Protected Title ≠ Protected Client: Why Regulation Alone Can’t Guarantee Safe Therapy

 

 

Intro:
In the UK, conversations are growing around regulating therapeutic titles like “psychologist,” “counsellor,” and “psychotherapist.” While this move is framed as protecting the public, it’s important to ask: does protecting a title actually protect clients?

What regulation means and why it matters:

A profession being regulated means that the training complete for that profession needs to meet a standardised minimum level of requirement and competence and the institutions offering this training are legally expected to maintain this standard consistently. When a professional title is protected:

• Only those with accredited training and registration (e.g. with the British Psychological Society/BPS) can legally use it.
• There is a minimum level of education, supervision, and ethical practice required.
• Clients have access to a complaintsprocess if harm occurs.
• It reduces the chance of unqualified individuals marketing themselves as professionals.

In other words, regulation is important. It offers some reassurance that practitioners have met certain standards and can be held accountable if things go wrong.

The Limits of Regulation:

Regulation ensures minimum training and accountability. But many clients from marginalised and minoritised communities know that a credential doesn’t guarantee safety. Registered professionals can still perpetuate forms of harm rooted in oppressive views such as racism, classism, ableism, and gender-based violence.

The Deeper Issues:

• Whose knowledge counts?: Regulation often privileges Eurocentric psychology, sidelining culturally rooted practices and knowledge gained through means other than randomized control trials, such as anecdotal and ancestral knowledge. Many therapeutic fields also carry a history of appropriating these practices, extracting from and repackaging them.
• Barriers to access: Expensive and exclusionary training routes mean fewer Black, Brown, working-class, and disabled psychologists enter the field.
• Intersectional harms: Even regulated psychologists may pathologise or dismiss clients whose experiences don’t fit the dominant framework.

Reflective Guide/Questions to consider:

If you’re considering working with a therapeutic practitioner, or are reflecting ongoing work, here are some prompts to support your questions and reflections. They’re drawn from my experience as a counselling psychologist, as someone who has received therapy, and from conversations with my clients. These prompts are meant to be supportive and suggestive, not prescriptive, so always trust what feels appropriate and comfortable for you.

1. Check Credentials (but Don’t Stop There): 

• What are their actual professional qualifications?
• What professional bodies are they registered with (HCPC, BPS, BACP, UKCP and BABCP are the main bodies in the UK, these details may be listed on the practitioner’s website or professional profile).

2. What are their therapeutic approaches:

• What models of therapy do they tend to use the most/prefer to use?
• How do they decide which approach to use and will that be discussed/decided on with you?

3. Check Their Values or other ideologies that influence their work:

• What values or ideologies inform their way of thinking about the world and influence their approach to therapy?
• Do they incorporate anti-oppression, equity, or inclusion in their practice?
• How do they acknowledge power differences in therapy?

4. Notice Representation and Understanding:

• Do they reflect your cultural background or show evidence of understanding it?
• Do they name and validate the kinds of stress and trauma you face?
• Do they show a willingness to explore and understand your lived experience?
• Do they show a willingness to own when they don’t understand or know something about your lived experience?

5. Look for Accountability:

• How do they handle feedback or rupture?

6. Trust Your Body:

• Do you feel listened to, respected, and safe in their presence?
• Does your nervous system feel calmer, or more activated, during and/or after sessions?
• If you feel activated during or after, do you feel able to talk to them about that and do you feel supported in that discussion?

Summary:
Protecting titles may reduce some risks by allowing greater transparency around the minimum training that someone has completed and ensuring that you know that the person you are working with has indeed completed that training; but without an anti-oppressive lens, it risks cementing the same inequities the field is already struggling with. Safety comes not only from regulation, but from humility, justice-oriented practice, and relational accountability.