A critical evaluation of the revised SCoPEd Framework (July 2020)

Below you will find the Summative Statement and Table of Contents from of our critical evaluation of the Scope of Practice and Education for the counselling and psychotherapy professions (SCoPEd) Framework, released in July 2020 by the BACP, BPC and UKCP.

You can download a PDF version to read in full here.

Please do feel free to get in touch should you have any comments or questions.

Best wishes

Maria and Tara

Summative statement

This document aims to provide a comprehensive review of the current iteration of the SCoPEd framework. The key issues remain the same as they were with its previous counterpart and those are as follows: The subscription to the medical model of distress. The elevation of psychotherapists at the expense of registered counsellors who are severely deskilled in key areas of their practice. Deskilled to such an extent it is difficult to argue they would be safe to practice at all. The inherent bias of the teams working on this framework and the widely challenged methodological flaws.

This newer iteration, which we meticulously evaluate, goes further in the restrictive nature of some key criteria. For example, the description of competencies being such that any work Accredited counsellors may currently get within the NHS would become untenable. It would be deemed unsafe. The NHS already explicitly states that unaccredited counsellors are unsafe to do one-to-one work with patients. An amendment to be inclusive of accredited counsellors in that would not be too far of a leap to make. This framework is resolute in its painting of a qualified counsellor being a static entity with no capacity to think for oneself across the spectrum of core competencies; including analysis and reflection of self, the client and the therapeutic relationship.

The accompanying methodological paper lacked a great deal of transparency and leaves as many questions unanswered as it answers. We discuss these areas and explore what changes could have improved the methodology and research up to this point.

This document then critically assesses whether the BACP, BPC and UKCP have met the aims they set out to achieve. The answer is it does not and where the framework may get close to meeting an aim, it falls short in profound ways. We then close with some recommendations for moving forward which include making adjustments for theoretical parity and truly consulting with members to discover what they want from this framework; if they want it.

Click here to download the full PDF version.

Table of contents