Breaking News: A Pennsylvania Judge Panel found that the Pennsylvania Psychology Board “capriciously disregarded Applicant’s competent evidence” regarding residency and psychologist-supervised experiences, “after presenting overwhelming evidence that would require the Board to arrive at a different outcome.”
Even though the Applicant’s experiences were supervised by a licensed-psychologist, the ASPPB-Friendly Board claimed her “degree was not APA or ASPPB designated,” so, they denied the Applicant’s request to sit for the EPPP (Sounds like WI all over again).
The Applicant appealed the provisional denial, and a full hearing was held. She presented her facts competently as documentary form and testimonial evidence. In their decision, the Pennsylvania Psychology Board said her experiences were “woefully short,” and failed to consider the Applicant’s evidence of number of hours she spent in the classroom. They did not address, or even mention, the Applicant’s evidence, which identified the flaws in the Board’s continued reliance in “the 36-weeks requirement.”
The Judge Panel Voided the Pennsylvania Psychology Board’s flawed decision to deny application to sit for the EPPP, and Overturned the Psychology Board’s Mess, and Sent It Back to Them to Fix It.
Here is the full Pennsylvania Court Case No.529 C.D. (2015) Final Order.
We Are in the Middle of a Social Revolution for Justice.
If There Is One Thing Corrupt Psychologists Cannot Hide From Is: The Courts and The Law.
We Encourage You All to Continue Exercising Your Right For Justice.