If you have read my earlier post, ‘Losing my BACP Accreditation‘’, you will know that I lost my senior accreditation with BACP. In that piece I described what it was like to wake up one day and find that a title I had held for many years had gone. Nothing about my work in the room had changed. Only the label on my membership card.
In simple terms, this is what happened. I was a senior accredited member. When BACP brought in the SCoPEd framework, the way they used senior accreditation changed. Some senior members could move into the new system and keep their status. Others, including me, could not. Our title disappeared, even though our work with clients stayed exactly the same.
Now BACP has published an article in Therapy Today called A guide to new accreditation routes. It explains the new SCoPEd routes that will open from February 2026 and presents them as the start of new opportunities. When I read it, I felt I needed to respond.
This is my personal reflection on that article and on what is still not being talked about.
What the new article says
The article explains that:
- new BACP accreditation routes will open from February 2026
- all of these routes will be aligned to the SCoPEd framework
- there will be a range of routes for registered, accredited and senior accredited membership
- routes include streamlined pathways for certain core trainings, Recognition of Prior Learning options and dual membership routes
- BACP has seen what it describes as a very positive reaction from members
The following pages in the magazine show neat tables that describe who each route is for. It all looks very ordered and tidy. If you are newer to the profession, or your training fits easily into the SCoPEd columns, the article might seem reassuring.
If you have already lost senior status, it reads very differently.
What the article does not say
The article does not explain why BACP chose to change the pathway for existing senior members in the way that it did.
There is no account of why some senior members were stripped of their title without being given a fair chance to apply for the revised senior membership. In practice, if you already had a Level 7 counselling qualification, such as a masters degree, you could move into the new senior route and protect your standing.
If you had a long and rich clinical history, extensive continuing professional development, supervision and personal therapy, but no Level 7 counselling degree, that experience was treated as less worthy. You simply did not count in time.
The article refers to positive reactions from members. It does not acknowledge the anger, sadness and confusion expressed by many former senior members. It is as if we are not really part of the story.
We appear only as a brief mention that we can reapply for senior accreditation from February without paying a fee. On paper this sounds helpful. In reality it means spending more time on forms and evidence, time that many of us would rather use with clients or on new CPD.
Experience and qualifications: what is being valued
I want to be clear that I have no quarrel with colleagues who hold masters degrees or higher qualifications. Many have undertaken demanding and in depth training and bring huge value to the profession.
My concern is about the message that has been sent by this process.
It appears to say that formal academic qualifications matter more than long practice, lived experience and ongoing development. Senior accredited members who trained through different routes, often many years ago, were told that what once counted no longer does.
Those of us who trained before certain courses existed, or who followed pathways that were fully accepted at the time, invested heavily in our work. We undertook further trainings in trauma and other areas, engaged in regular supervision and personal therapy, and tried to reflect deeply on our practice.
Yet when SCoPEd was laid over the profession, some practitioners could map upwards and others could not, even when our experience was equal or greater. The new hierarchy privileged particular academic pathways over the messy reality of long term clinical work.
For me this is not only painful at a personal level. It also raises questions about what we, as a profession, choose to value.
Why this matters for more than our egos
It would be easy to frame this as a group of practitioners who are simply upset about losing a badge.
For me, the issue runs deeper.
It is about trust. Can members trust their professional body to treat them fairly and transparently, especially when major structural changes are introduced
It is about ethics and power. BACP encourages us to work for justice, to avoid harm and to treat clients with respect. I try to hold those values in my own practice. I would like to see the same care extended to members when decisions are made that affect our careers, our standing and our sense of identity as therapists.
It is about who gets to belong. When recognition is narrowed to particular academic routes, who is pushed to the edges. People from working class backgrounds, carers who studied around family life, practitioners who trained before certain qualifications were available. Many of us do not fit the neat pattern that is now being privileged.
It is also about clients. Anything that undermines experienced therapists, or makes it harder for them to be seen and valued, affects the choice available to people seeking help. Relational depth, good judgement and ethical steadiness grow over time in the room. They are not granted by a certificate alone.
The silence around our questions
For me, the hardest part has been the silence.
Many senior accredited counsellors have asked BACP, repeatedly:
- why were existing senior members without a Level 7 counselling qualification not offered a clear and transparent route to keep that status?
- why was long experience, evidenced through years of practice, supervision and development, not treated as equivalent to a particular academic award?
- what would the real risk have been in allowing a Recognition of Prior Learning style process for those already recognised as senior members ?
- how does BACP plan to repair its relationship with members who now feel devalued and disposable?
So far those questions have not been answered in any way that feels adequate.
Reading this latest article, with its emphasis on opportunities and positive reactions, deepens the sense that those of us who lost senior status are no longer of interest. We are a small group, perhaps a thousand or so members. It is hard not to feel that we are viewed as an acceptable loss.
Holding some complexity
I know some colleagues feel relieved that there is now a more structured framework. They believe SCoPEd may help commissioners and the public navigate a confusing landscape of titles and trainings.
I can understand that view. It is possible to see that some parts of this project may bring order, and at the same time to recognise that the way senior accredited members were treated has been harmful and, in my view, ethically questionable.
We sit with complexity in the therapy room every day. We know how to hold more than one truth at a time. We can do the same here.
What I would like to see from BACP now
If BACP truly wants to strengthen the identity of the profession and build public trust, I believe the work has to start with its own members.
Some first steps could be:
- a clear public acknowledgement of the impact these changes have had on existing senior accredited counsellors
- an honest explanation of why no transitional senior route was created for experienced members without a Level 7 counselling qualification before February 2026?
- real dialogue with those of us who were affected, rather than being told that transition mechanisms have closed
- serious consideration of a meaningful Recognition of Prior Learning pathway for highly experienced practitioners who were previously recognised as senior now rather than February 2026?
Without this, the new routes risk feeling like public relations rather than genuine progress. They become a story about moving forward that quietly erases some of the people who helped build the profession to this point.
Where I am now
My membership label has changed. My work with clients has not.
I still turn up, session by session, trying to offer safe, thoughtful and honest counselling. I still draw on many years of practice, my continuing professional development, my supervision and my own therapy.
I feel sad and angry about what has been lost. I also feel increasingly disillusioned with BACP. The way these changes have been handled, and the harm they have caused to some members, leaves me experiencing BACP as distant and, at times, arrogant. I feel less proud to belong and more lethargic about professional membership bodies in general.
Yet I also feel proud of the work I continue to do and of the many colleagues who hold their clients and communities with such care, whatever their membership status.
If you are a counsellor who has been affected by these changes, you might feel weary of the whole topic. You might feel relieved, or furious, or somewhere in between. However it is for you, you are not alone. I would be interested to hear how the new routes look from where you stand and what you hope for next.