The Idea
One strategy that has been put forward as a long-term strategic goal is to create some kind of modality to work with other professions: including masters-level LPCC's and MSW's, and doctoral-level Psychologists and Psychiatrists.
It appears that though we are the largest masters-level professional organization - that on a national scale there are reasons to believe that rather than spreading across the country, the MFT license, will remain in a few states and possibly diminish in size.
One proposal which was put into the bylaws that were ratified in the Spring of 2013 was to simply let non-MFT's interested in joining CAMFT become members.
This idea was met with considerable disagreement by a group of members in particular because this new idea was not spelled out in the summary which accompanied the bylaws sent to members for a vote of approval. But many also argue that the idea of using CAMFT as the mode for rapprochement is a very bad idea and will cause serious problems for MFT's.
Other people pushing for some kind of rapprochement have suggested that CAMFT remain exclusively an MFT organization but become part of an umbrella organization which would include several professional categories.
Discussion Ideas
- What do you think of the CAMFT vs Umbrella idea?
- Why would we want to keep other professionals outside of CAMFT?
- Why would other professions want to join CAMFT?
- How does it serve us to let them become members?
- Many chapters have people of different licenses as members and even on their board - so why not at the state level?
- How do we build partnerships in particular with MSW's who historically did not exactly embrace the arrival of MFT's and who unlike MFT's benefit from Medicare reimbursement and higher pay even though they have almost an identical training to our own?
I was an intern when the vote was held, and although the outcome affects me greatly, I had no say in the matter. Now I am licensed. I want an organization that advocates for me as a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist. The Board cancelled some of the bylaw changes, but it left intact the change that allows LCSWs and LPCCS and psychologists to hold a majority of Board positions. This effectively gives control of CAMFT to non-MFTs. I strongly disagree with the Board's attempt to include non-MFTs in the organization. We are in competition with LCSWs and others, and we need an organization that advocates for us MFTs.
ReplyDeleteI am currently an intern. I was unable to vote on the future of CAMFT. The problem is with CAMFT letting in other groups - other groups are not letting in MFTs. We can "take the high road" and treat everyone like us but it is NOT working that way with others.
ReplyDeleteSocial Workers just got legislation passed that says the title of "social worker" can only be held by social workers. Many non-profits use the title of social worker and have many grants that say they "fund" x number of social worker positions. Many social worker interns and mft interns have both had these jobs - but now only social worker interns and social workers will be able to have these jobs.
MFTs do not have such a title that excludes social workers and psychologists and such.
Several of my social worker friends discussed how their social work professional groups feel that it would be bad for them and the economy to have MFTs being able to be reimbursed by MediCal and Medicaid and Medicare. They are being told that MFTs are too focused on just individuals and the families and do not understand the social constructs and how society and community affect people - that we have limited abilities and they have been school in a wide amount of knowledge. Many have told me that it doesn't make sense for us to be reimbursed by MediCal and such because we are a small nitch focused on people who have wealth and they are focused the community and social problems of the poor. Many consider us to be "snobs".
Now I am not saying all social workers believe this but many of the ones I have met. And now with the new health care mandates we are at an extreme disadvantage because more and more of our clients will have governmental insurance that we cannot reimburse and since if they want low cost therapy they will end up having to go to social workers, psychologists and psychiatrists.
If we every all come under one license with specialties and are all treated the same - I could see us having other professions in CAMFT - until then though, I see we still need to fight to gain equity.
Heather Blessing
Registered MFT Intern
See the comment below.
DeleteIt is not true that the bill proposing to protect the title Social Worker passed in the legislature. It is not law. It is a bill that has continued to come up, but has never yet passed. So, again, that is not a true statement made above
ReplyDelete