Introduction from Shelley Riggs, PhD, Vice President for Education
This year the The Family Psychologist (TFP) Education Column is exploring the challenges of couple/family psychology (CFP) training at various stages of education and the different ways that some programs and institutions have creatively addressed these matters. In this issue, Danielle Black, PhD, and Anthony Chambers, PhD, describe their experiences in CFP training at the postdoctoral level and share ways that the Family Institute at Northwestern University has responded to the challenges encountered by their postdoctoral fellowship program.
Danielle Black, PhD, LCP, is an assistant clinical professor and director of the Postdoctoral Fellowship Program at The Family Institute at Northwestern University.
Anthony L. Chambers, PhD, ABPP, is a clinical professor and Chief Academic Officer at The Family Institute at Northwestern University and is the past president of the Society of Couple and Family Psychology.
Training at the Postdoctoral Level
Training at the postdoctoral level poses several difficulties within the larger field of psychology. The accreditation of postdoctoral training sites is relatively new, and the development of training programs and guidelines for these training programs is less developed compared to predoctoral internships. However, there is consensus within the field that postdoctoral training is important for specialization (Eby, Chin, Rollock, Schwatz, & Worrell, 2011) and for the development of specialty competencies (Boake,Yeates, & Donders, 2002), such as CFP. In fact, in a study that examined common reasons for applying to postdoctoral training programs, the most cited reason among applicants was to develop a specialty (Logsdon-Conradsen et al., 2001). Furthermore, among the specialty areas recognized by ABPP, the study found that receiving specialty training in couple and family therapy was among the most desired training opportunities among applicants (Logsdon-Conradsen et al., 2001). Thus, we are well poised as a Society to discuss and address the current challenges in postdoctoral training in CFP.
There are two general areas of challenge in CFP postdoctoral training. The first challenge is at the programmatic level and involves financial constraints. In order to meet the basic APPIC accreditation for postdoctoral programs, the program must include individual supervision (two hours) and two didactic experiences (a full year of formal didactic experience) plus the time to administer the postdoctoral program. Thus, a high-quality CFP postdoctoral program requires a financial investment from the training institution.
These areas of challenges are ones that we have dealt with at our postdoctoral fellowship program at The Family Institute at Northwestern University. In terms of the financial constraints, we have developed a financial model that allows the fellowship to be self-sustaining. The development of this financial model has involved a cross-functional team that includes program leadership, individuals from our finance department and institutional leadership. It often takes a diverse team to solve these complex issues.
In terms of the training challenges, our solution to the lack of previous training within a systemic orientation is to provide coursework and systemically oriented supervision. Specifically, our fellows receive training in Integrative Systemic Therapy (IST, Pinsof, et al., 2017). We also encourage the diversification of caseloads to include both couple and family therapy cases. Finally, we encourage live supervision, which is one of the hallmarks of learning to conduct systemic therapy.
In general, many of the challenges in CFP postdoctoral training emanates from the larger professional psychology system. The field is in flux regarding postdoctoral training; however, the good news is that it is clear that there is a need for more postdoctoral training programs devoted to CFP (Logsdon-Conradsen et al., 2001). The need for postdoctoral training in CFP is also inextricably linked to promoting board certification, which is the clearest credential we have to claim us as a specialty. Through the sharing of information and resources, we can help protect the public by increasing the number of competently trained psychologists who can provide couple and family therapy training (Stanton & Welsh, 2011).
References
Boake, C., Yeates, K. O., & Donders, J. (2002). Association of postdoctoral programs in clinical neuropsychology: Update and new directions. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 16(1), 1-6.
Eby, M. D., Chin, J. L., Rollock, D., Schwartz, J. P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Professional psychology training in the era of a thousand flowers: Dilemmas and challenges for the future. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 5(2), 57.
Kaslow, N. J., Celano, M. P., & Stanton, M. (2005). Training in Family Psychology: A Competencies‐Based Approach. Family Process, 44(3), 337-353.
Logsdon-Conradsen, S., Sirl, K., Battle, J., Stapel, J., Anderson, P., Ventura-Cook, E., Zimand, E., Babat, N., & Kaslow, N. (2001). Formalized postdoctoral fellowships: A national survey of postdoctoral fellows. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32(3), 312.
Pinsof, W. M., Breunlin, D., Russell, W, Lebow, J., Rampage, C. & Chambers, A. L., (2017). Integrative Systemic Therapy: Toward a Comprehensive, Multi Systemic Psychotherapy. APA Books.
Stanton, M., & Welsh, R. (2011). Specialty Competencies in Couple and Family Psychology. Oxford Press.