Alliance for C&P - Open Letter to HPC Council Members

Here is the text of the Open Letter from the
ALLIANCE FOR COUNSELLING & PSYCHOTHERAPY to
Members of the Council of the HEALTH PROFESSIONS COUNCIL

12th MARCH 2011
CALL TO COUNCIL MEMBERS
The Government's unmistakable and welcome change of policy concerning statutory regulation means that the time has come for the HPC to withdraw from the fields of counselling and psychotherapy. The Alliance has consistently argued, as did all the professional bodies when it was first announced, that the HPC is an inappropriate regulator for the activities of counselling and psychotherapy. Thousands of practitioners have agreed with us.

In addition, the recent decision in the High Court to allow a Judicial Review of the HPC's conduct has seriously undermined public trust in the HPC.

We now call upon the Council Members of the HPC to instruct the Executive to desist from claiming that there is a compelling public-safety risk attached to the professions of counselling and psychotherapy, such that a case might be made for statutory regulation.

We further call upon the Council Members of the HPC to instruct the Executive to desist from attempting to open a voluntary register, or registers, for counsellors and/or psychotherapists.

NO CASE FOR STATUTORY REGULATION
In seeking to justify statutory regulation, alarming figures on the prevalence of abuse have frequently been claimed. However, such data stem from research carried out on other professions, usually in other countries, and often many years ago. There is no evidence whatsoever of a correlation between studies of American psychiatrists and psychologists conducted decades ago and the behaviour of counsellors and psychotherapists working in the UK in 2011; yet such unsubstantiated claims of statistical equivalence have been misleadingly presented to the HPC as if they were established fact.

Even allowing for under-reporting, the incidence of complaints in our field is very low in both absolute and comparative terms, and the number of cases that lead to practitioner striking-off is tiny. For instance, in 2008 the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) conducted an audit which found that the rate of upheld complaints had not exceeded 0.072 per cent over a ten-year period. The Alliance shares the view, held by most practitioners in the field, that the Government’s preferred option of quality-assured voluntary regulation (QAVR) will be more than adequate to deal with any existing or future misconduct; and the Alliance will do all in its power to ensure that QAVR is robust, effective, and consonant with the core values of the field.

We are particularly concerned about the credibility of any ‘research’ which may be produced by private companies describing themselves as 'clinics' who offer to work with the victims of professional misconduct by counsellors and psychotherapists. Such companies offer therapy – on a private fee-paying basis, often at extremely high rates – for those who may have suffered from, or engaged in misconduct. Given the obvious potential for a conflict of interest, we would urge Council to be very sceptical indeed about the objectivity of any such research. In fact, serious academic research into misconduct is, at present, lacking.

The Alliance believes that professional misconduct by counsellors and psychotherapists should be dealt with by a complaints system that is fit for purpose, being robust yet sensitive to the unique particularities of work in counselling and psychotherapy. HPC's Fitness to Practise system was widely criticised across the entire field of counselling and psychotherapy, even by those who are in favour of statutory regulation.

SAY 'NO' TO VOLUNTARY REGISTERS HELD BY STATUTORY REGULATORS
With regard to the power given to the HPC to establish voluntary registers for groups of health and care workers not currently statutorily regulated: we do not believe that the Department of Health ever anticipated that the HPC would seek to establish such a voluntary register for counsellors and psychotherapists. Given the model of accreditation to be employed by the Council for Healthcare Regulatory Excellence (CHRE), we can anticipate a potentially schismatic situation wherein the HPC and the existing professional bodies effectively compete to register counsellors and psychotherapists on a voluntary basis.

The CHRE has clearly stated that it believes statutory regulators should not hold voluntary registers where an existing alternative already exists. The CHRE believes that this would be confusing to the public, and would undermine the credibility of the entire accreditation system. The Alliance strongly concurs with this view.

The HPC has no experience whatsoever of working as a regulator outside of its existing approach based on legal protection of title. To expect a major culture change to take place within a short period as the organisation is forced to embrace the voluntary principle is entirely unrealistic.

HPC MUST WITHDRAW
For all these reasons, the Alliance seeks a clear declaration from the Council, to the effect that it will instruct the Executive that HPC should now gracefully withdraw from the fields of counselling and psychotherapy.



ALLIANCE FOR COUNSELLING & PSYCHOTHERAPY www.allianceforcandp.org