s (1998) interpretation of the Boulder model as applied to the training of rehabilitation psychologists. The authors strongly believe that there should be many acceptable paths to becoming a rehabilitation psychologist. Moreover, concerted efforts should be made to make rehabilitation psychology an academic discipline, and professional specialty, that is neither subsumed under nor merely an add-on to counseling or clinical psychology. In a recent article, Wegener, Hagglund, and Elliott (1998) offered several recommendations about the psychological identity and training of rehabilitation psychologists. Basically, they proposed that rehabilitation psychology training be based on the traditional scientist-practitioner model recommended at the First National Conference on Clinical Psychology held in 1949 in Boulder, Colorado (Raimy, 1950). They indicated that an individual wishing to become a rehabilitation psychologist should enroll in an American Psychological Association (APA)approved clinical or counseling psychology program, complete a predoctoral internship in a psychology setting and a postdoctoral internship in a rehabilitation setting, then take continuing education credits related to the rehabilitation psychology specialization. Unfortunately, the model itself is biased toward the needs of a particular group of rehabilitation psychologists (i.e., those without predoctoral training or clinical experience in rehabilitation settings). Although it is good to have people enter the field of rehabilitation psychology after they have had several years of study in counseling or clinical psychology, it is certainly not the only, nor necessarily the best, way for people to enter the field.