SocDevMum

Those are three very different programs, so I would suggest really narrowing down what your long term goals and research interests are. If your heart is set on getting a license and being able to work with clients/patients, than the Developmental program won't be what you need. However, if you are strictly interested in research and academia, than the Developmental program may work.  So really consider what it is you want to do, in the long term.
For a Developmental program, you may already be a good match experience-wise, as long as your LORs and personal statements are strong and convincing.  Clinical programs on the other hand are notoriously competitive, and in many programs first-years are coming in with multiple pubs and presentations after spending post-bacc time in a lab or clinic. 
To make yourself a top-quality candidate, you are going to need to write personal statements for each app that can clearly state why you are an excellent research fit to the prospective PI/lab, what your long term goals are, and how your experiences have prepared you. This is going to look different for each one, so I would suggest practice-writing those statements now. It may help you clarify for yourself what your research interests and goals are, and then you will better know where to apply.

Even though you find many areas of research interesting, you need to narrow down something more specific. Following that, you look at which faculty are doing that kind of research. Your statement of purpose, regardless of whether it's a clinical psychology or counseling psychology program, is by and large going to focus on your fit with an individual mentor's program of research. While there are a few minor philosophical differences between counseling psychology and clinical psychology, those differences have shrunk significantly over the years. The end license is identical and the work settings are about the same as well. For instance, you can find a counseling psychologist in an inpatient psychiatric unit and a clinical psychologist in a college counseling center. 
However, if you don't have significant research experience, including posters or even a publication, you may need to get some more research experience to make your application more competitive. 

I made the switch from a business/sales career to psychology in my early 30s. I ended up having to go back and get a second undergrad degree in psychology, but this only took 4 semesters. I then applied for PhD programs, but did not receive a single interview, and so applied to and was accepted into a master's program. It took 2 more tries to gain admission to a PhD program after completing my master's degree. I'm currently 37 and a first year student in a clinical psychology PhD program.
Here are some things I learned (often the hard way!). I hope you find them helpful.
1. Research experience is the great equalizer. If you want to get into a PhD program in Psychology, get involved in a research lab, and preferably multiple labs, right now. Publications and posters count for quite a lot. Sure, GPA and GRE are important, but research is what gets you interviews and, subsequently, offers. Start thinking about questions that are interesting and meaningful to you. If you are having trouble with specific questions, then start with broad concepts. Read recent research papers with those keywords. As a general rule, you want to be included on at least one publication and have a few poster presentations when you apply for PhD programs. Again, this is a general rule. I got into a PhD program without a publication, for example.  I'll say more about this in point 4.
2. Do not place too much weight on your age. This one cuts both ways. I often worried that I was too old, wouldn't fit in, or graduate programs would be hesitant to accept a "old" person. I found, over the course of 3 application and interview phases, that programs valued my business background with respect to time management, leadership, and "big picture" approach to research and grants. However, I did feel that I spent more time during the interview process answering the "Why now?" question (when compared against my PhD interview peers; I made it a point to ask about their experiences).  My advice? Go out of your way to completely answer why you are making a career change in your personal statement. The more you can root this in recent academic experience, the better.
3. Don't expect your past academic history/performance to count for much. My first degree was in math. I was in the honors college and completed a senior thesis that was presented at a national conference. This essentially added nothing to my current PhD applications. Recent academic work, including GRE scores, are valued much more highly than past (<5 years) academic work. Many graduate programs required a psychology degree, so my math degree was not helpful. However, this provided me the opportunity to "prove" that I was every bit as good academically in my 30s as when I was 20.
4. Be ready to relocate. I understand wanting to stay in an area, but the reality of graduate work in psychology is you apply to a person more than to a program; this is especially true at the PhD level. I had to decide whether staying in one place was more important than chasing my goals/dreams. Your specific research interests may not be represented in New York City. Ultimately, if you have to stay put, then look up the faculty of local universities, catalog their research interests, and get involved in their research area. The potential problem here is that you may not be passionate/motivated in the research areas that are close to you.
5. Be prepared to get rejected. Psychology is competitive. Over the 5 years I applied to graduate programs (and got rejected 4 times), I felt that I kept getting older, but the other applicants stayed the same age. To translate, I was getting older and always competing against folks in their early-to-mid 20s. I followed-up with every single rejected application, asking for feedback and ways that I can improve. Then, over the subsequent year, I went out and improved that part of my application. I knew that a PhD program was the right thing for me and I was unwilling to accept some other kind of career. Use that as motivation and not frustration.
6. What is the specific job that you want? Now that you have read my novella, make sure that the degree you are seeking is consistent with the job you want. I was not sure from your post what field in psychology interests you and/or what specific job you want. You can then work your way backward and lay out a 5-7 year plan to make it happen.
I know this was quite long, but I hope it has helpful information. Best of luck!

What might be helpful, if you can do it, is to go to work as an RA or Lab Manager in a lab that does the kind of work that interests you.  This would give you the experience you are currently missing for a future Masters or Phd/PsyD application, and allow you to explore what the options are specific to your field. You could network with clinicians and researchers and see what they have degree-wise, and get their input on where the field is going. Best way to find out what it takes is to get inside
 

Yes, thankfully tuition is waived for PhD students - they make their money off the Masters students, as @Clinapp2017 noted above. When I was getting ready to enter the application process, my advisors made sure to emphasize NOT going anywhere that wouldn't waive tuition. 
I'd love to see a union at my uni, I know several other graduate schools have them and have had some moderate success with improving the lives of their grad students through them. 
Such is Academia.... adjuncts and grad students carry the grunt work and get peanuts for it. Only way to push for change is from the inside, though.

I am a JD who went back to school for a PhD and am now a faculty member. Happy to discuss my experiences and offer some advice one-on-one if you want to PM.

THIS.  Ivy League doesn't necessarily mean better, there are several really outstanding Psych programs on the East Coast that are not Ivy League. Also, not to be a downer, but much of the PhD process is as much about WHO you know as what you have done.  I agree with the multiple posters above - what kind of work do you want to do, that you think you need a Psych PhD rather than a JD to do? Also, why not Sociology? As you mentioned, you already have extensive relevant experience in sociology, and the topic you want to study is extremely relevant to sociology as well. You look like an excellent candidate for top tier sociology programs right now, but for psychology there is quite a bit of "catch up" you will likely have to do to become a viable candidate, especially for Clinical. Lastly - you don't need a Clinical degree to do that kind of research, either, should you decide that Psych is really it for you.  You could easily cover that topic in a Community or Developmental Psych program. I strongly suggest reading up on who is currently doing the work you are interested in across the psychology journals, and see if it's a good fit for you

THIS.  Ivy League doesn't necessarily mean better, there are several really outstanding Psych programs on the East Coast that are not Ivy League. Also, not to be a downer, but much of the PhD process is as much about WHO you know as what you have done.  I agree with the multiple posters above - what kind of work do you want to do, that you think you need a Psych PhD rather than a JD to do? Also, why not Sociology? As you mentioned, you already have extensive relevant experience in sociology, and the topic you want to study is extremely relevant to sociology as well. You look like an excellent candidate for top tier sociology programs right now, but for psychology there is quite a bit of "catch up" you will likely have to do to become a viable candidate, especially for Clinical. Lastly - you don't need a Clinical degree to do that kind of research, either, should you decide that Psych is really it for you.  You could easily cover that topic in a Community or Developmental Psych program. I strongly suggest reading up on who is currently doing the work you are interested in across the psychology journals, and see if it's a good fit for you

Yes, thankfully tuition is waived for PhD students - they make their money off the Masters students, as @Clinapp2017 noted above. When I was getting ready to enter the application process, my advisors made sure to emphasize NOT going anywhere that wouldn't waive tuition. 
I'd love to see a union at my uni, I know several other graduate schools have them and have had some moderate success with improving the lives of their grad students through them. 
Such is Academia.... adjuncts and grad students carry the grunt work and get peanuts for it. Only way to push for change is from the inside, though.

Sorry to hear that  Canadian programs are a bit different, but we also have to pay tuition from our stipend at most programs - I know it's waived at most decent US ones. The tuition here is a tad smaller, but it increases each year, as do the extra school fees. That's why the RA/TA work can add to that; it also might be because some programs have grad students in a union. You think that would get us something, but not much - I've heard they've been trying to raise the funding cap unsuccessfully for quite some time, while our living costs (especially rent) is going up at a scary rate.
I cannot imagine also supporting children on this, even with a working spouse.

For real. My spouse doesn't make a whole ton but enough to cover the bulk of our bills. I was uninsured for a bit until we were married and I could hop on his insurance. 
My university also doesn't have this outside work requirement, so I also work part time for a neuropsychology private practice as a psychometrist. 

I resonate with this statement immensely as someone with a partner who doesn't make a ton of money in her job, but still makes enough for us to get by. Also getting married meant I had the benefit of joining her insurance plan which was significantly better than my university's plan. 
 
Playing devil's advocate, I am not really sure how things are going to change unless we somehow burn down the whole system and start over. PhD students, while a source of invaluable labor to the university, are also fundamentally students IMHO because they are at the university to obtain a product: a PhD. This means the university has to hire faculty, hire admin to support the faculty, etc. to make sure PhD students (and undergrads, too) get an education. Don't even get me started on masters degree students... that is the university's cash cow, for sure. 
 
I still think we PhD students are woefully underpaid for the amount of work we put in, and I will be honest in saying that I have a couple of side-hustles only because the grad government at my university made the university wave that requirement a long time ago through a negotiation that ended a strike. These are small side-gigs (e.g., portrait photography) that are also my hobby, so it's a nice way to supplement my terrible income in my high CoL area. The sad thing is if I went full-time and really invested in launching a portrait business (or wedding photography) I could possibly earn nearly double a post-doc salary in just a year or two with the right photography connections and marketing... *sigh* 
 
I really hate academia. Even with a pretty successful research run during my PhD, I fully plan to obtain a clinical job at a VA or academic med center where I can make a decent salary after post-doc and not have to worry about this BS anymore, lol

My program (and all the ones I ever applied to) funded your stipend through a TA or RA position, so there's no supplementing option. And when I say no outside work is allowed, I mean nothing that will send you a W2 or 1099 (in the USA) at the end of the year.  I'm at a public uni, so my contract for my stipend is literally with the state, and if I'm busted working elsewhere I lose my funding. So unless I'm working for cash under the table, side jobs are a no-go... I am lucky enough to be married, and have teenagers that work for their own spending money, but even with that the cost of living here is killing us and I need to take out a certain amount of loans to keep a roof over our heads.  Academia cares nought for the basic survival of it's graduate workers.
 

So many things...
How does anyone live on these stipends that are less than the cost of living when we aren't allowed to take outside employment?
Balancing personal research and lab research/teaching/etc
Preparing for comprehensive exams
Surviving the publishing process
How do you decide whether or not to stay in academia or go the alt-ac route after graduation?
All the things!

My program (and all the ones I ever applied to) funded your stipend through a TA or RA position, so there's no supplementing option. And when I say no outside work is allowed, I mean nothing that will send you a W2 or 1099 (in the USA) at the end of the year.  I'm at a public uni, so my contract for my stipend is literally with the state, and if I'm busted working elsewhere I lose my funding. So unless I'm working for cash under the table, side jobs are a no-go... I am lucky enough to be married, and have teenagers that work for their own spending money, but even with that the cost of living here is killing us and I need to take out a certain amount of loans to keep a roof over our heads.  Academia cares nought for the basic survival of it's graduate workers.
 

? definitely what I was thinking. As a single person already with a mortgage and other bills, the stipend amount + only allowed to work <= 10 hours a week is tough. But I haven't gotten in anywhere yet so this may not even be an issue I have to worry about!

Honestly, if I didn't have a spouse, I don’t think it would have been very manageable. 

Co-signing this question! Particularly for current students who are older and had to go from decent paying job and bills to below min. wage stipend yet still have bills...

Hello everyone
After consulting with several other members (and derailing other topics ?), I would like to propose the creation of an ongoing thread about the trials and tribulations of psychology graduate students. So maybe we can make this a place where current or incoming grad students can talk about what's concerning them, what things they are enjoying in their grad journey, ask/offer advice to others, etc. I would like to propose we also touch upon things that come after graduation and the future of the field in general.
So what do you think? What are some day-to-day grad student life things you'd like to talk about with folks currently in a program?

Like everything in life, I believe the reality is more nuanced and you're probably both right in some ways.
I am going to speak to this from my own experience, having started my grad school career really young, then life got in the way, then re-starting as an older student.
To get into a highly competitive program right out of undergrad I was similar to you @I/OWA - I worked hard to accumulate a lot of experience in a short amount of time and also had two bachelor's. I was a first gen student and lived through poverty, so I was exposed to some of life's burdens. I did well in my graduate studies, but now looking back, I can see exactly what @Psyche007 is talking about - it was not easy, I was naïve in many ways and still too young to understand many of the nuances. Since it was clinical psychology, this was even more relevant. I had the research methods knowledge and excellent grades yes, but I lacked many other things.
Now going into things at a much older age, I see how I have changed and accumulated a different set of abilities. Skills that will come in handy when it comes to both clinical work but also navigating academia. 
I do know very young grad students who go through it with flying colors. We have so many bright applicants that it's very likely that the incoming cohorts are really bright and frequently over-achieve. But I still see them insecure with how to deal with internal politics, how to advocate for themselves and how often they are afraid to set the boundaries needed to have a good work/life balance. They also don't know how life is like beyond grad school. Many faculty members take full advantage of these things for their own self-serving purposes and it really angers me. 
I realize it's only my perspective and my experience; but for me what @Psyche007said was totally true. I might have fought him a decade ago on this, but not anymore. And it's not just clinical - if you want to take your I/O knowledge to the business world after you graduate, you'll still have to accumulate the business experience, even if your research capabilities are flawless. Sometimes you just need to go through certain experiences so that it all comes together.
Tangential off-topic: @Psyche007seeing your post reminded me that it would be great to have a current grad student thread - irrespective of our ages, many of us could also use a support system for going through the highs and lows of the PhD. Are you still on board to starting that?

I've been around a few graduate students under 23 who have struggled massively with the workload, responsibility, and maturity required to engage and be successful. I have had to ask myself serious questions as to what made them suitable for acceptance. The more unprepared students allowed into a programme, the more the programme becomes diluted in terms of complexity and intellectual demand and concentrated in terms of quantity of work. I've encountered a fair amount of basic busy work and my classes are largely unrewarding, but perhaps that is demonstrative of my programme, even though friends at other programmes say their experience is very similar.
I think that students are better prepared for grad school if they've lived and worked in the real world for a while. You get to see how much of grad school is self-important posturing. It's interesting how sheltered individuals are who have spent their lives in academia. It is a rich and fertile ground for nurturing narcissism, encouraging obsession with politics and reputation, taking yourself super seriously, and doing things for the sake of establishing a career instead of contributing to the field, something I see as the essence of any doctoral programme.
It's easier to get along with faculty when you are 'non-traditional'. Many seem pleasantly surprised and refreshed by a student who is autonomous, challenging, and highly engaged. Then there are some who just want you to be quiet and do as you're told. It's clear that they're very accustomed to dealing with children but not other adults.
But hey, I didn't start undergrad until 30, so my experience has been different the entire journey.

For real   There are way more "nontraditional" PhD students out there then people must be aware of...

I'm finding it hard to believe that any decent portion of folks began their PhD at 21-23. That's assuming someone only needed 4 years for their bachelor's and they were accepted fairly soon after undergrad. I'm biased because I'm non-traditional (enrolled in community college at 21, bachelor's at 27), but I'm more interested in seeing the distribution of PhD starting ages in the 30+ group. As someone mentioned, it feels ageist to lump everyone 30+ together.

There's a big difference between starting at 30 and starting over 40 or 50. Looks a little ageist to me... ?

Hello there
I can definitely relate, most of us are in the same boat. This is my third time, and I am still impatient and have days where I keep refreshing my email for too long. 
The thing is, programs like to keep applicants on hold because you never know what might happen. I just heard a story about this last week from a faculty member currently interviewing - they had a candidate that they felt were a great match, they interviewed them and then realized that it won't be working out after all. So now they have to do more interviews after the program's initial round of interviews. Some programs might do additional rounds of interviews to fill out more spots if they found more funding or if the applicants chose a different offer. There are quite a few people who get in from waitlists. You get the idea, the process is pretty unpredictable. However, you also must realize that usually these are more rare events. If you find out some of your programs already had several interviews with applicants, I would put that program on the backburner and focus on the rest of them. 
I agree with you that it would be better if we had more transparency in the process. A few programs give candidates at least an estimate of when they might hear back (the deadline is X and we interview initially in Y month) and I think all should follow this, like they do with the offer deadline. If I manage to get an acceptance this application season, I am definitely committed to advocating for more transparency and change as a grad student and beyond.