First, and perhaps most important to my ambivalence, is the fact that at this time, there are three (yes, three) boards jockeying for some kind of position and status in the area of clinical neuropsychology. Two of these boards are now affiliated: ABN (the American Board of Professional Neuropsychology) and ABPdN (the American Board of Pediatric Neuropsychology), although each has in the past been a separate entity, competing for attention. Now, I am a pediatric neuropsychologist, so it might be wondered, why not go for that board as certification of my skills? Perhaps the easiest way to answer is to say that ABPdN appears to be a board without much of a mandate, or even any consistent constituency, making the option for membership unpalatable at best and still perhaps even suspect at worse. None of the key researchers, teachers, or mentors in the area of pediatric neuropsychology, with whom I have any relationship, have any connection with this board, and as such, the leaders of the organization appear to have little to no organizational support for their efforts or actions. In contrast, ABCN is a component of the ABPP, which holds strong support within organized clinical psychology. It however does not truly sit as a welcome home for me, as someone who first and foremost identifies as a clinical psychologist, who then specializes in neuropsychology. I find that it often emphasizes the small constituent parts of practice, as opposed to the broader gestalt of working with individuals, particularly children and adolescents, from a holistic perspective. I remind myself that this may be an error of perception; but it is a worry that sits heavily with me. And keeps me a bit skeptical in turn.
Second, I recognize that I represent an aspect of the profession that remains somewhat suspect, to my peers outside of the academy. I identify strongly as an academic, who integrates research with practice. I work within a University setting where I undergo repeated reviews of my effort and progress - my scholarship and the success of my practice are simultaneously reconsidered, as part of my reappointment process, every five years. By both a group of my professional peers and by my colleagues more broadly across the medical disciplines. This leaves me feeling that the imprimatur of board certification is really a bit superfluous. I have to go through a review of my work and my identity as an expert more often than I would ever do so within the framework of board certification. And in a manner that ultimately feels more rigorous, given the breadth of the review. It again may be a matter of perception, but it also weighs heavily when I think about the process of taking a written test, mostly about adult functioning and its assessment, and then submitting for review my work as an evaluator, and then undergoing a three hour interview. I find that it leaves me sitting in a place of tension, that I am not quite willing to expand.
Lastly, I really wonder what it all will do for me in the end. I have jumped hard and high through numerous hoops to date. I agree that licensure is only one step of the process, but as a published, funded, and well sought out expert -- I believe that I have already shown that I am a worthy representative of my disciplines. I have the credentials that I need already well in place, it seems. Is having one more -- the sign that my colleagues have allowed me into their club -- really going to change anything? I believe that I have already been accepted into the club. Having some additional letters after my name, and another professional society bill to pay each year, isn't really going to do much more.
I remain open to reconsideration of this belief. But for now, I admit that I am really much too busy to worry about it, when push comes to shove.
Second, I recognize that I represent an aspect of the profession that remains somewhat suspect, to my peers outside of the academy. I identify strongly as an academic, who integrates research with practice. I work within a University setting where I undergo repeated reviews of my effort and progress - my scholarship and the success of my practice are simultaneously reconsidered, as part of my reappointment process, every five years. By both a group of my professional peers and by my colleagues more broadly across the medical disciplines. This leaves me feeling that the imprimatur of board certification is really a bit superfluous. I have to go through a review of my work and my identity as an expert more often than I would ever do so within the framework of board certification. And in a manner that ultimately feels more rigorous, given the breadth of the review. It again may be a matter of perception, but it also weighs heavily when I think about the process of taking a written test, mostly about adult functioning and its assessment, and then submitting for review my work as an evaluator, and then undergoing a three hour interview. I find that it leaves me sitting in a place of tension, that I am not quite willing to expand.
Lastly, I really wonder what it all will do for me in the end. I have jumped hard and high through numerous hoops to date. I agree that licensure is only one step of the process, but as a published, funded, and well sought out expert -- I believe that I have already shown that I am a worthy representative of my disciplines. I have the credentials that I need already well in place, it seems. Is having one more -- the sign that my colleagues have allowed me into their club -- really going to change anything? I believe that I have already been accepted into the club. Having some additional letters after my name, and another professional society bill to pay each year, isn't really going to do much more.
I remain open to reconsideration of this belief. But for now, I admit that I am really much too busy to worry about it, when push comes to shove.
