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 rebuttalsTable 2: Relevant advantages of NEPThe 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.