The credentialing of counselling in Australia

Abstract

Counselling is an unregulated activity in Australia. No statutory regulation currently exists. As a result, different counselling organizations are promoting different voluntary standards for the practice of counselling. This has led to a credentialing dilemma in which counsellors and the public are confronted with a number of counselling qualification choices. This dilemma poses a number of questions: Should counselling become more regulated in Australia? At what level should counselling be regulated? Should there be various levels of counsellor regulation? This article provides an overview of the credentialing dilemma facing counselling in Australia, compares and contrasts two main Australian accreditation efforts, and proposes cooperation as a way of navigating said dilemma. The implications for counselling as a profession are discussed along with suggestions for its development as a profession. This includes a discussion regarding the relative advantages and disadvantages of greater regulation of counselling as a professional activity in Australia. Specifically, what is and is not generally considered a profession is reviewed, different forms of credentialing are outlined, and general arguments for and against accreditation efforts are presented. The efforts of the Australian Counselling Association (ACA) and the Psychotherapy and Counselling Federation of Australia (PACFA) are compared and are shown to have common ground. Consequently, ways in which the main counselling organizations may best work in conjunction to promote counselling as a profession in Australia are proposed. These suggestions include good communication, collaboration, and the avoidance of turf wars. Specifically, that the ACA and PACFA collaborate on developing a combined independent registration list that is supported by both organizations or, minimally, that both organizations have mutual recognition on each other's register lists.