Analysis of Scopes of Practice Consultation Feedback

It was felt that the proposed structure is illogical and would not be beneficial to the psychology community, or the public. [...] This will lead to a proliferation of scopes, fragmentation, and confusion for the public in a small country that will benefit from well trained generalists.” − “Are you choosing to gate-keep and encourage an entitlement schema?” 2.2.2. [...] Evidence to support the need for change A common criticism from submissions was a lack of evidence. [...] It was clear submitters felt strongly that a lot of care and consideration would need to go into the creation of the scope if it were to proceed. [...] Concern around the impact of the consultation and the impact that the changes would have on the workforce − “Creating financial challenges and job uncertainty for any psychologists (unless you are clinical) to gain employment that is not a short-term contract in New Zealand since you have made these proposed scope changes.” b. [...] Concern that the endorsement process would make it difficult for psychologists to expand their learning and practice − “It is clear and it’s hugely demoralising. [...] Scopes seen to be overly restrictive − “The proposed clusters of scope of practice are limiting and would have negative impacts for many psychologists in terms of professional growth and their livelihoods.” Yes 30% No 34% Unsure 18% Yes but with some changes 18%Page 25 Analysis of Scopes of Practice Consultation Feedback 3.2.11.3. No - Impact on the public: a. [...] Is there any evidence that the proposal will achieve its intentions.” − “There appears to be a lack of evidence and clear communication in this process, particularly in terms of the actual problem. [...] Practical experience is not recognised in the proposed changes − “I think that a psychologist should be granted registration under a scope of practice if they can demonstrate/provide evidence that they hold the equivalent knowledge/experience that an accredited program for that scope would cover without having to go back and complete additional training.” − “An opportunity to change scop [...] There was an acknowledgement by some responders of the need for change, and appreciation to the Board for taking action.