The University Counseling Center has seen a majority of its full-time counseling staff leave in the last two years, a turnover rate the former employees blame on mismanagement.
Since fall 2009, 11 counselors have filtered in and out of nine clinical positions at the center, Senior Associate Dean of Students Mark Levine said this week. Four of those employees left in the last four months.
Former employees claim the center has been mismanaged under director John Dages, who took the helm in 2009, and associate director Barbara Brown, who was hired in 2004. One counselor said the “dysfunctional” work environment was caused by “indecisive leadership” and "hands-off management.”
A clinician – who left this spring after two years at the center and spoke on the condition of anonymity because she still works in the counseling field – described Dages as “unprofessional,” citing his demands regarding workload, threats to fire staff, comments about personal lives and rare presence at the center.
“If I didn’t pick up the phone on the first ring, [Dages] told me it was unreasonable,” another psychologist recalled.
Another former employee said Brown “screamed at colleagues” who did not meet her professional expectations.
The counselor stressed students are at a disadvantage when clinicians quit after seeing patients for just a few months.
“The overturn creates a chaotic environment,” the counselor said. “The biggest issue is that people don’t want to stay here, and that’s a real shame.”
The former employee also questioned the lack of face-to-face time Dages and Brown spent with clients, saying the managers are not attuned to the needs of students.
“John and Barbara don’t interact with students. They don’t know what’s going on in the student community,” the psychologist said. “There’s a lot of potential for students to fall through the crack.”
Levine said it is not uncommon for the head of a large counseling center “to focus on the macro-managerial functions,” adding that Dages steps in to see clients in emergency situations.
“We both strive to make UCC a healthy and productive work environment, as well as a fair workplace for staff,” Dages said. “While I cannot be sure why former employees brought up these negative comments, many shared with me that their time at UCC provided extremely beneficial clinical experience.”
Multiple counselors said GW’s reputation as an “unhealthy work environment” has spread across the country. One former counselor said she was warned by counselors locally, as well as from Arizona and Ohio, not to apply to GW’s counseling center.
Dean of Students Peter Konwerski said Student and Academic Support Services is working with the counseling center management to hold “professional development sessions,” which he said enabled the staff to communicate concerns about “policy, procedure and operational improvements" under the new model.
The counseling center rolled out a new fee structure Sept. 6 as the result of a year-long lobbying effort by student leaders demanding greater accessibility to mental health services.
The revised policy allows students to receive up to six therapy sessions at no cost, and the center saw a 25-percent surge in the number of first-time clients compared to last year.
The staff is now left with four full-time psychologists and seven part-time staff members – an increase from the three to five part-time staffers that were on hand last year. Levine said employees left for various reasons, with most heading to privately owned firms that pay more and offer more flexible hours.
One of the clinicians, who resigned in the spring and now works at a private office, said the transition to private practice meant a lower paycheck, but the experience at GW “soured me from working in university counseling centers.”
The most recent resignation was submitted to the center in late October – the same time when counseling center administrators met individually with staff members to address their professional grievances.
Levine said these meetings, including exit interviews with staff over the last year, have given him “helpful feedback on ways to make UCC, and the staff experience, even better.” Human Resources will “assist with various training and development initiatives,” he said.
Konwerski said the center's management has been working with Human Resources to "ensure that the leadership team is more available, visible, accountable and transparent in their communication with the staff."
“I am confident that these concerted efforts should help bring the team to the next level,” Levine said.
Thanks to Sarah Ferris for bringing attention to a serious institutional problem through her well-written piece. As a former UCC staffer, I’d like to offer some additional information on how DOS and UCC management intractability and the resulting staff turnover hurt students:
Many therapy hours that should be available to students (2-4 hours weekly per license-earning psychologist) are wasted training and providing ongoing supervision to new and interim staff.
Students’ evaluations of the UCC are sporadically sought and rarely reviewed by those in charge. Staff frequently reflect student grievances to management but “we’ll look into that” becomes change occurs only when students bring pressure through external channels of influence (ex: the fee change).
It’s not just psychologists who leave the UCC: two case managers and an office manager also have quit since fall of 2009.
Thanks goodness UCC management is not more directly involved with students and parents because their typically scattered, litigious-minded interactions often result in dissatisfaction and complaints.
I’ve found counseling at UCC helpful, so I recently called to schedule an appointment for this year. My counselor from last year no longer works there and although the counselor was helpful on the phone, I was told that there is such a high demand that my first appointment wouldn’t be for 2-3 weeks. I guess this article helps explain why and it’s too bad that more isn’t being done to retain the good staff.
Mark Levine and Peter Konwerski’s comments show where their concerns lie — with maintaining the status quo.
On multiple occasions over these past 2 years staff have gone to lengths to present serious concerns to UCC heads, DOS, to Human Resources and they hear the same pandering, empty comments as quoted in the article: “Helpful feedback…training and development initiatives…all about the model…to communicate concerns….” Bluster and talk-filled listening meetings and strategic plans result — but change doesn’t.
Staff — who, in my experience as a former UCC employee, have been caring, responsible, hard-working, and smart professionals who put students first — remain at the UCC for as long as they can because they want to work with students; they generally leave out of frustration and a sense of futility with management. It’s a copout for Levine to say their motivation to leave is for higher paychecks. They wouldn’t even have been looking for jobs if UCC was anything like the majority of counseling centers where positions are considered plum and are rarely available because staff come to stay.
DOS’s passive attitude is a terrible reflection of GWU’s commitment to students, especially those who form important supportive relationships with counselors of ultimately short duration instead of with seasoned professionals possessing long-term university counseling experience, useful institutional knowledge, and, most importantly, a personal connection with those students.
There is no vision generated from the UCC “leaders” who operate from a reactive stance and have regularly exhibited more concern about appearances than improvement. Why does GWU permit this sham management team to stay while it waves good-bye to round after round of caring front line staff who can no longer tolerate their surroundings?
I am not in the psychology field nor affiliated with GWU, but am aware of John Dages and Barbara Brown’s (lack-of) professionalism in the workplace. Why are they still there??
As one of the most recent Staff Psychologists to resign from UCC, my concern is for clients. Students that seek counseling at UCC cannot be certain that their therapist will be there for the duration of their treatment. Such uncertainty may leads to difficulties in forming current and future therapeutic alliances – the cornerstone of meaningful therapy.
I would like to publicly apologze to all of my clients for leaving without a chance to explain, hear your thoughts, or say good-bye.
In an effort to remedy this situation, I am reducing my rate for any GW student seeking therapy to $60 per session. My office is in Dupont Circle.
Dr. Tali Shokek
202-308-3668
Drshokek@gmail.com
You have got to be kidding me.
You use this article as a chance to pimp yourself.
Wow.. how unprofessional.
Your comment took an ugly, ugly turn there at the end, Doctor. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I would also recommend removing this post. Although you are attempting to remedy a situation, your methods hinge on unethical. I do however, wish you the best with your practice.
It seems that in my attempt to support students I have, unintentionally, made several students feel uncomfortable. My apologies. Please remove my posts posts and contact information.
Thank you.
Really “Dr” Shokek you think you have made people uncomfortable? Did you think that because some of us came in to see you only to find out you had quit the day or two before without so much as an email to let us know?
Was it because our needs were ignored and we had to be dumped onto someone elses plate?
Or did you feel uncomfortable because you took the opportunity to bad mouth your old bosses in an attempt to put money into your pocket by convincing us to see you personally at the “reduced” rate of $60 instead of free at GW. How do you sleep at night? And god save anyone who does waste their money looking for help from you.
If someone had such concern for their clients maybe they would have been professional and given notice that they were leaving the UCC. So they had time to explain to the clients why they were leaving and say goodbye. Instead of just abandoning their clients without regard to how it would affect them and then using this article to advertise for their own private practice. How convenient.
11 Staff members in 2 years is beyond epidemic — I wonder why more isn’t being done since the problems don’t seem to be new or actually improving??
As a former UCC staff, it is sad to see this ongoing problem with GW’s UCC. Staff feel there is no other option but to leave, because the environment is toxic and abusive. This puts caring psychologists in an awful position, either leave the clients they care about or continue to experience abuse themselves. If you are upset that your counselor left the UCC, please understand that the fault lies with John Dages. Direct your anger to the appropriate place. Your counselor would not have had to leave in such a manner, my guess is they had no choice. Eventually, after being threatened and scared, and experiencing acute emotional battering typical of Dages’, people are left feeling desperate, depressed, and helpless. This is not any environment a psychologist should have to practice in, nor is it an environment that promotes healing for the students. The administration needs to stand up and make real changes, including firing John Dages and reporting him to the licensing board.
Yet another former staff member is writing to say all of what is written is true. We left because we had to. It is a toxic environment with two incompetent leaders. It is the fault of the university leadership as they ignored cries for help for years.
I received my clinical psychology doctoral degree from another local university this past spring and the poor reputation of GW’s Counseling Center is well branded in the professional mental health community. Due to the UCC’s constant need to fill positions I have been asked by friends nationwide interested in the highly sought competitive job field for university counseling centers what I know about the experience of GW and am forced to reveal many of the issues outlined in this article I have heard over the years.
It is unfortunate that such high turnover is present in a vital student service and university administration has turned a blind eye.
Why does none of this surprise me?
As a freshman, I wrote an article for the Hatchet about stress. Dages was my primary source for the story. Throughout our interview, he tried to qualify and revise many statements, even when their meanings were clear. This struck me as pompous and arrogant.
When I experienced a mental health crisis during my sophomore year, I avoided seeking help from UCC. Instead, my mental health deteriorated, forcing me to take a year on Medical Leave of Absence. The negative image I had formed of UCC, in part thanks to Dages, surely influenced my actions.
Now a senior, it’s nice to see I wasn’t crazy for thinking the UCC administration was useless.
Based solely on the comments section of this article, it is clear that there are very strong feelings regarding the content. Ms. Ferris’ article is well-written, but clearly only addresses the tip of a much larger iceberg. As a former UCC Staff Psychologist, I am pleased to know that this issue has finally been exposed. It is my hope that after reading this article and the accompanying comments, the GW Community will understand two critical points:
(1) The UCC is, and always has been, an excellent place for students to receive support and treatment for a variety of issues and/or concerns. Regardless of the “workplace drama”, the Staff Psychologists, Case Managers, and Receptionist are extremely skilled, caring, empathic, and capable of working with the GW student body.
(2) This article (and the comments that follow) will have zero impact on change unless the students take this matter into their own hands. Countless staff members have expressed concern about Dr. Brown (the Associate Director) and Dr. Dages’ (the Director) questionable actions (ethically, professionally, and legally). Yes, the finger can easily (and deservingly) be pointed at Drs. Brown and Dages, but equal blame should be directed at Mark Levine, Peter Konwerski, and EEO (Equal Employment Opportunity, a subsection of HR that has heard all of the former employees complaints). For Mr. Levine to say that staffers are leaving to pursue jobs that will offer additional pay is both insulting and an example of his need to turn a blind eye and deflect any/all responsibility for the mess he has contributed to. The reality is, no psychologist who goes into private practice will immediately be making large sums of money. It is true that University Counseling Center work is not a lucrative job path, but those of us who make the choice to work in these settings do so because we are passionate about the population with whom we work.
GW students – I urge you to speak up and not let this issue slide. You deserve more than what you are receiving. Your tuition/fees are outrageous and you deserve, at the very least, a University Counseling Center that you can continue to rely on. I hope that any student who has read this article will not be dissuaded from seeking treatment at UCC. The current UCC Staff Psychologists and the Case Manager are outstanding and have my utmost respect.
I also encourage GWU students who have utilized services at GWU to share their experiences so that other students will recognize how helpful UCC can be to those in need.
As a former staff member at the UCC many years ago, it pains me to hear about the current state of affairs. Prior to John Dages, the UCC had a stellar reputation and was a competitive training site for psychology interns and post-docs. I was proud to have worked with an incredible and professional staff at that time (none of whom remain at the center), and I am saddened that the UCC has gained a “reputation” inside and outside the psychology community.
While the UCC leadership bears most of the responsibility for the apparent mess that the center has become, I would hope that students and staff would be scrutinizing the office of the Dean of Students and SASS, which were responsible for creating this situation by placing Dages and Brown in these positions in the first place.
The UCC does not operate independently and answers to the pressures and politics of the DOS and SASS. Not having been at the UCC in many years, I do not know the current relationship and involvement of DOS in the UCC. However, as a former staff member, I witnessed how the personal politics of those in leadership at DOS impacted the staff and leadership at the UCC during that time. It was partially in response to this environment that there was another mass exodus of excellent staff. So while Dages and Brown should answer for the current problems, I would point out that DOS bears responsibility for creating this environment and allowing it to continue. Student counseling centers have become increasingly important as demand for mental health services has increased and GW cannot afford to have inept and unprofessional leadership at the helm of the UCC.
As a former UCC staff member, I am beyond overjoyed to see that someone has finally brought this to the public. Many of us who had exit interviews complained about Dages and Brown, citing very specific incidents. None of this was heard by the administration, however; they appeared to be far more concerned with using Dages as their pawn than providing students with quality care.
Working under Dages and Brown was very stressful and not conducive to any sort of professional growth or affinity with staff members. In fact, they made it nearly impossible for staff to create bonds with each other. E.g., Dages would not allow doors to be closed if there were more than one staff member in an office; he would actively eavesdrop at people’s doors; he would threaten to “write up” anyone who disagreed with his management style or policies…the list goes on.
Both Brown and Dages would saunter in to the center at arbitrary times, take off early, and utilize center time for their private practices. All in all, it is very much a dysfunctional center and I am happy it has been exposed and that SOMEONE is listening. Hopefully the administration will finally take notice and make some long overdue changes.
In my time at GW, I dealt with severe bouts of depression. The one time I sought assistance from UCC, they didn’t help in any way – unless you count the counselor who let me use her computer to book a train home. I found that Disability Support Services was actually more helpful to me in terms of managing my depression in conjunction with my academic pursuits.
Well, at least you can be happy knowing she probably doesn’t work there anymore.
I’m not the least bit surprised to read this article. As someone who took a class in the UCC and saw a therapist there for almost 2 years, I think students are really jerked around. Imagine working up the courage to make an appointment, getting comfortable with one particular therapist, only for them to leave abruptly? There’s absolutely nothing fair about that. Changes have to be made.
Additionally, my personal problem with UCC has always been a lack of information sharing with the students. During my freshman year, I had a really unfortunate incident with a TERRIBLE psychologist at GW’s UCC involving informed consent. All it did was add to my stress and make me swear off of seeking any kind of psychological help. 2 years later, I was lucky enough to start seeing a fantastic therapist at UCC. Of course, the awful one from my freshman year was long gone.
For any sort of counseling relationship, I think it’s important to be upfront with students and to have a cohesive working environment among the staff. Doesn’t really sound like that’s happening.
It is clear the problem at UCC is long standing and pervasive and dmeands being addressed from the top down. Our student has struggled with mental health issues since being at the university, along with friends and roommates, and many have turned elsewhere or even left as a result of the need for more support than they got. It is not clear how much support a university should have to provide but if the environment at UCC is such that there is excessive staff turnover, there is a problem. Given that the turnover is beyond excessive, the situation should be considered at a crisis level.
To those of you who jumped all over the former staffer who provided her contact information above, shame on you for rushing to judgment. Continuity is a hallmark of effective therapeutic treatment and I would certainly want to know how to reach a care provider who had moved on and the rate offered to students to see her is a great rate. Why would it bother you that this provider is offering to be available at a discounted rate to students looking for continuity or to students looking for care outside of the volaitile UCC? I don’t feel Tali was out of line. I would like to know how to reach our UCC counselor who has left.
Although I am not a UCC employee, nor would I ever choose to be, I have worked with John Dages and Barbara Brown. They are some of the most incompetent psychologist I have met, how they even have those titles – I am not sure. They lack professionalism and the ability to build rapport with others. John Dages is unable to maintain attention to any task for longer then two minutes, I have interacted with him in meetings. On the other hand, Barbara Brown lacks the ability to empathize with others, furthermore, if she does not get her way she will roll her eyes. As someone who has taken a Psychology 101 course, facial expressions are key in interactions with others – learn how to control them. I am unsure why Mark Lavine or DOS staff have not stepped in sooner with this problem, this is only detrimental to the student body. From what I have heard, they rarely do any of their own work anyways, dispersing it for their psychologist and professional staff, why do we need them?
As another former UCC staff member I am happy to see that this information is finally getting out on a public forum. From my experience at the GW UCC most of the statements regarding the leadership of Dr. Dages and Dr. Brown are not far from the truth. However I think it is also important to include the leaders in the Dean of Students as major contributors to the problem. The Dean of Students is directly responsible for getting rid of Dr. Dages’s predecessor who was competent, respected in the larger counseling center community, and had maintained GW UCC’s solid reputation. Why the Dean of Students chose to demote her and promote Dr. Dages was never clearly communicated. It is speculated that the Dean of Students wanted someone who would bend over on any issue. Perhaps this is why Dr. Dages seems to be more preoccupied with pleasing his bosses in the Dean of Students office opposed to focusing on providing solid psychological services to the GW students and serving as a true leader and advocate for the GW UCC staff.
I was EMERGed and was required to come in for two meetings. I met with one of their staff, which I looked up on their website and found out was a graduate student in clinical psychology. Don’t get me wrong, the student was very nice, was able to connect with me, empathize with my situation, and gave me a lot of advice about how to deal with future situations, but will my sessions count? Was it even ethical I met with a graduate fellow? I do not want to have to pay their outrageous fee of $50 per session for having a night of fun again. I think it was ludicrous that the night I was EMERGed, I walked into the hospital to sit there for 2 hours and walked out. What a waste of money to EMERG, why do they not worry about those who really need help in the emergency room.
As a former student, I only used the UCC counseling center a few times. As it is said in the article of students having a high potential of falling through the cracks.
I was the perfect example of this. After experiencing a severe trauma that even happened on GW campus in 2009, I was completely ignored and my situation worsened after the counselor i was set up with left on maternity leave. No one contacted me, nothing was done.
After emailing Brown explaining the further damage UCC had caused, nothing further was done.
I am also puzzled how Brown still works for UCC and I am not surprised of the high turnover. I did not find UCC helpful in the least bit, however, I hope they can recover from this and find a situation to better help their students.
It is encouraging that former staff members, students, parents, and other staff at GW as well as individuals who are not affiliated with GW are all speaking out regarding such an important issue. Of course, it is also frightening that so many individuals, both within and outside of GW, have been impacted by this situation or at the very least are aware of it — and it has still been allowed to continue. These responses are a wonderful start to drawing attention to these matters, but this cannot be the end if we are aiming to achieve some form of long-lasting, meaningful, and effective change. I encourage all to continue to speak out to have their voices heard, and to contact the Dean of Students office directly to express their concerns about this matter. Dean of Students Office can be reached at (202) 994-6710. Dean of Students, Peter Konwerski, can be reached at peterk@gwu.edu. Senior Associate Dean of Students, Mark Levine, can be reached at markl@gwu.edu. Let’s speak out for our students, children, friends, and colleagues.
My two brief encounters with Dr. Brown were very confusing. She gave one piece of policy instruction on the phone and a very different one via email. It was as if I had been quoted policy by two different people. I pointed this out to my counselor and they sighed as if this was a regular problem.
I think the problem might be that it is hard to find psychologists who are also managers. Generally people do not go into the field to become managers.
I would also request that the school focus on hiring PhDs, instead of PsyDs. The latter can intend to be helpful, but there are too many poorly designed PsyD programs out there. The two PsyDs I met with at UCC were very dogmatic in their approaches. They seemed more interested in loyalty to their particular traditions than delivering what students needed long term.
- A grad student.
Grad Student,
While I do not intend any disrespect by saying this, what you are insinuating about Ph.D.’s vs. Psy.D.’s is downright wrong and ignorant. I have been practicing psychology for nearly 20 years as a Ph.D. My wife, on the other hand, has been practicing for nearly the same number of years as a Psy.D. She is, without a doubt, no less competent than I (or any other Ph.D.).
I am currently in private practice and I work as a training director at a local community agency. Over the past several years I have had countless Psy.D. and Ph.D. trainees pass through the training program that I lead. There have been several Psy.D. trainees who have been more competent than their Ph.D. peers, and vice-versa.
Are you aware of what the difference is between a Ph.D. and a Psy.D.? Both are doctoral degrees, both require the same number of years of schooling, and both are respectable degrees. Ph.D. curricula tend to focus more on research and empirical data, producing psychologists who will continue on in academia (professors, researchers, etc.). Psy.D. programs, on the other hand, also focus on research, but are more focused on the clinical aspect of psychotherapy (producing competent clinical psychologists!). It is for that reason that many Psy.D. trainees have much more experience working with a wide range of populations and in various settings.
While I believe that you did not intend to communicate that Psy.D.’s are “lesser than” their Ph.D. counterparts, that is exactly what you did. The bottom line is – this is not accurate. For example, both John Dages and Barbara Brown are Ph.D.’s. What does that tell you? I am sorry that you have had poor experiences in the past, but that is frequently the case in clinical psychology – Psy.D. or Ph.D. – clients need to find the best match. Letters after one’s name does not make them a better or worse clinician.
This conversation is more appropriate for another forum, as the important question from this article is what will SASS, Mark Levine, Peter Konwerski, and EEO do about the challenges the UCC currently faces?
I am the same person who posted the comment to which you reply. To answer your question: I feel I am as familiar with the two degree programs (PhD and PsyD) as a person not in either can be.
Since you are a pscyhologist, you surevly recognize that I am relating my experiences (just as you are relating yours). However, you should also know that anecdotal evidence is not sufficient to settle this matter. I.e., your various examples are not on point. Of course, part of my argument is also anecdotal. Nonetheless, there are a great many PsyD programs out there that of questionable quality. Perhaps that unfairly tarnishes the the degree, but I have seen the results first hand.
This article is filled with so many problems. “Former clinicians” state such and such. Why can’t the Hatchet actually name its sources? Instead it is nameless abortions with no way of knowing if they are legitimate.
And then the comments section is filled with “anonymous” former workers saying all manner of accusations. Yet the only person willing to stand by their comments is Dr. Tali Shokek. While her comments may have caused controversy at least we know they are from a real person.
I wish that more “former clinicians” would have the same courage and confidence in their opinions as she has and actually stand by their public comments about how bad the UCC is. Instead they hide behind the comfort of the internet. I would think psychologists would encourage openness and not this type of passive aggressive anonymity while making these claims. Until the names come out with the claims I find most of the comments and the article itself quite suspect and unreliable.
Sorry Id just like to note I meant aberration not abortion. Darn auto correct. I apologize for my error.
Your point is well taken; however, when people have been bullied and fear retaliation (i.e., litigation, loss of job) of some sort, they often remain silent. The staff here have indeed talked to others in the university without anonymity, and their concerns have been ignored. That light has finally been shed on this toxic work environment is a relief to those who have endured this regime for so long. I don’t fear their anonymity in this venue — I’m just glad they finally have a voice. As for who the anonymous people are….the effects of this leadership has literally affected everyone who has ever worked with or for Drs. Brown and Dages. Just get a staff listing and know that everyone on it could have submitted comments here. This is not hyperbole. Rather, this issue is that far reaching.
Nameless aberritions? What is that?
Anonymous sources are common in this kind of situation and the response shows that the sources are right.
Good point, “Scott Baker”.
Nice way of focusing on the important issues. Jackass.
You’re probably Barbara Brown, John Dages, or Tali Shokek using another name to try to pull the attention away from the fact that the GW Administration has MAJORLY SCREWED UP here. I’m sure all of the “anonymous psychologists” are evil people who were waiting for an article like this so that they could write made up lies and nonsense.
I remind readers – you can buy into this “Star Magazine” nonsense or focus on the important issues: The administration is turning a blind eye and allowing the GWU Students to suffer.
Where is the parent outrage? Do parents want to also turn a blind eye? “My child doesn’t need therapy”. Well, that’s wonderful. However, your child’s roommate may need therapy – or the student down the hall from your child. UCC doesn’t just serve those who come to the center, they do outreach to the community and help those in need so that their problems do not become larger problems that impact more of the GW community.
Okay, here’s some parent outrage. I am the parent of a student who was seeking help at the UCC for depression. The student went for the second visit and was told the therapist no longer worked at the UCC. It’s hard enough for a student to make that big step and reach out for help. What a frustrating experinece.
The bigger problem we experienced was the psychiatrist at Student Health. My student was put on an antidepressant, early on complained about side effects that caused insomnia, the inability to keep up with school work, and the inability to wake up for classes, yet the doctor kept increasing the dose. My student’s GPA has taken a serious nose dive because of medication side effects and a young doctor’s incompetence. When we asked for a letter to the university explaining the situation (medication side effects) the doctor denied the existence of these side effects (which are publicly disclosed by the drug’s manufacturer online — and any competent elementary school student would be able to understand the very straight-forward language describing these common side effects)and then the doctor refused to write a letter saying that the student’s inability to attend class had anything to do with these side effects. Today I had to pay some major dollars to a quite reputable psychiatrist so my student could be re-evaluated and helped through this very difficult time (now it isn’t just the depression, it’s the prospect of failing grades and dealing with a GW Student Health psychiatrist who is squirrely, irrational and unsupportive). The doctor today said that it is common knowledge that these side effects can arise and that if they do arise and do not resolve within 7-10 days, the patient should immediately be taken off the medication. Instead, my student was on the medication for approx. 6-7 weeks, with the dosage being increased over a period of 4 weeks. The reputable doctor with over 30 years of experience said that it was irrational for the GW Student Health doctor to deny that these side effects occur. I can’t figure out what her motivation is. It makes me wonder if she is concerned about litigation against her or the university. How very sad for GW students. It seems to me that the psychiatrists who work for the university have a conflict of interest because they (at least the doctor my student saw) are not looking out for their patient’s best interests because they apparently are also trying to protect the university? How dare this doctor put my student on medication and then refuse to back up the student who is facing the possibility of failing classes because of this medication. Oh, and here’s the best part. The doctor said that she would say that she was treating the student, but the main letter would have to come from the UCC! After the frustrating experience at the UCC, my student did not feel comfortable going back. I’m looking forward to writing that letter to the American Psychiatric Association.
Oh, one more thing. The evil woman who answers the phone at the UCC must go. Last year when my student was extremely depressed and finally mustered the courage to call (it was a Thursday) but couldn’t schedule an over the phone appointment for Friday, the evil, stupid woman told her she would have to call back on Monday because there was a rule that the appointment could only be scheduled within a 24 hour period. Can you imagine?!!! The point of the rule is to make sure that students are scheduled within 24 hours so that they don’t jump out the f___ing windows. She did not understand this basic UCC policy and the rationale behind it. I called, and though this idiot person told me it really wasn’t a parent’s place to be calling and that college students should be doing these things for themselves, I insisted that she schedule an appointment for my depressed student for the following Monday. This is frightening to me. My student is very open with me and I am available to help, but not all students have an advocate to help them deal with inept mental health professionals. And these students are particularly vulnerable and maybe not the most assertive people.
I do want to say that the UCC therapist assigned last year was incredibly awesome, and we were so sorry to hear that he left. It would have been great if my student could have picked up with him where the sessions left off last year.
My advice to any parents out there, if at all possible, just pay for your student to go to real psychiatrists and real psychologists (no disrespect intended toward the many fine psychologists who work/have worked at the UCC). In retrospect, I wish I had done this in September. The clean-up of this mess is going to cost more in dollars and I don’t know if there is much we can do about the grades at this point.
I can see why the other psychologist did not want their name on this article. With a few clicks on the internet you can practically “Google” anyone. As a clinican, you would not want your name tainted on the internet, or even questioned. Unfortunately that is too late for Dr. John Dages and Dr. Barbara Brown
It is encouraging that former staff members, students, parents, and other staff at GW as well as individuals who are not affiliated with GW are all speaking out regarding such an important issue. Of course, it is also frightening that so many individuals, both within and outside of GW, have been impacted by this situation or at the very least are aware of it — and it has still been allowed to continue. These responses are a wonderful start to drawing attention to these matters, but this cannot be the end if we are aiming to achieve some form of long-lasting, meaningful, and effective change. I encourage all to continue to speak out to have their voices heard, and to contact the Dean of Students office directly to express their concerns about this matter. Dean of Students Office can be reached at (202) 994-6710. Dean of Students, Peter Konwerski, can be reached at peterk@gwu.edu. Senior Associate Dean of Students, Mark Levine, can be reached
at markl@gwu.edu. Let’s speak out for our students, children, friends, and colleagues.
Levine, Konwerski, and their boss, Bob Chernak, are complicit in perpetuating the UCC situation.
Let the university president and the chairman of the board know about your unhappiness with the UCC — and with DOS and SASS.
While you are at it, cite President Knapp’s “Message to the University” (11/17/11) and ask him how that squares with what is being allowed to go on at the UCC.
(see: http://gwtoday.gwu.edu/aroundcampus/amessagefromthepresident)
President Steve Knapp
GWU
Rice Hall Suite 801
2121 I Street NW
Washington DC 20052
president.gwu.edu
202-994-6500
Mr. W. Russell Ramsey
Chairman, Board of Trustees
GWU
Rice Hall Suite 802
2121 I Street NW
Washington DC 20052
trustees.gwu.edu
202-994-8610
I want to be very clear about my reason for leaving UCC. I have Parkinson’s Disease. The chronic stress of working in such an environment as described by former staff members may be difficult for most people. For someone diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease it is also physically detrimental. As you can see I don’t hide behind a computer screen and in a similar fashion, I expressed my concerns about the administration to Mark, Peter, HR, and EEO. As a result, I felt singled out by UCC administrators. I realized that if I stayed at UCC I would become iñcreasingly disabled physically. I left abruptly however because of a particularly stressful incident with Barbara that morning. As much as I wanted to stay, I chose my health. It had to come first. So, I apologize to my clients. I miss seeing you and working together, and I wish that I could have explained this in person.
Tali
I am so sorry Dr. Shokek for the stress you endured while at the GW counseling center. I am also sorry that several people on this site assumed that you had alterior motives when you offered to see GW clients at a reduced rate, which is a great deal. You were right to put your health first instead of staying in a hostile environment.
I’m sorry to hear that you are not well. It does seem rather unprofessional, though, how you are disclosing all of this personal information. You are probably a decent person, so I am going to make a well-intentioned suggestion that you stop posting.
As three former staff psychologists at GW many years ago, we really can’t say we’re pleased to read the revelations in Sarah Ferris’ article, as it saddens us to read that what was once a stimulating and supportive environment, has become an increasingly hostile workplace to recent and current employees.
We believe that what you are witnessing is the latest iteration of what has been a years long process of stripping away any semblance of an authentic student service orientation in favor of a model that values units of service over quality of service. The current rate of staff turnover is alarming, and we suspect demoralizing and damaging to those left behind (colleagues, students, and clients). This trend, taken together with several of the responses to Sarah Ferris’ article, suggest that the current UCC environment is no longer the safe, collaborative, and collegial environment which attracted and sustained a competent, cohesive and largely satisfied clinical staff when we were there in the mid-90s to early 2000s. We must understand, however, that the UCC exists within a larger system, and if you want to understand how the center (and the University) arrived at the current crisis, attention should also be directed to the Division of Student and Academic Support Services administration, which has oversight and direction over the UCC.
When I (Steve) was hired in 1994, the UCC and Student Services collaborated to establish a vision for optimizing the effectiveness and reputation of the UCC on campus. This was also true when Bill (1995) and to some extent Kim (1999) were hired. Were we perfect? Of course not. But the climate was one of responsiveness to student needs and criticism, which we thought reflected the responsiveness of the administration to the needs and critical feedback of the UCC staff. The smallest unit of a system often reflects the values and norms of the larger system. We never feared to share our opinions as is now implied by the fact that most responders to this article remain anonymous. We truly believed that we would work at GW for many years. Staff development was supported by weekly guest lecturers presenting topics in psychology relevant to our work. Funds were also made available for staff training outside of the UCC, which many of us used to attend conferences or workshops that enhanced our skills and knowledge. It was a climate or growth and renewal, not stagnation and fear.
At the time there was also a vibrant training program (Accredited by the American Psychological Association) for graduate students in clinical and counseling psychology, which not only increased the number of available clinicians to students (typically as many as three full time and three part time staff), but also created an ongoing climate of clinical evaluation, collaboration, and learning that buoyed morale, stimulated the learning and enhancement of clinical skills, and contributed to a consistent and stable core of clinical staff. One could argue (and the administration did) that staff time provided for training and supervision could have been used for direct service hours, but objectively, the staff hours diverted to training were offset by a) the additional clinical hours provided by supervised doctoral students in psychology; b) high job satisfaction that training brought to permanent staff; and c) a lower rate of staff turnover arising from multiple role satisfaction which inoculated us from burnout. That UCC psychologists are there to offer direct service to GW students couldn’t be more true; however, one can also argue that ongoing learning and training only serves to strengthen the enthusiasm, investment, and competence of the clinicians delivering those services. It’s both/and, not either/or. It is not a coincidence that some of the finest medical and mental health service organizations in the country are also rigorous teaching institutions that value ongoing training and learning. As the units-of-service model became more firmly entrenched at GW, however, the training programs at the UCC were systematically dismantled, and ultimately eliminated by an increasingly short sighted, and at times arrogant administration. This trend was underway when each of us decided to leave over a period of four years (1999-2003), and each of us can attest to the robustness of the trend.
The UCC of our past forged close and cooperative relationships with Resident Life, the Dean of Students Office, the University Police Department and other departments charged with preserving and improving the physical and emotional welfare of the students. We were proud to be psychologists at GW for a number of years, and would have stayed much longer were it not for the initial harbingers of things to come. As administrative changes took place at SASS over the years, collaboration gradually gave way to a more authoritarian, micro-managerial approach that in our view isolated the UCC and interfered with its effectiveness. The previous Director of the UCC did a fine job for many years, shielding her staff from the political exigencies imposed by an increasingly reactive Dean of Students Office that emphasized form over substance, and often second guessed the clinical decision making of UCC staff and the policies of its Director.
Our sincere hope is that the exposure of some of these problems in the larger system will result in a careful and thoughtful analysis of how to restore not only the reputation of the UCC, but its effectiveness and collaborative role in the larger GW community. We also hope that SASS will resist setting the UCC up as a scapegoat while turning a blind eye to its own policies and practices that may have contributed to the current dilemma. While some of us have been gone from GW for well over a decade, we would love to see its reputation restored as a place to which students and practitioners in psychology from around the country flock in order to work and train.
UCC is horrible. They sent me a letter saying my “case had been closed” and then called me demanding money. What am I, a court case?
Apparently so.
In the last few days several former UCC staff, GW students, and parents have expressed their “concen” and “outrage.” Most of them encouraged others to speak with DOS and SASS administrators, however none of the recent UCC ex-staff members or GW students or parents were willing to reveal their identities. Hidden safely behind their computer screens, they criticzed and urged others to do something to ameliorate this situation.
Most poignant was “speak out” who wrote, “I encourage all to continue to speak out to have their voices heard, and to contact the Dean of Students office directly to express their concerns about this matter…Let’s speak out for our students, children, friends, and colleagues.”. It is easy to write an email, but will “speak out” and others who behaved in a similar fashion actually speak out?
According to a current UCC employee with whom I an still in touch, there are currently over 40 students who are on the waitinglist to be seen. Who will speak out on their behalf? Will you?
You really need to start thinking about how the things you write might effect someone?
You sound like a digruntled employee who wants to keep stirring the pot. You’re not offering a solution, just personal jabs.
You are not helping the center, the people still working at the center, the school, the students or yourself.
This not only reflects on you as a person but as a professional. You might learn from the quote that “silence is golden”.
So…”concerned student,” you think things get better if nobody speaks up? Tali Shokek’s post is not entirely fair (she seems to be finger pointing at people who are speaking up at least here; and she doesn’t not recognize the hardship that speaking up can bring) but to suggest that nobody speak up is worse.
Dear “Concerned Student”,
Silence is not golden. Silence is permits the continuation of abuses. Silencing counseling center staff is what led to this problem within UCC in the first place. Tali Shokek is right this time – speakinig up is the only way to promote change and it is up to us – the GW community – to make that happen. While some may choose to do it in an open forum, others – like myself – would rather do it by contacting DOS and SASS personally.
Silencing GW students and parents or current and/or former counseling center staff is unethical and dangerous.
The Active Minds chapter on campus has started a feedback form to organize thoughts and voices to effectively lobby the administration on this issue. They are also offering to respond with organized resources for those saying they were let down by UCC.
The link is here: http://bit.ly/vX6Gr0
In light of this excellent article regarding the UCC, we would like to extend a message to the GW community. While we are a group that supports, promotes, lobbies, and shapes the counseling center, we understand that some in our community have found the services provided unsatisfactory.
Please know that we, as a group of student advocates, can act as a sounding board to hear and field your complaints, to use those complaints to continue to advocate for change in the UCC and the university as a whole, and to point those feeling let down or wronged to additional resources. There are a number of resources on campus, in the DC area, and nationally that serve similar roles to the UCC and we are more than happy to connect members of the GW community to those resources.
Our message is simple. We commend you for trying to get help. We are concerned and understanding that the help you received was unsatisfactory. We want to know about your complaints so we can not only continue your search for resources, but also work on making sure the same problems don’t occur in the future.
Please do not let a negative experience on the path to mental wellness be a roadblock in your overall journey. Let us help you carry on by directing you to the support you need. Let us be a voice for you in working with the UCC and the GW administration to improve services.
We have opened a Google form for complaints and concerns. They can be anonymous or carry a name at the contributors discretion. We will respond to any requests on this form for additional resources through our public twitter account (@ActiveMinds_GWU) without mentioning any names. More information on this process can be found on the form found here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dFZDdmtXMi0xdEdCcERXZzViMWowYkE6MQ
Please let us know if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Best,
Active Minds at GWU
activemindsgwu@gmail.com
GW students should be aware of another resource on campus – The GW Center Clinic. This is a low-cost clinic based in one of the university’s doctoral programs. Advanced doctoral students provide both short and long-term therapy. Student-therapists remain in the clinic for at least a year and remain with their patients for the duration of their training in the clinic.
The clinic is a good and affordable option. People can read about it here:
http://programs.columbian.gwu.edu/psyd/clinic
I was shocked that the UCC doesn’t promote this option more. Given they are at the same school.
If you look at the list of employees, all are good except for the managerial staff. Contact the staff to stand up to them, in order for change to occur! Sad how two individual could bring down a place!
http://gwired.gwu.edu/counsel/ContactInformation/MeettheUCCStaff/
I heard an additional clinician quit; maybe he was one that quit earlier but I think this is a new one.
That’s right, another staff psychologist left. He had been with UCC for over a year and left under Mark Levine’s leadership. That is concerning as is Mark Levine’s opinion piece in the Hatchet dated Jan 30 2012.