Canine or dog psychotherapist is only a con trick, there is no such recognised qualification except one you apply yourself.
If someone claims to be a canine psychologist and then clearly states to a prospective client ‘This is what I call myself but it means nothing at all apart from the fact its what I call myself'. That is quite fair and anyone who employs the services of such a person has only themselves to blame if something goes wrong.

If, on the other hand, the so called dog therapist does not clearly state that the title is nothing more than a self thought up title, designed for the purpose of commercial gain then that person is coning people who know no different.
It is unreasonable for the general public to phone up a government department to find out if a plumbing, carpentry, chiropractitioner, canine therapist etc, etc, etc titles are legitimate every time they need a service, regardless of what the service is.
Eugeana is correct there are naïve and first time dog owners out there who have lived honest lives and expect others to have an open and honest policy and approach to life, There are all to many canine charlatans about to take advantage of them. Canine behaviourist is another term which has absolutely no recognition, in law this means that unless you have a contract they do not need to get results of any kind.
If there is nothing physically wrong with the dog which might cause some behaviour problem (very rare anyway) then the only behaviour problem with all dogs is that they’re owner has not trained them properly.
As regards training classes or courses. If the owner and dog has (a) been assed as acceptable for a training course (b) been given a written description of the course goals for owner and dog and maximum duration (c) been taken on as a client by a dog training course trainer, after accepting the description, including duration then the owner should expect the goals to be achieved by the end of the time limit.
An assessment is of the trainers ability to successfully teach that client how to train their dog within the time frame.
If any training course accepts a client and their dog when the dog has reached puberty or around 8 to 9 months it should not take more than 8 to 9 weeks, less with most dogs but 9 weeks accounts for slow learners.
The dog should be capable of a 2 minuets out of sight down stay in a STRANGE precinct with strangers by then, the exception being nervous dogs, which are not uncommon but not the majority.
Thankfully all this dragging dogs training out indefinitely, taking money at every turn, without results will soon end, they are trying to bring in legislation for contracts with full descriptions of the services goal, if it is not achieved a refund must be given, not just for dogs but other things.

Hey doog,
Please don't use a comment of mine to support your rants against behavioralists. I was actually thinking that the owners were really lazy and didn't really want to put in the hard work of raising a dog right. The modern society of "instant gratification." I didn't think they were naive and they weren't first timers, either. :( Personally, I really don't want any part of this type of "discussion"

Btw since you mentioned it a bit ago in a rather accusatory posting towards me, no I'm not "for" or "against" these individuals. I'm very neutral. There are good, bad, and indifferent people in every part of society. It is up to the consumer to be aware of what valid pet education and training is, just like pretty much every other aspect of adult lives.

My wise German grandpappy had a saying, "You have to be smarter than the dog to train it".... well, imo, that's basically it for being a dog owner. :) :) Don't necessarily take a friend's word, do one's own research, determine the arguments for/against, and make a decision :rolleyes: Complicated at times, but that's life :D :D
toodles

Doog dog,

The profession of dog training and behaviour is being regulated more:

'Under the new regulations coming out soon between ASAB and the RCVS, only people who have a valid degree course, in psychology or a biological science/behaviour course, will be able to call themselves behaviour therapists, therefore all the other courses which are available at the moment, which are not accredited via a Uni, will be invalid. Other people will be able to work as ;behavioural trainers; and in this respect, the Bishop Burton course is going to be one of those which will be acceptable as a qualification. It has certainly been endorsed by the UKRCB as an essential requirement for membership in the future. [$nbsp]It looks as though the UKRCB is set to become the<br>professional body/trade association for behavioural trainers in the future under the new guidelines

I haven’t a clue what ASAB means but the regulations you mention are only for those organisations you mention.
People will not in the past, now or future wil not be able to claim member of UKRCB (for example) unless they are, but, anyone will be able to call themselves canine behaviourists or therapists etc in the same way as they already do regardless of what academic qualifications they have.
By way of example anyone can set up as a ‘human’ psychotherapist, psychologist and related without any regulation whatsoever, but, they cannot set up as a ‘psychiatrist’ because ‘psychiatrist’ is a recognised profession and the title ‘psychiatrist’ is protected in law.
A practical everyday application of this is the fact that a court must in law accept a psychiatrist as an expert witness but someone who claims ‘psychotherapist’ is not an expert unless they have passed NHS based exams.
They can have a degree in any related subject (psychology for example) but they could not give expert evidence in court because it is an academic degree, no more.
As I said I do not know what ASAB is, I do understand RCVS and they have no say in who puts a title on themselves, they can, of course take action if anyone claims some kind of association with them if that person has none.
They and anyone can point out ‘So and so’ has not got this or that qualification, but they can do that now.
They have no control over anyone wanting to call themselves dog therapist, behaviourist or similar, only an act of parliament can bring in legislation.
Apart from that a degree or course in any of the subjects you mention do not by any means mean that the person can train people to train their dogs or for that matter train their own. It does mean they have been taught to pass exams.
Again by example, anyone can get a degree in photography or film makeing, but they end up as security guards or shop assistants because the real world of film or photography is nothing like the cosy classroom.
UKRCB is not recognised by the government and never will be, it is simply a private organisation, though of course the RCVS can recognise or have it as an affiliate but that is purely between the two of them.
There is a high probability that legislation will be brought in but it will unconnected to anything or any organisation you mention and will involve compulsory contracts, even so that will not come about for about another 2 years.
So now and in the future anyone can and still will be able to call themselves ‘behavioural trainers’ etc, only government legislation can protect a title.

Hi Nouggattie, something I forgot, why did Martin Deeley resign from UKRCB?

Doogdog,
When did you fail your Canine Behaviourist course? Did the course providers fail to reimburse you because they could not be held responsible for selling their course materials to a dunce? Dear me, you do have a chip on your shoulder. Try getting out a bit more, and value other people for their abilities rather than wallowing in self-pity and slanderous remarks.