Adventures on the Electronic Frontier

Ethics and Risk Management in the Digital Era

About the Workshop
Most of us have heard about the dual meanings of the Chinese ideograph for crisis: danger and opportunity. This is a great descriptor of the situation psychology finds itself in with regard to the rapid development of new electronic technologies that could revolutionize the way we provide psychological services. The provision of remote (i.e., internet or telephone based) psychological services is developing rapidly and has been identified as a priority by a number of federal agencies. The Department of Defense currently uses these technologies to evaluate and/or treat its personnel in both combat and noncombat settings. In addition, insurance companies and Medicare are already reimbursing these services in limited circumstances. Psychologists are already involved in this process. The current regulatory system, however, was designed for an environment in which services are provided in person with treatment provided face-to-face. Currently, this dated system has no provisions for treatment to be provided otherwise and is struggling with how to deal with and regulate telepsychology. Consequently, how the regulatory environment will respond to all of this is quite gray at this point. On the one hand, the system is conservative, based on state regulation and geared to protecting consumers within states. On the other hand, everyone realizes that this technology is both revolutionary and has enormous potential to create progressive advancements which cross regulatory borders, raising questions about statutory authority and its applicability.

With the expansion of the digital age even psychologists who have no interest in providing some or all their services remotely are being confronted by issues having to do with the new internet and computer-based technologies. Facebook, Google, cyberreviews and attacks, email, texting, Twitter, Skype, real time audio and visual technology, encryption and computer security are impacting almost all psychologists. Many questions regarding the internet and digital communication have arisen for psychologists and include: Can I have a Facebook page? What can I put on it? How do I secure my electronic communications?

How much of my private, non-professional life and activities is appropriate to reveal to the public? How do I control access to my private and personal information?

The Trust’s experience in giving workshops and taking risk management calls indicates that psychologists are not fully prepared to deal with these developments, particularly those who were not raised in the digital world. Regardless, even psychologists unfamiliar or uninvolved with these new technologies know that they are revolutionizing communication and creating a variety of new professional challenges from which no psychologist can escape.

This workshop will address the above issues starting with a point in time review of the current status of digital psychology and make predictions based on the current state of affairs as well as review the potential professional and economic advantages of using telepsychology. It will provide guidance to psychologists who wish to take full advantage of this technology before the rules are established, a circumstance that will likely expose them to some risk. Additionally, the workshop will review the current ethical rules, standards and underlying principles dealing with telepsychology and online services. It will then look at relevant laws, both current and in development and will address relevant court decisions, government policies, jurisdictional issues and licensing board responses. In summary, this workshop will provide those who attend with an overview of the beginnings of the evolution of regulatory policy for both psychologists interested in using telepsychology and those who are less prone to embrace this new technology. Finally, and most importantly, this cutting edge workshop will provide practitioners with a method of identifying risks and with a process for developing a risk management strategy based on the approach presented in past workshops and in the Trust publication “Assessing andManaging Risk in Psychological Practice: An Individualized Approach.”

Learning Objectives
• Participants will be able to apply basic ethical principles to evaluate risks, benefits, and appropriateness of using various electronic communication and social networking mediums in their professional practice in a variety of situations.

• Participants will be able to identify ethical, legal, and disciplinary trends concerning electronic communication that will allow them to anticipate, plan, and adjust their practices accordingly.

• Participants will be able to evaluate when and how to provide remote professional services, therapeutic, and otherwise to clients in a way that minimizes disciplinary risk.

• Participants will be able to understand, apply, and integrate the laws and legal principles governing remote practice within and between states.

• Participants will be able to identify various kinds of professional credentials that will enable them to increase their professional mobility.

• Participants will be able to develop amendments to their informed consent and documentation and professional consultation policies to accommodate remote practice and electronic communication.

• Participants will be able to identify important issues regarding privacy and confidentiality created by electronic communication mediums and technologies that present risks to clients so they can clearly discuss these risks with clients who wish to utilize these technologies.

• Participants will be able to evaluate and improve their competency to utilize electronic technology and provide remote services to their clients

• Participants will be able to discuss and apply specific positive, ethically based strategies to manage the disciplinary risks presented by remote electronic communication and professional service delivery based on documentation, consultation, informed consent and demonstration of competency

Eliigibility for Insurance Premium Discounts
Workshop completion earns 6 CE credits and eligibility to receive a 15% premium discount on your Trust Sponsored Professional Liability Insurance for your next 2 consecutive policy periods. To obtain CE discounts, submit CE certification from an organization approved by APA to offer CE credit (must have been completed within the previous 15 months) with the insurance application. Discounts cannot be combined and are not applicable to Researcher/Academician or Student policies. Group policies become eligible for the CE discount when at least 50% of those insured under the group policy submit CE certification. All applications are individually underwritten and submission of CE certification will not guarantee insurance policy issuance or renewal.

Workshop Schedule
9 – 10:30 AM: Workshop

10:30 – 10:45AM: Break

10:45 – Noon: Workshop

Noon – 1PM: Lunch on your own

1 – 2:30 PM: Workshop

2:30 – 2:45PM: Break

2:45 – 4:30-PM: Workshop

CONTINUING EDUCATION CREDITS
Adventures on the Electronic Frontier: Ethics and Risk Management
Adventures on the Electronic Frontier: Ethics and Risk Management in the Digital Era is spon- sored by the Illinois Psychological Association. The Illinois Psychological Association is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. The Illinois Psychological Association maintains responsibility for this program and its content.

Six continuing education credits for psychologists will be awarded.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Those who attend the workshop and complete the Trust evaluation form will receive six continuing education credits. Please note that APA CE rules require that we only give credit to those who attend the entire workshop.Those arriving more than 15 minutes after the scheduled start time or leaving before the workshop is completed will not receive CE credits and will not be eligible for the 15% premium discount described in this brochure.

CANCELLATION POLICY
No refunds will be offered for this workshop.
Grievances about the workshop may be addressed to the Illinois Psychological Association in writing.

Illinois Psychological Association
67 East Madison Street Suite 1817
Chicago, Illinois 60603

LOCATION
The Standard Club-Chicago
Ethics and Risk Management in the Age of The Affordable Care Act: will be held on Friday, June 3, 2016 from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Standard Club, 320 South Plymouth Court in Chicago, Illinois. There are several self-park garages in the area. The Standard Club is very close to the Red, Blue, Green and Purple lines of the elevated. The Standard Club is in walking distance east of the train stations.

The Illinois Psychological Association is committed to accessibility and non-discrimination in continuing education activities. Presenters and attendees are asked to be aware of the need for privacy and confidentiality during and after the program. Additionally, if a participant has special needs, she/he should contact Marsha Karey by May 3, 2016 to discuss what accommodations can be provided. All questions, concerns, or complaints should be directed to Ms. Karey (312- 372-7610 x201 or mkarey@illinoispsychology.org.

There is no commercial support for this program, nor are there any relationships between the CE sponsor, presenting organization, presenter, program content, research, grants, or other funding that could reasonably be construed as conflicts of interest.

Workshop #1 Worry, Panic and Anxiety

Illinois Psychological Association 2016 Clinical Workshop Series

The Illinois Psychological Association is sponsoring a series of 3 workshops in 2016.These workshops will provide training for psychologists wishing to develop their clinical knowledge and skills. The following information is about Workshop #1.

Location
Argosy University’s Illinois School of Professional Psychology will support this program by hosting this series at their campus at 225 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1300, Chicago. IL. (312-777-7600). This building requires preregistration and a picture ID to pass through security.

The Illinois Psychological Association is committed to accessibility and non-discrimination in continuing education activities. Presenters and attendees are asked to be aware of the need for privacy and confidentiality during and after the program. Additionally, if a participant has special needs, she/he should contact Marsha Karey by February 19, 2016 to discuss what accommodations can be provided. All questions, concerns, or complaints should be directed to Ms. Karey (312-372-7610 x201 or mkarey@illinoispsychology.org.

There is no commercial support for this program, nor are there any relationships between the CE sponsor, presenting organization, presenter, program content, research, grants, or other funding that could reasonably be construed as conflicts of interest.

Time
This workshops is scheduled from 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM. Bagels and coffee will be offered for breakfast. Lunch is on your own.

Parking
Argosy University does not have parking facilities; however, there are several commercial parking lots close to campus. There is a Self-Park one block west of Michigan Avenue on Lake Street.

Continuing Education:
Each full day workshop offers 6.0 continuing education credits. The Illinois Psychological Association is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. The Illinois Psychological Association maintains responsibility for this program and its content.

The IPA has been approved by The Illinois Social Work Continuing Education Committee for the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation to offer CE credit for social workers. #159-000291.
APA CE credits satisfy the continuing education requirements of Illinois Licensed Professional Counselors.

Cancellation Policy
No refunds will be offered for this workshop for cancellations after Tuesday, March 8, 2016.

Grievances about the workshop may be addressed to the Illinois Psychological Association in writing.

Illinois Psychological Association
67 East Madison Street Suite 1817
Chicago, Illinois 60603

The Workshop
Friday March 11
Worry, Panic and Anxiety
Dave Carbonell, Ph.D. and Patrick McGrath, Ph.D.

Learning Objectives:
1. Attendees can list 3 evidence based therapy techniques to treat anxiety disorders.

2. Attendees will be able to describe to their patients a rationale for using CBT and ERP to treat anxiety.

3. Attendees can explain to patients how to utilize effective change techniques.

4. Attendees will be able to teach patients anxiety tricks to avoid getting stuck and how to turn that around.

5. Attendees can demonstrate how to apply exposure techniques to worries as readily as to feared objects and activities.

Workshop Schedule
 9 – 10:30 AM: Workshop

10:30 – 10:45AM: Break

10:45 – Noon: Workshop

Noon – 1PM: Lunch on your own Workshop

1 – 2:30 PM: Workshop

2:30 – 2:45PM: Break

2:45 – 4:30-PM: Workshop

Letter to IPA Members Regarding the Hoffman Report

Dear Colleagues,

We, like you, are saddened and sickened by the findings of the Hoffman Report: an ongoing pattern of collusion between a select group of APA top leaders and the Department of Defense (please see more details below). The 500+ page report is extraordinarily detailed and thorough and is available in its entirety at www.apa.org. Our initial response is based on this profoundly important report. Given the gravity of the findings, the density of the document, and the importance of being thorough, you may be receiving further communications from us as we continue to digest the material.

While the report does not conclude that APA or anyone within it promoted torture, it did find there was an effort to "curry favor" with the Department of Defense and that APA lent support to the Department’s interrogation program and thereby contributed to abuse by DoD and the CIA. We, the IPA leadership, do not approve of and cannot defend what this group of APA representatives did.

Bruce Bonecutter, our IPA representative to APA Council in 2006, should be commended for co-sponsoring a resolution to be inserted into the APA Ethics Code points 1.02 and 1.03: "Under no circumstances may this standard be used to justify or defend violating human rights." APA immediately published its intention to include this sentence in our Ethics Code and the 2010 APA Ethics Code does include this sentence in both of these sections.

Furthermore, we believe that, as psychologists, we have a primary commitment to always do what is in the best interest of our patients, first and foremost, our clients and to our colleagues. We recognize that the profession of Psychology is going through a very difficult time because of the actions of a select group of psychologists in leadership within the APA, but this crisis gives us all, and in particular the leadership at IPA, an opportunity to come together as a cohesive community to support each other, to support social justice initiatives, to demonstrate transparency, and to represent ourselves, in all of our outreach with our larger community as committed, compassionate professionals who seek to build alliances that will promote human understanding, and to reduce interpersonal violence in all sectors of our society.

As per Joe Scroppo Ph.D. JD wrote on D42 [with permission from the author]: "The lesson is to avoid repetitions of the fiasco…we must actively support legitimate dissent…by building into these systems a role for persons whose primary job is to challenge the consensus…painful though it is to have onlookers when difficult, complicated and morally fraught decisions have to be made, the exposure brings our moral conscience to the fore and helps us to resist our baser impulses.”

We welcome any and all initiatives for social justice and organizational ethics programming and their implementation for IPA. Please contact any one of us in IPA leadership (see our names below).

There are many media reports about the Hoffman Report. Please read the full document at your earliest convenience to understand the entire context. Here is the link: http://www.apa.org/independent-review/APA-FINAL-Report-7.2.15.pdf. We very much appreciate the thoughtful approach that our IPA community is taking in beginning to process information that can be overwhelming. We appreciate you.

If you have specific thoughts or questions that you would like to have addressed at the APA Council meeting at the Toronto Convention, our IPA representative to APA Council, Cliff Saper, would very much like to hear them. He can be reached at: cliffsaper@gmail.com. We are also planning to have a dinner at Convention on Saturday night, August 8th, at 7 p.m. at a venue to be determined. At that dinner, we will be discussing the APA plight. If you’d like to join us, please let Cliff know!
On the APA website related to the Report of the Independent Reviewer (http://www.apa.org/independent-review/index.aspx), a public comment section has been added where anyone can add comments and those comments can be viewed by governance, members and the public.

Most sincerely,

Karla Steingraber, Psy.D., IPA President
Joe Troiani, Ph.D., IPA President-elect
Blaine Lesnik, Psy.D., IPA Immediate Past President
Laura Faynor-Ciha, Ph.D., IPA Secretary
Beth N. Rom-Rymer, Ph.D., IPA Treasurer
Cliff Saper, Ph.D., IPA representative to APA Council

Nancy Molitor, Ph.D., APA Public Education Campaign
Susan Zoline, Ph.D., Co-Chair, IPA Ethics Committee
Abigail B Sivan, Ph.D., Co-Chair, IPA Ethics Committee
Bruce Bonecutter, Ph.D., Past IPA President (1989-1990), IPA Fellow
Alexander J. Paret, Ph.D., Membership Chair
Gregory Sarlo, Ph.D., Past-President, Consortium Chair
Abby Damsky Brown, M.A., Parliamentarian
Amy L. Robinson, Psy.D., Metro-Area Representative
Daniel Brewer, Psy.D., SOGI Chair
Ellen M. Stone, Psy.D., Co-Chair of the Employee Assistance Program
Lisa Lombard, Ph.D., Clinical Issues Section Chair
Carsi Hughes, Ph.D., Placement Chair
Michele Womontree, Psy.D. South Central Region
Chris Bibby, Psy.D., Social Responsibility Chair
Patricia Pimental, Psy.D., Legislative Chair
Patricia Farrell, Ph.D. Past President, Healthcare Reimbursement Reform Sub-Committee Chair
Terri Schultz, Ph.D., Healthcare Reimbursement Reform Sub-Committee Chair
TMS Psychological Services, PC

Here is APA’s press release:

http://cirrus.mail-list.com/tpaboardplus/43358736.html

Here is the full report:

http://www.apa.org/independent-review/APA-FINAL-Report-7.2.15.pdf

Please see this letter, below, from APA Immediate Past President, Nadine Kaslow and APA President-elect, Susan McDaniel:

"Dear Members,

The APA Board of Directors commissioned Mr. David Hoffman of Sidley Austin to do a thorough and independent review related to allegations of a relationship the APA and Bush Administration related to the use of abusive interrogation techniques during the War on Terror. The report was recently received confidentially by Council who were in the process of providing recommendations to the Board when it was leaked to the New York Times. We had planned on a public release this coming week after Council’s input, but we have now posted the complete report on the APA website along with a press release that includes the Board’s initial recommendations. The supporting documents will be made available on our website this weekend.

The conclusions of the Independent Review report are deeply disturbing. Mr. Hoffman found evidence of an ongoing pattern of collusion between a small group of APA representatives and the Department of Defense. The Hoffman report states that the intent of the individuals who participated in the collusion was to "curry favor" with the Defense Department, and that may have enabled the government’s use of abusive interrogation techniques. As a result, the 2005 PENS report became a document based at least as much on the desires of the DoD as on the needs of the psychology profession and the APA’s commitment to human rights. Mr. Hoffman did not find evidence of collusion with the CIA or in the 2002 change to our Code of Ethics.

The Hoffman report clearly writes a difficult chapter in our organization’s history. We sincerely apologize for the actions, policies and lack of independence from governmental influence detailed in the report. Our members, our organization, our profession, and the public expected and deserved better. We have announced a series of corrective actions related to policies and procedures to strengthen our organization and demonstrate our commitment to ethics and human rights.

We realize it is a lengthy document, but encourage you to read the full report. Although the Executive Summary thoroughly overviews the findings, the specific details that provide the background (emails and interview data) are in the actual document. Reading the full document will help you to better understand how Mr. Hoffman came to his conclusions.

As troubling as the findings are, it is important that they have come to light so we can address them in a systematic and thoughtful way. As a result of the report, there will be significant changes in the organization, in terms of both policies and procedures. Dr. Stephen Behnke is no longer an employee of APA as a result of the findings in the Hoffman report, and other personnel actions are under consideration.

APA as an organization is a tremendous force for good in the world. Our members and our staff include so many talented, committed, and ethical psychologists. Our task now is to use what we have learned to ensure that something like this can never happen again, to return to a focus on our core values in everything we do, and to work to regain the trust of both our members and the public.

The months ahead will be very challenging for the association. We have much work ahead of us to address the findings of the report and to move toward healing. Nothing will ever undo what was done in the past, and we cannot deny that it is a stain on the honor of “Psychology,” but we must and we will return to our roots to rebuild a new organization of which all of us can be proud. With your patience, support and engagement, we truly believe that we can come through this painful time an even stronger organization.

Sincerely,

Drs. Nadine Kaslow and Susan McDaniel

Stress in America

American Psychological Association Survey Shows Money Stress Weighing on Americans’ Health Nationwide

WASHINGTON — While aspects of the U.S. economy have improved, money continues to be a top cause of stress for Americans, according to the new Stress in America™: Paying With Our Health survey released today by the American Psychological Association. According to the survey, parents, younger generations and those living in lower-income households report higher levels of stress than Americans overall, especially when it comes to stress about money.

“Regardless of the economic climate, money and finances have remained the top stressor since our survey began in 2007. Furthermore, this year’s survey shows that stress related to financial issues could have a significant impact on Americans’ health and well-being,” APA CEO and Executive Vice President Norman B. Anderson, PhD, said.

The survey, which was conducted by Harris Poll on behalf of APA among 3,068 adults in August 2014, found that 72 percent of Americans reported feeling stressed about money at least some of the time during the past month. Twenty-two percent said that they experienced extreme stress about money during the past month (an 8, 9 or 10 on a 10-point scale, where 1 is “little or no stress” and 10 is “a great deal of stress”). For the majority of Americans (64 percent), money is a somewhat or very significant source of stress, but especially for parents and younger adults (77 percent of parents, 75 percent of millennials [18 to 35 years old] and 76 percent of Gen Xers [36 to 49 years old]).

A gap also appears to be emerging in stress levels between people living in lower-income (making less than $50,000 per year) and higher-income households that mirrors the growing wealth gap nationwide. In 2007, there was no difference in reported average stress levels between those who earned more and those who earned less than $50,000, with both groups reporting the same average levels of stress (6.2 on a 10-point scale). By 2014, a clear gap had emerged with those living in lower-income households reporting higher overall stress levels than those living in higher-income households (5.2 vs. 4.7 on the 10-point scale).

Stress about money and finances appears to have a significant impact on many Americans’ lives. Some are putting their health care needs on hold because of financial concerns. Nearly 1 in 5 Americans say that they have either considered skipping (9 percent) or skipped (12 percent) going to the doctor when they needed health care because of financial concerns. Stress about money also impacts relationships: Almost a third of adults with partners (31 percent) report that money is a major source of conflict in their relationship.

The report also uncovered good news about stress management. Americans who say they have someone they can ask for emotional support, such as family and friends, report lower stress levels and better related outcomes than those without emotional support. Unfortunately, some Americans say that they do not have anyone to rely on for emotional support. According to the survey, 43 percent of those who say they have no emotional support report that their overall stress has increased in the past year, compared with 26 percent of those who say they have emotional support.

On average, Americans’ stress levels are trending downward: The average reported stress level is 4.9 on a 10-point scale, down from 6.2 in 2007. Regardless of lower stress levels, it appears that Americans are living with stress levels higher than what we believe to be healthy — 3.7 on a 10-point scale — and some (22 percent) say they are not doing enough to manage their stress.

“This year’s survey continues to reinforce the idea that we are living with a level of stress that we consider too high,” Anderson said. “Despite the good news that overall stress levels are down, it appears that the idea of living with stress higher than what we believe to be healthy and dealing with it in ineffective ways continues to be embedded in our culture. All Americans, and particularly those groups that are most affected by stress — which include women, younger adults and those with lower incomes — need to address this issue sooner than later in order to better their health and well-being.”

To read the full Stress in America report or download graphics, visit the webpage.

For additional information on stress, lifestyle and behaviors, visit the APA Help Center webpage and read APA’s Mind/Body Health campaign blog. Join the conversation about stress on Twitter by following @APAHelpCenter and #stressAPA.

Methodology
The Stress in America survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Poll on behalf of the American Psychological Association between Aug. 4 and 29, 2014, among 3,068 adults ages 18 and older who reside in the U.S. Because the sample is based on those who were invited and agreed to participate in the Harris Poll online research panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. To read the full methodology, including the weighting variables, visit the Stress in America Press Room webpage.

The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States. APA’s membership includes nearly 130,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives.

National Register Credentialing Scholarships for Early Career Psychologists, Postdoctoral Trainees, and Doctoral Students

We are now accepting applications for National Register Credentialing Scholarships. These scholarships help early career psychologists, postdoctoral trainees, and doctoral students become credentialed by the National Register of Health Service Psychologists by covering the cost of the credentials banking and review fees.

The application deadline is October 15, 2014. To apply, go to www.NationalRegister.org

Once credentialed by the National Register, you gain immediate access to benefits including:

• Expedited licensure mobility in the US and Canada
• Credentials verification to healthcare organizations, hospitals, and employers
• Consumer referrals via FindaPsychologist.org
• Subscription to The Register Report magazine
• Free continuing education*

Since 2005, the National Register has awarded more than 1,300 credentialing scholarships to doctoral students, postdocs, and early career psychologists representing more than 200 different doctoral programs. We hope you will take this opportunity to start your career as a credentialed health service psychologist. The application deadline is October 15, 2014.

Credentialing scholarships are supported by donations to the National Register scholarship funds.

* The National Register is approved by the American Psychological Association to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. The National Register maintains responsibility for this program and its content.

Governor Pat Quinn (D) Signed Into Law Historic Bill, Sponsored by the Illinois Psychological Association

Prescriptive Authority Given to Licensed Clinical Psychologists

PRESS RELEASE (Archived from 2014)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
Beth N. Rom-Rymer, PhD, President, Illinois Psychological Association
docbnrr@gmail.com
cell: 312-961-1735

Terrence Koller, PhD, Executive Director, Illinois Psychological Association
ipaexec@aol.com
office: 312-372-7610 x202

Chicago, Illinois (June 25, 2014) Today, at 3:30 pm, Governor Pat Quinn (D) has signed into law the historic bill, sponsored by the Illinois Psychological Association, that gives prescriptive authority to licensed clinical psychologists, with advanced, specialized training, to prescribe certain medications for the treatment of mental health disorders. Illinois has now become the third state in the country, after New Mexico and Louisiana, to give prescriptive authority to licensed clinical psychologists with this specialized training. Introduced by Senator Don Harmon (D), President Pro Tem of the Illinois Senate, Senator Dave Syverson (R), Representative John E. Bradley (D), and Representative Raymond Poe (R).

American Psychological Association Help Center

Psychotherapy Works

Research shows psychotherapy is effective in treating depression, anxiety and behavioral health issues. It can help people make positive changes in their lives and relationships and develop skills to manage life’s challenges and be healthy.

Vist the APA Help Center

Featured Tools:

Psychotherapy: Friends Helping Friends (video)

Protecting Your Privacy

Psychotherapy: Understanding Group Therapy

How To Help In An Emotional Crisis

Understanding Psychological Testing and Assessment

Stress In America 2013

Health Care System Falls Short on Stress Management

APA Survey finds inadequate attention given to behavioral health needs of younger Americans, people with chronic illness

Washington — When it comes to stress management and wellness, there is a gap between what Americans want from their health care system and what they actually get, according to a new survey released today by the American Psychological Association (APA).

Findings from Stress in America™: Missing the Health Care Connection, which was conducted online by Harris Interactive among 2,020 U.S. adults in August of 2012, suggest that people are not receiving what they need from their health care providers to manage stress and address lifestyle and behavior changes to improve their health.

While Americans think it is important that health care focuses on issues related to stress and living healthier lifestyles, their experiences do not seem to match up with what they value. For example, though 32 percent of Americans say it is very/extremely important to talk with their health care providers about stress management, only 17 percent report that these conversations are happening often or always.

“When people receive professional help to manage stress and make healthy behavior changes they do better at achieving their health goals,” says APA CEO Norman B. Anderson, PhD. “Unfortunately, our country’s health system often neglects psychological and behavioral factors that are essential to managing stress and chronic diseases. In order for our nation to get healthier, lower the rates of chronic illnesses, and lower health care costs, we need to improve how we view and treat stress and unhealthy behaviors that are contributing to the high incidence of disease in the U.S.”

Americans who receive little or no stress or behavior management support from their health care provider are especially vulnerable. This is a sizeable group, with slightly more than half (53 percent) of Americans saying they receive little or no support for stress management from their providers, and 39 percent saying that they have little or no behavior management support. The same respondents were more likely to indicate that their stress increased in the past year compared to those who do get support from their health care provider (38 percent with little/no support vs. 29 percent with a lot/great deal of support). The situation appears to be worse for the 20 percent of Americans who report experiencing extreme stress (an 8, 9 or 10 on a 10- point scale). More than two-thirds of U.S. adults with high stress (69 percent) say their stress has increased in the past year, yet 33 percent of U.S. adults say that they never discuss ways to manage stress with their health care provider.

Survey findings also show that Americans struggle to keep their stress to levels they believe are healthy. Even though average stress levels across the country appear to be declining (4.9 on a 10-point scale vs. 5.2 in 2011), stress levels continue to surpass what Americans define as a healthy level of stress (3.6 on a 10-point scale). And for many Americans, stress is on the rise — 35 percent of Americans say their stress increased this past year.

Millennials Challenged by Stress and Lack Support
Millennials (age 18-33) in particular seem to have trouble managing their stress and getting health care that meets their needs. The Stress in America survey found Millennials reporting an average stress level of 5.4 on a 10-point scale, exceeding the national average (4.9). This generation also gives its health care lower marks than Americans across the country: Millennials are less likely than people nationwide to give their health care an “A” grade (25 percent vs. 31 percent). Nearly half of Millennials (49 percent) do not believe or are not sure that they are doing enough to manage their stress, and few say they get stress or behavior management support from their health care provider. Only 23 percent think that their health care provider supports them a “lot or a great deal” in their desire to make healthy lifestyle and behavior changes, and just 17 percent say the same about their health care providers’ support for stress management.

The Connection between Chronic Illness and Stress
The Stress in America survey found that U.S. adults with a chronic illness seem to lack support for stress and behavior management when compared to Americans overall, and compared to those who do not have a chronic illness. Americans with a chronic illness are less likely than those without a chronic illness to say they are doing enough to manage their stress (59 percent vs. 66 percent). And for those with a chronic illness who say they get little or no stress management or behavioral support from their health care provider, stress is on the rise — 41 percent said their stress increased in the past year compared with 35 percent of Americans overall.

Although Americans living with a chronic illness see their health care provider more frequently than those without a chronic illness, people living with a chronic illness do not necessarily receive better stress management support. Half of those with a chronic illness (51 percent) see their health care provider three or more times annually compared with only 17 percent of those without. Despite more frequent visits, only one quarter (25 percent) of those with a chronic illness say that they get “a great deal or a lot” of stress management support from their health care provider. But those who say that their health care provider supports them a great deal or a lot for stress or behavior management fare much better than those who do not receive such support. Sixty- eight percent of the former group report they are doing enough to manage stress. This compares to only 54 percent who say they receive little or no support.

To read the full Stress in America report or to download graphics, download the full report below.

For additional information on stress, lifestyle and behaviors, visit www.apa.org/helpcenter and read APA’s Mind/Body Health campaign blog www.yourmindyourbody.org. Join the conversation about stress on Twitter by following @apahelpcenter and #stressAPA.

Methodology
The Stress in America survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Interactive on behalf of the American Psychological Association between August 3 and 31, 2012, among 2,020 adults aged 18 and older who reside in the U.S. The four generations noted in this report are defined as the following: Millennials n=340 (18 – 33 year olds), Generation X n=397 (34 – 47 year olds), Boomers n=1040 (48 – 66 year olds), and Matures n=243 (67 years and older). Among the 2,020 adults surveyed, 1,424 report having been diagnosed with one or more of the following: type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, cancer, heart disease or heart attack, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, overweight, stroke, asthma or other respiratory disease, chronic pain, depression, an anxiety disorder, arthritis, or obesity. This online survey is not based on a probability sample and therefore no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. To read the full methodology, including the weighting variables, visit www.stressinamerica.org

The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States and is the world’s largest association of psychologists. APA’s membership includes more than 137,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 54 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people’s lives.

Harris Interactive is one of the world’s leading market research firms, leveraging research, technology, and business acumen to transform relevant insight into actionable foresight. Known widely for the Harris Poll® and for pioneering innovative research methodologies, Harris offers proprietary solutions in the areas of market and customer insight, corporate brand and reputation strategy, and marketing, advertising, public relations and communications research. Harris possesses expertise in a wide range of industries including health care, technology, public affairs, energy, telecommunications, financial services, insurance, media, retail, restaurant, and consumer package goods. Additionally, Harris has a portfolio of multi-client offerings that complement our custom solutions while maximizing our client’s research investment. Serving clients in more than 196 countries and territories through our North American and European offices, Harris specializes in delivering research solutions that help us – and our clients—stay ahead of what’s next. For more information, please visit www.harrisinteractive.com.