inundated by post and email on any other matter and the purpose of the meeting was to try and get a feel for what the issues were about. All participants had a chance to speak after listening to brief position statements from Darian Leader (College of Psychoanalysts), Lynne Gabriel (BACP), Colin Walker (MIND), and Marc Seale (HPC). It is not clear what direction a conservative administration would take on these issues but Ms Milton did establish by a show of hands that all present, bar one person, were in favour of some sort of independent regulation. While she was openly critical of HPC and listened to other suggestions from the Alliance, she did not make any commitment to another approach. You can read other reports on this event on most of the professional body websites (eg www.bacp.co.uk/regulation) or by googling 'Westminster debate'.

August 2009: statutory regulation of psychotherapists and counsellors

Earlier in the year the Professional Liason Group of the Health Professions Council invited stakeholders in the field to contribute to a consultation on their findings. CPCAB responded as an organisation; read CPCAB's full response document.

HPC PLG report from 26^th and 27^th May 2009

This was the last meeting of the PLG prior to further public consultation. The group considered revisions to the standards of proficiency discussed at the last meeting, the qualification entry level, the transfer of registers and the protection of the title counsellor.

Standards of proficiency
Although it has been difficult to articulate the areas of difference between counselling and psychotherapy, the PLG has continued to look for words to express these differences because of the need to reflect both the differentiated focus of the work and the real public perception of this difference. The distinction is made more difficult because of the huge area of overlap between the work of an experienced counsellor and a psychotherapist in terms of client groups, issues, work settings etc. The group were constantly reminded that that standards are for “entry level” and do not define the scope or definition of the whole field. The discussion was helped by a contribution from Peter Fonagy (Skills for health) who suggested that psychotherapy is more concerned with the ‘disordered mind’ and counselling more with ‘the mind’ in general. However, some members continued to argue that there is no difference between counselling and psychotherapy. At one point an HPC member was prompted to observe that the lines between the two are so confused that the profession is not ready for regulation. The provoked a loud cheer from the public gallery but the chair was quick to refocus on what she saw as a manageable if complicated task.

The final result was agreement on approximately 40 shared standards for counsellors and psychotherapists with just a handful reflecting the difference - in section 3.a.1 around knowledge understanding and skills.

For psychotherapists:

• Understand typical presentations of severe mental disorder
• Understand methods of diagnosis of severe mental disorder appropriate to the approach and be able to conduct appropriate diagnostic procedure
• Understand and be able to effectively implement treatment methods to address symptoms and causes of severe mental disorder

For counsellors:

• Understand theories and research on mental health and well-being and obstacles to well-being, and be able to use these to facilitate client development
• Understand theory and research concerning specific life problems, issues and transitions that commonly lead individuals to seek counselling and use these to inform practice

A full set of final draft standards will be circulated as part of the consultation which will take place between July and October.

Qualification entry level
The discussion on qualification entry level followed. In her preamble, the HPC member representing the HPC Committee for Standards of Education and Training noted that HPC is looking to change the requirement that SETs (standards of education and training) specify qualification type and level as this has caused problems in other professions too. However, the PLG has to work within the current SET structure especially as changes to HPC structure make any future certainty impossible. She also reminded us that the word “normally” allows HPC to exercise discretion.

The chair acknowledged that there was broad agreement on level 7 for psychotherapy but that counselling was contentious. CPCAB then had an opportunity to articulate the FE awarding body position on this issue as follows:

• The draft SOPs can be met at level 5
• The threshold entry level should not be “aspirational” and 50% counsellors train in FE
• There is no evidence that current diploma level counsellors cause harm to the public which is the primary purpose of regulation
• That academic ability is not more valuable than life experience or relational skills
• That many counsellors, especially in the voluntary sector, who choose counselling as a second career do not want to do a degree level training
• The effect on community counselling services would be huge if counselling moved to level 6
• A level 5 entry level would be more inclusive and reflect greater diversity of the population (with evidence of higher numbers of minority ethnic students on FE training courses )
• That HE training is more expensive
• That anything above level 5 would change the face of counselling as it would not have a future in FE.

Those in favour of degree level made a couple of general points about the wording of the SOPs being level 6. There was also concern about counselling being two levels below psychotherapy and being perceived as “lesser” than psychotherapy or lesser than other HPC professions. Other arguments included that fact that degree level is the ‘direction of travel’ for counselling but HPC pointed out that although there may be a drift upwards to degree over time (as has happened in other professions) this is very different from imposing an aspirational level now. The chair asked for final arguments for and against the proposition that it should be level 5. Finally she said she had not heard argument for level 6. It was therefore agreed that the PLG would recommend level 5.

Transfer of the voluntary registers
This was debated in more detail than the January meeting. There was concern about the transfer of registers from groups which did not have robust criteria – and this is an unknown number. The HPC explained that a committee will scrutinise applications and members should have confidence in the process.

BACP has yet to define criteria for the register of those who are not accredited and members will have to go through some kind of process to get on to this register which will necessarily have to distinguish between counsellors and psychotherapists. However, it appears that transfer of the register will not necessarily be at ordinary membership level (which is what I understood at the last meeting when I attempted to clarify the position) but it is extremely unlikely that it will be limited only to those who have done BACP accredited courses as the aim is to “capture” as many practitioners in the transfer as possible. I am attempting to get further clarity on this point but any individual working as a counsellor/psychotherapist will still have the right to apply via the grand parenting route.

NB. Once on the HPC register, registrants have to sign declarations saying they are meeting HPC standards and 2% of CPD returns are audited as quality assurance. They do not have to meet new education and training standards as individuals.

Other issues
There will be further discussion on protected titles for those working with children and young people which has come back onto the agenda because of representations from the child psychotherapists. The HPC will recommend that the title “counsellor” will be protected but this will an amendment to the Health Professions Order 2001.

Next steps
All that has been agreed will be presented to the HPC Council on 6^th July and if approved go out to consultation between July and October. A final meeting of the PLG to consider responses to the consultation will take place on 18-19^th November.

Qualifications and regulation – what’s happening at the moment

Regulation
The uncertainties regarding counselling training and regulation continue, with the whole field is currently undergoing a time of change and uncertainty. What we can say categorically is that, as yet, no decision about qualifications and levels of training has been made.

The Health Professions Council’s PLG (Professional Liaison Group, of which our Head of Qualifications is a member) is now meeting regularly to make recommendations which will inform the legislative process. There will be further consultation with the wider community during 2009 and recommendations made in May 2009. The legislative process will then take a further 18 months to come into operation. Regulation, together with a grandparenting scheme, is likely to take effect in 2011.

Qualifications and Credit Framework
Skills for Health (our Sector Skills Council) will begin the work towards migrating qualifications onto the new qualifications framework from July 2009. Current information from LSC is that funding for NQF qualifications will end in July 2010. CPCAB expects to put new unitised qualifications onto the QCF, which replaces the NQF, from September 2010. These qualifications will have credits attached and will meet both the HPC (Health Professions Council) standards of proficiency and the NOS (National Occupational Standards) requirements.

So, contrary to what you may be hearing, NO decisions have yet been made. We will, of course, continue to keep you updated as more information becomes available.

Timeline
PLG has regular meetings	Now until May 2009
PLG meeting for wider community	31st March 2009 (Manchester)
PLG makes recommendations to HPC	May 2009
HPC possible further consultation with wider community	Second half of 2009
Skills for Health migration project begins	July 2009
NQF funding ends	July 2010
New unitised qualifications available on QCF	September 2010
Register planned to open	2011

HPC PLG report March 2009

The third PLG meeting was held on 3rd and 4th March 2009. The issues under discussion included draft Standards of Proficiency (SOP), Standards of Education and Training (SET), voluntary register transfers and grandparenting arrangements.

No final decision has been reached on either the SOP or the SETs but these will be discussed in further detail at the next meeting which means that there has been no decision on threshold level of entry for future registrants. CPCAB is continuing to press for entry below HE level for all the reasons outlined in our response to the Call for Ideas and it is quite clear that HPC systems allow for this. Furthermore, CPCAB will ensure that any restructuring for the QCF will take account of HPC threshold entry requirements, Standards of Proficiency and Standards of Education and Training.

However, it is important to understand that the threshold entry for future registrants is NOT the same as the criteria for transfering those on voluntary registers (or UK approved courses or grandparenting) at the point of the register opening. This will be as inclusive as possible and lower than any future threshold entry requirements.

Transfer of existing practitioners to HPC register
Reminder: there are three routes to HPC registration:

1. Transfer of voluntary registers on the day the HPC register opens. There are over 40 different voluntary registers and as it desirable to bring as many practitioners under the umbrella on day one as possible. The criteria will be lower rather than higher and will definitely be below BACP accreditation level.
2. Individual applications via “UK approved course route”. This does not mean a BACP approved course – it means any course which would have enabled a candidate to apply to go on to one of the voluntary registers eg to become an ordinary member of BACP¹. This will include all individuals who hold CPCAB diplomas past or present. There will be a charge of over £420 for this and applicants have to meet other requirements eg to be of “good character”.
3. Grandparenting. For individuals who cannot meet criteria for entry to a voluntary register but have been practising as counsellor/psychotherapist before the opening of the register (see HPC website for details). There is also a charge of £420 for this route.

The PLG agreed that the grandparenting period would be 2 years. During this time practitioners can continue to work and practice under their existing title and throughout any appeal period.

Implications for CPCAB candidates if current recommendations are accepted

• All past L4 diploma candidates (including historic versions TC03/European diploma) who are members of BACP are likely to transfer to the HPC register automatically – not just accredited members.
• Those candidates who are not members of a voluntary register but have completed a CPCAB L4 diploma (or historic versions) or those who are part way through our L4 diploma will be able to apply to HPC via the UK approved course route.
• Given current discussions about the transfer of the registers it is extremely unlikely that any CPCAB diploma (L4) holders will need to apply via this route.

Issues to be discussed at the next meeting

• First draft of Standards of Proficiency for counselling and psychotherapy
• Revised criteria for register transfer
• Legal advice on protecting title of “counsellor”

Copies of the HPC PLG agenda, papers and minutes can be found on the HPC website. Please contact CPCAB if you would like to find out more information at admin@cpcab.co.uk.

Fiona Ballantines, Head of Qualifications CPCAB

¹Completion of 1 year full time or 2 year part time counselling/psychotherapy course which includes a supervised practice placement as part of the training. GLH and client hours are not specified.

HPC PLG report January 2009

This was the second meeting of the PLG. Under matters arising from last meeting
I asked for my question about how the counselling NOS fitted with project to develop NOS for psychological therapies to be recorded in the minutes of the last meeting and made the point that 50% counsellors train in FE and awarding bodies will want to know how these projects relate. This and a few other changes were agreed.

Structure of the Register
The first discussion was about how to structure the register. The implications of various options were set out by Michael Guthrie (Head of Policy and Standards). Most people agreed that there should be a different protected title for counsellor and psychotherapist although BACP made the points about their research showing that there is no difference between what counsellors and psychotherapists do in terms of which clients people work with and what they do. The lay members asked helpful questions about the differences which steered the discussion away from academic level of training. It was also made clear that whatever is “sketched” out at this stage can be revisited if the subsequent stages make it untenable.

I made the point that if we accepted that there was no difference between counselling and psychotherapy the training standards would necessarily have to be high and this would be detrimental to many working counsellors.

In the end the argument that won the day was that counselling and psychotherapy are perceived differently by the public (counselling being widely acceptable as “OK” and psychotherapy being more linked to mental health problems and more in-depth work). There was also a strong feeling that counselling is different from psychotherapy and this isn’t just about training level and these differences should be valued and preserved by different protected titles.

The meeting agreed that given the difficulty of defining the difference between two categories in the public perception we did not need a third category of eg “psychotherapeutic counsellor”. However, this issue may come back on the agenda if members are unhappy with the academic level of training agreed for counsellors.

The PLG is therefore proceeding on the basis that there will be a counsellor and psychotherapist section of the register with two separate protected titles which could potentially have different academic levels attached. This has implications for grand-parenting arrangements especially for those that work under both titles.

The standards will therefore be structured as follows:

• General standards from HPC (that apply to all registrants)
• Some common high level standards for counselling and psychotherapy
• Some specific standards for counsellors and specific standards for psychotherapists

Modality specific titles
There was a lively discussion about whether to have protected modality specific titles but the HPC members felt this was not necessary to protect the public and was best left to the professional bodies and the course approval process. It was emphasised, however, that in view of there now being over 600 counselling approaches, an approved course should be bona fide and have a body of literature and credibility underpinning it. This will be ensured by standards of education and training

Entry level
The thorny question of entry level was still present in much of the discussion. The HPC member representing the HPC Committee for Standards of Education and Training admitted that the current requirement for qualification type and level to be specified in the general standards had caused problems in the past and is causing problems now. The She said the committee would revisit this issue with a view to considering whether it would be possible to approve a range of qualification types and levels provided they met the standards.

Working with Children
This was hotly discussed, especially the issue of child psychotherapists who currently have an “approved” title. There was a big debate about whether losing the protected title would reduce child protection. However, a strong case was made that this argument applies to all vulnerable groups and that protection needs to be ensured via the education and training standards and by the requirement for professionals to take responsibility for working within their area of competence. The HPC convener explained that the current regulatory framework is moving away from defining titles by which groups people work with or indeed which functions they perform. The same arguments applied to protection of modality titles and indeed all special interest groups eg sexual and relationship therapists. This issue was “parked” to see whether reassurance is achieved via education and training standards.

Register of conscientious objectors
There was a reflective discussion about how to address the concerns of those who still oppose regulation. I made the point that there was a petition with 1600 names doing the rounds – many of which I knew and respected – but I saw my role as taking part in shaping this “sketch” of what regulation might look like to ensure that it reflects the heart and values of counselling. However, it was decided that a register of conscientious objectors is not viable and would not help to protect the public.

Psychological therapist
Should there be a separate category for “psychological therapists” (IAPT low and high workers)? Apparently this will number about 10,000 people many of which belong to other professional groups BACP, UKCP, BABCP etc. as well as psychologists, graduate mental health workers etc. It was decided that this was outside the scope of this PLG. A suggestion that all counsellors might be happy to call themselves psychological therapists was not popular.

Discussion of title for counsellors
In general the group wanted to use “counsellor” which is widely accepted and used by the public. However, it is not clear whether this can be protected. Michael Guthrie will check this out further. Most people felt that “registered counsellor” might be acceptable. There was no appetite for “therapeutic” or “psychotherapeutic” for reasons discussed the day before. “Therapist” was thought to be too widely used elsewhere.

The next stage of work on 3-4th March will look at standards of proficiency issues and education and training. I reminded the group that in addition to professional body and HE standards there as also NOS and awarding body standards. Since the meeting I have sent copies of our level 4 and 5 qualifications.

Fiona Ballantine Dykes
CPCAB representative on the PLG

HPC PLG report December 2008

The first meeting of the PLG took place at their headquarters on 4th December 2008 under the gaze of a packed public gallery. This meeting offered an opportunity for PLG members to meet each other and form as a group under the chair Diane Waller (art psychotherapist) supported by Michael Guthrie, Head of Policy and Standards at HPC.

HPC presentations covered the process for moving towards statutory regulation and the work plan for the PLG. There was reassurance from HPC members that regulation will cover both the NHS and private sector and will take into account the concerns of those who see counselling and psychotherapy as being outside the medical model. It was acknowledged that this is the first time a group is going through the process of regulation at the behest of government rather than at the request of the profession itself.

There was an opportunity to offer a preliminary response to the summary report on the findings of the HPC Call for Ideas consultation. Detailed discussion will be timetabled over the coming weeks. There was some discussion about the responses from those opposed to the regulation process however it was clear the PLG group needs to focus on building a “sketch” on what regulation might look like rather than revisiting the principle itself. The summary report on the Call for Ideas can be viewed on the HPC website. It offers a very skilled summary of the many different positions expressed in response to the consultation. CPCAB views are accurately and thoroughly included.

Peter Fonagy, the representative from Skills for Health, was invited to give a brief overview of the work in progress on developing National Occupational Standards for psychological therapies which include (1) CBT (2) psychodynamic and psychoanalytic (3) family and systemic (4) humanistic, person-centred/process experiential NOS and (5) pan modality therapies. In response to a question from the CPCAB, he was not able to comment on how the psychological therapy NOS will fit with the current counselling NOS, also held by Skills for Health.

The process for regulation was outlined as follows:

• PLG meetings between December 08 and May 09
• Additional wider reference group meeting (confirmed for Manchester March 31st) for organisations/individuals not represented on the PLG
• PLG makes recommendations to HPC council July 2009
• HPC considers the report
• Further consultation – discuss changes, possible further Call for Ideas
• Recommendations finalised and then given to government
• Legislation process – including 3 months period of feedback on draft legislation
• Final decision rests with parliament
• Register opens 2011

HPC’s role was outlined as follows:

• Set standards
• Approve courses
• Register individuals
• Holds registrants to standards (complaints process etc)

The next meeting will be on 28-9 January and will debate the structure of the register. HPC minutes and all papers for these meetings are available on their website.

Fiona Ballantine Dykes
Head of Qualifications, CPCAB representative on the PLG

Good news in an uncertain world!

Our Head of Qualifications, Fiona Ballantine Dykes, has been invited to represent CPCAB on the Health Professions Council’s new Professional Liaison Group (PLG) for psychotherapists and counsellors.

This is an important development for three main reasons:

• Firstly, the government has made it clear that in order to protect the public counsellors and psychotherapists should now be statutorily regulated and the Health Professions Council (HPC) has been given the lead role in recommending how this should be done.
• Secondly, as part of this process the HPC has set up a Professional Liaison Group (PLG) to consider the key issues relevant to this new initiative and follow the completion of their Call for Ideas consultation
• Thirdly, CPCAB – and our tutors and students – will now have a voice in influencing how our profession – and the qualifications and experience which underpin it - develops in the move towards regulation.

So, congratulations to Fiona for being selected! Good news indeed.

Background

Find out more about the HPC by visiting www.hpc-uk.org.
For more information about PLGs please see www.hpc-uk.org/aboutus/professionalliaisongroups/.

Full list of members of the Psychotherapists and Counsellors Professional Liaison Group

Sally Aldridge – British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy
Fiona Ballantine Dykes – Counselling and Psychotherapy Central Awarding Body
Mark Clark-Glass – Lay member of the HPC Council
Jonathan Coe – We Need To Talk
Mick Cooper – University of Strathclyde
Peter Fonagy – Skills for Health
Julian Lousada – British Psychoanalytic Council
Jeff Lucas – Lay member of the HPC Council
Brian Magee – Counselling and Psychotherapy in Scotland
Linda Matthews – British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies
Rose Mary Owen – Relate Institute
Jean McMinn – Queen’s University Belfast
Kathi Murphy – United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy
Eileen Thornton – Alternate Physiotherapist member of the HPC Council
Annie Turner – Occupational therapist member of the HPC Council
Graham Smith – Physiotherapist member of the HPC Council
Diane Waller – Arts therapist member of the HPC Council and Chair of the PLGG

CPCAB's response to the HPC Call for Ideas

The Health Professions Council opened the debate by inviting interested parties to share their views at the beginning of the discussions via the 'Call for Ideas'. Read CPCAB's full response, submitted in October 2008, here.

Challenges in the regulation of the UK counselling profession

As the only specialist awarding body offering qualifications in counsellor, run by counsellors, CPCAB is uniquely placed in the current challenging situation and undertakes to offer support and guidance wherever possible. As long ago as April 2008 CPCAB prepared a statement entitled 'Challenges in the regulation of the counselling profession'. You can read the full response document here.