The Australian counselling and psychotherapy profession is at a pivotal moment. With the introduction of the National Standards for Counsellors and Psychotherapists in 2025, attention is now turning to a critical question: how should these standards actually be implemented? At first glance, this might seem like a policy discussion happening somewhere “out there.” But in reality, the decisions made in this space will shape how we practise, how we are perceived, and how clients experience our work.
A profession both essential—and under-recognised
Counsellors and psychotherapists already play a vital role in Australia’s mental health system. We provide early intervention, support prevention, and often work with clients before issues escalate into more complex presentations. In many regional and underserved areas, we are the most accessible form of mental health support.
And yet, despite this contribution, the profession remains largely unregulated -and unprotected!
Currently, anyone can call themselves a counsellor or psychotherapist, regardless of training or experience. While peak bodies such as PACFA and ACA set standards for their members, adherence is voluntary. This creates a wide variation in practitioner competence—and, importantly, in public trust.
The problem beneath the surface
The report highlights several “market failures” associated with this lack of regulation. First, there is information asymmetry. Clients often cannot distinguish between a highly trained practitioner and someone with minimal qualifications. In a field built on vulnerability and trust, this is no small issue. Second, consumer protection is inconsistent. While there are complaint pathways (such as health complaints commissions), these are typically reactive and only intervene after harm has occurred. Third, there is an underutilisation of the workforce. Despite strong evidence that counselling and psychotherapy are effective, practitioners are often excluded from funding systems like Medicare. This limits access for clients and contributes to a fragmented career landscape for therapists.
In short, the issue is not just about standards—it’s about how the profession is positioned within the broader mental health ecosystem.
Three possible regulatory pathways
Department of Health, Disability and Ageing published the following report recently (23 February 2026): “Regulatory models that could be used to implement the National Standards for Counsellors and Psychotherapists in Australia”.The report outlines three broad models for implementing the National Standards. Each comes with its own implications.
1. Voluntary regulation
This is essentially the current system. Professional bodies continue to lead, encouraging practitioners to adopt the standards. The advantage here is flexibility and low administrative burden. However, it relies heavily on practitioner goodwill and does little to address inconsistencies across the profession.
2. Contract-based regulation
In this model, standards are enforced through funding agreements. For example, practitioners working in government-funded services may be required to meet the National Standards. This creates stronger accountability—but only within funded systems. A large portion of private practice may remain unaffected.
3. Statutory regulation
This is the most formal approach, involving legislation and mandatory registration—similar to psychologists under AHPRA. This model offers the highest level of public protection and professional recognition. However, it also introduces complexity, cost, and the risk of over-standardising a diverse and evolving field.
Beyond the models: a deeper question…What kind of profession do we want to become?
This is the most formal approach, involving legislation and mandatory registration—similar to psychologists under AHPRA. This model offers the highest level of public protection and professional recognition. However, it also introduces complexity, cost, and the risk of over-standardising a diverse and evolving field. While it is easy to get caught in the pros and cons of each approach, a more fundamental question sits underneath: Regulation is not just about compliance. It shapes identity, culture, and the implicit contract we hold with the public. Too little regulation risks fragmentation and mistrust. Too much risks rigidity and loss of diversity. The challenge is not choosing a “perfect” model—but finding a proportionate one that balances safety, accessibility, and professional integrity.
What this means for practitioners
For practising counsellors and psychotherapists, this is not a distant policy issue—it is an invitation to reflect and engage. How do you understand your own professional identity within a largely unregulated field? What role should standards play in shaping practice? And how do we collectively ensure both quality and accessibility of care?
The National Standards are a significant step forward. But, as the report makes clear, standards alone are not enough. It is their implementation—and our engagement with that process—that will ultimately define the future of the profession.
