Re: Re: LCAT vs. LMHC

[Guest guest]

Dear Colleagues,

During the grandparenting period I had originally applied only for the LCATand the LP (licensed psychoanalyst). However, when I read on the list serve (I believe it was Theresa Haney who wrote this some time ago) that one or more insurers had told her that, yes, they had heard about the four new licences but were going to bother only with the LMHC and the licensed family therapists, and when thereafter I heard that the federal government too is not interested/sufficiently informed about LCATs for some of the services that they run, I decided to apply for, and was granted the LMHC as well.

I thereafter also registered myself and received a National Provider Identifier (NPI) number. It is my understanding that soon all insurers will want their providers to have and use NPI numbers. Please be aware that when I registered there was no way for me to list myself as an LCAT as that is not a known category. When I talked with someone connected with the NPI system they said we should get in touch with them and let them know of our existence. Perhaps this is easily done. I'm afraid I did not do so.

To my mind pushing for recognition of the LCAT by insurers and by such govenrment entitites as Medicaid, Medicare, and the Veterans Administration and the NPI System is where we - NYCCAT and its component organizations - should now put our energy and resources. It should probably become our HIGHEST PRIORITY. As the psychoanalysts are in a similar situation we should also reach out to organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis (NAAP)

[Guest guest]

I have not weighed in on anything here for sometime, partially because I

have felt so terribly discouraged and had hoped to be able to add

something positive at some point. Unfortunately, I have not found that

place yet.

I am working in Plattsburgh, NY (60-miles south of Montreal) and have

been working for the same agency since my 1995 internship. I started at

the Child/Family Clinic, then was working in our adult outpatient and

CDT programs as a full-time art therapist. In 2006, we became the pilot

program for the state OMH decision to switch CDT programs to PROS. I

lost my job title as " art therapist " , had to reapply (yes, via resume

and interview) for my position as a " rehab practitioner " , lost my voice

in terms of input into the program, can still provide art therapy but

only in groups 8-12 hours per week (no more indivdidual work) and cannot

officially call it art therapy under PROS (at least not yet), work 50-60

hour/wk and get paid for 40, must now provide a written curriculum for

my " art coping-skills development classes " [i am not a teacher, I'm a

therapist.], lost $5,000/yr income when the on-call crisis I covered was

out-sourced to someplace across the county . . . .

There's more. I have checked with the county MH clinic: There is no hope

in the near future for an LCAT to be hired as it apparently took quite

an effort and a lot of time for the powers that be to agree to re-write

the definition of therapist so that LMHC's could be hired. Still, LMHC's

and LCAT's will only be reimbursed by Medicaid. Medicare will not and

our agency has chosen to bill in accordance to what Meidcare will

reimburse (i.e. no insurance co.). For numerous reasons I never wanted

or planned to go into private practice, though explored this option

anyway. It's not for me. I work for a not-for-profit. No one here gets

compensated adequately. Now, when we hire an LMHC, as soon as a job

opens elsewhere, they leave for better pay, of course. That means we are

constantly short of staff, covering groups (oops, I mean " classes " ) that

are outside of expertise, and taking on additional clients who just lost

their rehab practitioner to another agency. The documentation as become

unmanageable and the reimbursement for services provided is less than

ever and does not cover numerous services we provide.

I am licensed to practice, but have lost money, position, voice, time,

energy, and now passion. My agency can no longer afford to send me to

trainings, much less anything having to do with art therapy, since art

therapy supposedly does not meet pych rehab principles (I have argued

this since before PROS started). I cannot afford to travel to and pay

for trips to trainings and conferences so that I can stay current and to

earn the CEU's necessary to keep my -BC and thus my License once mine

expires in about 4 years. I am seriously considering leaving the field.

I guess going back to school to get my LMHC so that I could be hired and

then practice under my LCAT while billing under LMHC would be an option.

I still have 9-years of student loans to pay. I'm 50. I love art

therapy. My passion for it still exists when I sit with folks in my

groups. But I cannot physically and emotionally continue in this way

much longer.

And so, these are my very discouraging words about my experience as a

LCAT in art therapy in the North Country of NY. I am sorry to put out

such discouraging words and I hope others with good experiences will

follow this email with encouraging words for those who are entering the

field and passionate about their work. I thought maybe this would be one

experience -to the extreme- on the continuum of experiences to know

about. Thanks for listening. Respectfully,

Gretch Sando, LCAT, ATR-BC

gsando@...

Plattsburgh, NY

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:35:01 -0400

Beate Becker wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,

> During the grandparenting period I had originally applied only

> for the LCATand the LP (licensed psychoanalyst). However, when I

> read on the list serve (I believe it was Theresa Haney who wrote this

> some time ago) that one or more insurers had told her that, yes, they

> had heard about the four new licences but were going to bother only

> with the LMHC and the licensed family therapists, and when thereafter

> I heard that the federal government too is not

> interested/sufficiently informed about LCATs for some of the services

> that they run, I decided to apply for, and was granted the LMHC as

> well.

> I thereafter also registered myself and received a National

> Provider Identifier (NPI) number. It is my understanding that soon

> all insurers will want their providers to have and use NPI numbers.

> Please be aware that when I registered there was no way for me to

> list myself as an LCAT as that is not a known category. When I

> talked with someone connected with the NPI system they said we should

> get in touch with them and let them know of our existence. Perhaps

> this is easily done. I'm afraid I did not do so.

> To my mind pushing for recognition of the LCAT by insurers and by

> such govenrment entitites as Medicaid, Medicare, and the Veterans

> Administration and the NPI System is where we - NYCCAT and its

> component organizations - should now put our energy and resources.

> It should probably become our HIGHEST PRIORITY. As the

> psychoanalysts are in a similar situation we should also reach out to

> organizations like the National Association for the Advancement of

> Psychoanalysis (NAAP).

> With best regards to all!

> Beate

>

> Re: LCAT vs. LMHC

>

>

> Thanks for all of your suggestions. It seems that most people, like

> myself agree that we need to advocate for the creative arts therapy

> profession, yet at the same time we need to take of ourselves in

> the

> interim.

>

> I am eligible

> for both the LCAT and the LMHC after I complete my

> > post-graduate hours. Does anyone know if it is necessary to have

> both

> > licenses or is the LCAT sufficient for job stability in New York.

> (In

> > other states, they consider art therapy to be nothing more than a

> > modality and it is imperative to have the double registration.)

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ---------------------------------

> > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with

> Yahoo!

> Search.

> >

>

>

>

>

IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail is meant only for the use of the intended

recipient. It may contain confidential information which is legally privileged

or otherwise protected by law. If you received this e-mail in error or from

someone who was not authorized to send it to you, you are strictly prohibited

from reviewing, using, disseminating, distributing or copying the e-mail.

PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY OF THE ERROR BY RETURN E-MAIL AND DELETE THIS

MESSAGE FROM YOUR SYSTEM. Thank you for your cooperation.