How to REALLY think about your training needs.

What should the erstwhile professional body, the British Psychological Society, be offering as advice and support to recently qualified UK clinical psychologists earnestly seeking further training in working with young people who present with distress around “gender identity”?

A recent post on social media asked colleagues for recommendations “to increase my understanding and uncover any areas that I don’t know about”.

The following, reproduced almost verbatim, appeared in response, and is published with the writer’s permission.

“I am guessing that you are aware that this area of clinical work is relatively new and under-researched, that it is contentious, with strong voices that make very strong, opposing claims (which can make it difficult to think through some of the issues), and that it involves working with a very vulnerable client group and complex family and treatment systems, with considerable risk.

With these factors in mind, while I don’t have any particular training to recommend, my advice would be to research training provider(s) very carefully. “This training is great” requires much more cautious evaluation. Any training will form part of your CPD record and so part of the evidence you have with regards to professional registration, etc. So – for your own sake and that of your clients – focus on professional training(s) that will help you develop your core scientific and therapeutic knowledge (e.g. in developmental psychology) you have from previous psychology degrees in as broad a way as possible. This might, for example, include:

• the possible sources of discomfort with/dislike of our bodies
• the psychological development of our identity/identities
• social contagion
• overlapping clinical difficulties (especially autism and the  effects of developmental trauma and how they might interact with feelings of discomfort about/dislike of our bodies)
• the potential impact of homophobia
• the relevant issues around risk and safeguarding
• treatment/interventions and the associated scientific evidence (including side effects, outcomes and the arguments about reversibility of treatments)
• the influence of any financial benefits to some sectors of, for example, lifelong drug treatments (or indeed training providers)
• the very conflicting professional guidance available and understanding the implications of these for you and your patients/clients.

When taking into account the essential perspective of lived experience, make sure any training includes the experiences of those who regret treatment and transition as they are also often silenced and marginalised (and stigmatised), and they hold an essential part of the picture that has to be kept in mind. “

What an abysmal reflection that the BPS remains incapable or unwilling (or both, given that its position reflects the intersectionality of several strands of vested interest) to produce anything remotely as helpful, nuanced. professionally and socially responsible as the above. This just took one thoughtful experienced clinical psychologist on a late weekend evening to sort out the best current perspectives on the matter.