Dear Registrants,
The College has successfully regulated the profession of applied behaviour analysis (ABA) for one year; how quickly the present becomes the past. Although ABA is the 鈥測ounger鈥� of the two professions in Ontario, the College benefits tremendously from the novel ideas and energy that our Behaviour Analysts bring to Council and Committees. The College is stronger with psychology and ABA together.
The world of regulation in Ontario is changing at lightning speed; the mandate is to remove interjurisdictional barriers to trade and to the mobility of regulated professionals to Ontario. Simply stated, the provincial government is committed to making Ontario a location of choice for regulated professionals from other Canadian jurisdictions to live and work. This mandate goes further for specific professions, such that they are part of the , permitting duly registered health professionals from any Canadian jurisdiction to begin working in Ontario while applying for Ontario registration. 鈥淎s of Right鈥� is in effect for physicians, nurses, respiratory therapists, and medical laboratory technologists鈥nd psychology is one of a group of professions proposed to join the initial four. This is in addition to the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), which permits registered psychology professionals from any Canadian jurisdiction to become registered with any other Canadian psychology regulator with the same title and scope. I will discuss the realities of this legislation shortly. The confirmation of whether psychology will join the 鈥淎s of Right鈥� exemption list of professions will likely be known by the end of the year. In the interim, the College is working hard behind the scenes to make the operational preparations required for this potential reality.
What does this mean for the profession of psychology? Under the CFTA, a duly registered Psychologist in any province, regardless of the degree upon which that registration is based, is eligible for registration with the 91视频 as a Psychologist. This has been the reality for many years with the number of Master鈥檚 Psychologists in Ontario outnumbering Psychological Associates as reported in the 鈥淐losure of Master鈥檚 Registration Report,鈥� at the March 2024 Council meeting. 鈥淎s of Right鈥� further solidifies the spirit of the CFTA such that Psychologists from any Canadian jurisdiction would be permitted to practice in Ontario with the same title and scope. On the matter of scope of practice between Master鈥檚 and Doctoral degrees, this was decided by HPARB in the early 2000s鈥he scopes are identical (see President鈥檚 message, April 2002, Vol.28, No.3, The Bulletin). This has been common law in Ontario for a quarter of a century, yet many of us in the field are unaware of this reality, and newer Canadian regulators, Northwest Territories and Yukon, created their minimum registration requirements to become a Psychologist at the Master鈥檚 level. The combination of the CFTA, the lack of consistency in the registration standards of Psychologists across Canada, and the national and provincial interjurisdictional mobility movements make debates about whether there should be differences in scope of practice and/or title between Master鈥檚 and Doctoral registrants less relevant or compelling. The horse has left the barn, and it鈥檚 not looking back.
In this context, I also feel compelled to share recent literature about the profession published in the flagship journal of the Canadian Psychological Association, Canadian Psychology. I provide you with several quotes from ), which include authors from Ontario universities, University of Ottawa and University of Toronto.
On page 15 of Faber at al. (2023) a selection of quotes:
鈥溾�anadians like to consider themselves as 鈥渘icer鈥� than their cousins in the South due to their stated priority of embracing multiculturalism, but racism is the same on both sides of the border (Gran-Ruaz et al.,2022; Stewart, 2004)鈥︹��
鈥溾�o special 鈥渘iceness鈥� allows Canada to justify superior morality in regards to societal treatment of their racialized populations, as much as they might want to believe it鈥︹��
鈥溾�ll throughout the process of becoming a professional psychologist in Canada, we find weaponized policy tools鈥︹��
鈥溾�hey act as if it is a mystery why there are not more BIPOC professional psychologists鈥攎aybe students of colour are just not as qualified, or maybe they do not want to become professional psychologists…鈥�
鈥溾�ore grievously, the rules are being used to prevent them from achieving an education, from educating and serving others, and from obtaining access to the corridors of power that professional psychologists prowl鈥︹��
Given the concerns of the Academy and Ontario鈥檚 focus on expanding access to care, the College is undertaking a modernization initiative of our registration processes. We have work to do and we hope we are able to address some of the concerns highlighted in Faber et al. (2023). I highly recommend you take a look at the Council meeting materials if you are interested in learning more about the work of the College.
Wishing you a wonderful summer,
Tony
Tony DeBono, MBA, Ph.D., C.Psych.
Registrar and Executive Director
Faber, S. C., Williams, M. T., Metzger, I. W., MacIntyre, M. M., Strauss, D., Duniya, C. G., Sawyer, K., C茅nat, J. M., & Goghari, V. M. (2023). Lions at the gate: How weaponization of policy prevents people of colour from becoming professional psychologists in Canada. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 64(4), 335鈥�354.