State Regulation - Keeping our eye on the ball

Ipnosis sound bites

Statutory or state regulation of the psychopractice field in any of the forms that have been proposed up to now is a Mistake.

It is a mistake to base accountability on input, i.e. ‘I’m ‘qualified’, I match a list of training competencies and ethical standards, so I am a safe pair of hands’. Input accountability is also intrinsically discriminatory.

Output accountability, i.e. some version of the IPN model, is non, or less discriminatory, and as a continuing, dynamic, face to face quality assurance process, it is likely to minimize client dissatisfaction.

IPN is in favour of accountability, IPN embodies accountability, it is a worked through, presently available, alternative to dominance forms of regulation.

Significant number of psychopractitioners are uneasy about state regulation.

The psychopractice field is not united.

If state regulation of psychopractice is installed it will be due to the decades of lobbying for it by trade associations such as the BACP and UKCP.