Response to “Reconsidering the discontinuation of M.Phil. programs in clinical psychology and psychiatric social work: An imperative for India’s mental health future”

Dear Editor,

We are reaching out in response to the article “Reconsidering the Discontinuation of M.Phil. Programs in Clinical Psychology and Psychiatric Social Work: An Imperative for India’s Mental Health Future” featured in the February 2024 issue of the Indian Journal of Psychiatry.[1] While we understand the concerns raised about the challenges facing psychologists and students in the wake of these program discontinuations, we believe that the article’s arguments overlook several critical aspects that merit discussion, as outlined in Tables 1 and 2.

Table 1.

Arguments in original viewpoint and subsequent rebuttals

Argument		Rebuttal
Argument 1: No viable alternatives to the MPhil program		The original viewpoint misses the broad scope of training overseen by the Rehabilitation Council of India, including over 58 specialized programs. Furthermore, alternatives like the Professional Diploma and Psy.D in Clinical Psychology offer targeted, practical training. These programs are designed to effectively equip professionals with the necessary skills for today’s health-care needs, filling the gap left by discontinuation of M.Phil. programs[2]
Argument 2: The legislative process required to amend the Mental Healthcare Act is intricate and time-consuming. This legislative inertia risks disrupting the educational framework and poses a substantial threat to the continuity and efficacy of mental health services across the country		The 2-year phased discontinuation of M.Phil. programs allows for a careful transition, reducing disruptions in mental health services. This method ensures that new alternatives are smoothly integrated, preserving the supply of qualified professionals. The original argument exaggerates the immediate effects of legislative changes and underestimates the ability of these alternatives to effectively replace the discontinued programs
Argument 3: Discontinuation of the M.Phil. programs exacerbates the existing manpower crisis in mental health, particularly affecting service availability in rural areas. This action, by reducing the number of qualified professionals, directly impacts mental health service delivery where it is most needed		The article overstates the effects of discontinuing M.Phil. programs on the mental health manpower crisis, particularly in rural areas, incorrectly inferring data on psychiatrist shortages. The real issue involves deeper systemic problems like stigma and insufficient funding[1,3]
Additional argument: NEP 2020 compromises the specialized nature and depth of expertise required in mental health professions by phasing out focused programs like M.Phil.		NEP 2020 actually enriches the specialized focus and depth in mental health professions by promoting a modern, research-driven approach. The creation of the National Research Foundation highlights this by fostering academic and practical applications, better equipping professionals for today’s mental health challenges[4]

NEP=National Education Policy

Table 2.

Relevant advantages of NEP

Feature of NEP 2020		Advantages in mental health education		Citations
Modern approach		Integrates current clinical practices and technological advancements into training, ensuring relevance and forward thinking		[2]
Increased practical approach with alternatives		Focuses on practical training through alternative degrees and timelines, aligning with modern health-care needs		[2]
Emphasis on research		Encourages research at the undergraduate levels, fostering a culture of inquiry and innovation in mental health		[4]
NRF		Allocates funding and resources specifically for mental health research, leading to significant advancements		[4]
Novel solutions and pathways		Encourages viable deputy pathways for mental health professionals, enhancing career and training opportunities Recognizes and incorporates various qualifications beyond traditional degrees, broadening the scope and accessibility of training		[2,4]
Increased mental health awareness		Integrates mental health education into early schooling, increasing awareness and understanding among children		[4]
Interdisciplinary education and flexible curriculum		Enables students to draw from multiple fields of study, fostering a holistic understanding of mental health that can enhance care Removes rigid boundaries within the curricula, offering more adaptable and interdisciplinary educational options		[2,4]

NEP=National Education Policy, NRF=National Research Foundation

The article overemphasizes the discontinuation’s adverse effects on mental health resources, particularly in rural India, incorrectly inferring data regarding shortage of psychiatrists to amplify the argument for the need of an academic program. It also overlooks the broader, more pressing challenges to mental health-care accessibility, such as societal stigma, lack of awareness, and insufficient funding and compensation for mental health professionals.[3] Addressing these foundational challenges, which persist despite the existence of M.Phil. programs, is imperative for enhancing mental health care.

In addition, the article overlooks the potential of alternative qualifications to fill the gap left by the discontinuation of M.Phil. programs.[2] Alternatives such as Professional Diploma in Clinical Psychology and Psy.D in Clinical Psychology offer practical, hands-on training experiences poised to effectively equip candidates for their roles in the field, proving to be valuable for individuals targeting doctorate-level credentials as well as those seeking shorter, more focused training programs. The viewpoint also discusses the Rehabilitation Council of India’s requirement for an M.Phil. degree for clinical psychology licensure, but overlooks its 58 specialized training programs, revealing a gap in the discourse on mental health professionals’ training and availability.

By integrating these alternatives and emphasizing practical experience, undergraduate interest in mental health research can be sparked, aligning with the National Education Policy’s emphasis on enhanced research in the revised honors/masters curriculum and establishment of the National Research Foundation.[4] This growing interest could potentially increase the number of students pursuing research at multiple levels of education while also addressing the critical need for a robust body of India-focused research.[4,5] This policy introduces the removal of rigid boundaries, providing students with flexibility and aiming to curb dropout rates while enabling creative and interdisciplinary study combinations. In addition, it integrates a psychology curriculum through the National Curriculum Framework, encouraging interdisciplinary learning from the sixth grade, inclusive of short-term internships covering mental health and substance use basics.

The article’s depiction of the discontinuation as abrupt overlooks not only the extension of these programs’ validity to ensure a smoother transition, but also the essential need for swift and decisive reforms in India’s mental health education and care. The urgent need for mental health services in India requires innovative solutions, including the phasing out of programs that may not meet the current needs of the population or the health-care system itself.

In conclusion, discontinuation of M.Phil. programs presents challenges, yet it unfurls a promising horizon for innovating and advancing India’s mental health care and education.

Sincerely,

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.