_kita

@fuzzylogician's point here is probably the most important. I've been a part of ethics committees in the past. If someone released information about an ongoing investigation, they could be brought up on charges from slander to malpractice. Honestly, you could even be brought up on these charges if the violation is validated, and, for some reason, the professor's record was expunged.
If your career has any type of licensing attached to it, ethical violations of that degree (malpractice) could lead to being stripped of, or never allowed to get, your license. That's the same thing for anyone who reports these problems. I would instead encourage the schools ethics boards to start reporting violations to the public instead of going about it as an independent third-party. If these records were made public, a public platform like you're discussing would not be a professional violation.
 
 

I just want to say that what you are feeling is commonly felt by many other grad students. I think the nature of a PhD research program makes these existential questions more prevalent. We're all doing very specific and niche research. It may be very interesting to us (at least at one point) and we may be very good at it, but ultimately, all of our hard work and effort and unless we're very lucky, we're not going to change the world. At the end of the degree, maybe a dozen people will really care about our results. Perhaps a few hundred may know about it and file it away in their minds.
At the same time, society and culture tells us that our 20s are supposed to be our "best" years where we do a lot of fun times before "settling down". I just turned 30 so I see these messages in TV shows etc. all the time. Grad school is like an apprenticeship, where we are generally underpaid compared to our abilities/work because we are getting a qualification/degree out of it. (Not saying this is a good thing---I strongly believe that people should be paid in proportion to their labour, and that grad students should be paid much better wages. But I'm just stating reality here). Comparing ourselves to our friends/acquaintances who aren't in trainee/apprenticeship programs will always suck, because it's comparing two different career paths. Apples and oranges.
So, I want to say that during my 7 years of grad school at two different programs, I've felt this way many times. I've met tons of other students that feel the same way at some point. I really think grad school emotions is a rollercoaster of feeling like we have the best job ever and questioning all of our life decisions that led to this point. I also want to say that out of all the examples of people feeling this doubt, there are two phases in grad school where this happens the most commonly. The first is during the student's first year. A lot of life changes has happened, usually, and sometimes grad school reality is not grad school expectations. The second is halfway through the program (the "mid-grad-school-life crisis"). Usually there is a little bit of a slump after quals/candidacy and before the dissertation/defense preparations begin in earnest. It's a point in your career where you might have finished some of the initial project goals you had at the start and now you start thinking "now what?". And it's a point where it's time to seriously consider your next steps beyond the PhD and it's normal to feel unqualified to think up your own projects, or to be apprehensive about the unknown.
Sorry that the above is not really advice on what to do, but rather just affirming that you're not alone in how you're feeling. It doesn't make you a bad academic or mean that you're not cut out for the academic world (not that you need to be either). But now I want to share some tips that help me (and others) manage these feelings of doubt/uncertainty and helped me get closer to my own career goals:
1. Find support in others. One good way is to talk to your grad school friends about your feelings. A post like this is a good idea. I read threads elsewhere on these forums where people say they're not in grad school to make friends, and I can get that. It's a work environment and you don't need to be BFFs with your cohort. But I personally found that conversations about grad school life with people actually in grad school have been the most helpful for me to process and manage these feelings. So, if you're not interested in being best friends with your colleagues, at least cultivate a relationship where you can act as each others support network. If humour helps you, there are plenty of blogs/comics/websites that chronicle the woes of being a grad student (just be mindful that you're not reading these things and spiraling further into self-doubt). Some of my favourites are PhD Comics, Lego Grad Student, and WHATSHOULDWECALLGRADSCHOOL.
2. Rediscover your passion. We all chose this path because at some point we were deeply interested in our work (whether it's the topic, or the idea of discovering new things or whatever). I find it really helpful to take a step back occasionally and remember what I love about the field. I very rarely read popular science articles or news stories or TV shows about space/astronomy/planets because it feels a lot like work. But it was these things that led to my love of the field in the first place. Sometimes it's helpful to revisit these things and read or watch something you wouldn't normally watch. Another way I find my passion is to talk to others who work on my specific subfield. I always get a huge surge of motivation and excitement after a conference. I find that continuing to engage with my colleagues on professional Facebook groups and Twitter keeps me connected to my subfield. This is especially important if your department doesn't have a ton of people in your area. Also, it's another way to build a support network. Finally, for me, I try to do a lot of public outreach. Talking to non-experts about my work forces me to examine the big picture, which gets me excited about the work again. And seeing/hearing the audience's excitement is very motivating. These things help me feel like I am actually doing something I enjoy, not being stuck in a routine.
3. Prioritize your non-work commitments. I don't want to prescribe a set number of hours because everyone has different work habits and preferences. But for me, I did not want to work more than 40-50 hours per week. If I worked 40 hours per week, my stipend would work out to a barely livable wage (definitely not in the city where my PhD school was though). So while that's part of the reason I set a limit on working hours for myself, the main reason is to avoid burnout. There is a lot of pressure in academia for academics, especially students, postdocs and pre-tenure profs to feel like they have to devote their whole life to work otherwise they were not worthy. At some level, this is indeed driven by competition: there are only so many permanent jobs available after all. But, you're not going to succeed if you're burnt out. So, I eagerly took on and carved out time in my schedule to do things I enjoy doing. It sounds like you are already doing some of this. It took me a few years to develop the courage (and wisdom) to say "no" to work related things in favour of my personal life, but when I did it, I felt a ton better about myself and my workload. I used to think that I needed a "good" excuse to say no to something or reschedule something, but I now realise that this meant I was prioritizing work above all else, which was not healthy for me. So, I do prioritize work during the work day, but if someone wants to meet with me at 5pm? I am happy to suggest the meeting happen the next day, or the next week. And I'm not afraid to say the reason is that "I want to go home and cook dinner so that I can watch X show" or "Sorry, I can't, I am playing tennis with my friend at 5:30pm" or whatever. To me, work should not trump the other parts of my life so I compartmentalize work commitments to business hours on working days. This also applies to taking vacation time and doing the things on my bucket list. Find out what the policies are at your school and plan to do some of the things you always wanted to do while in school. There is definitely some balance required of "living in the now" vs. "preparing for the future", but it's easy to just think you'll do something later. Taking the time to do something on your "later" list now can feel really good and help with motivation too.
4. Check in with yourself often. As I said, grad school is a roller coaster of emotions. My plan was that I would do grad school/academic career path for as long as I feel happy doing so. That is, for every "down" in the rollercoaster, there needs to be an "up". I told myself that if one day, the rollercoaster never goes back up, then I will know it's time to do something different. To me, this means that the grad school / academia journey isn't a decades long process before I get any stability. It's very daunting to think of it that way. Instead, I just take it one year at a time. If I'm still happy and I still see a path towards my eventual goals, I'll stay. At the same time, I try to take actions that will increase my ability to achieve my overall life goals where possible. For me, this means learning skills that are employable outside of academia, developing and making contacts with people in the geographic region I want to stay in etc. I suggest these things because I find that my friends who decided to devote 100% of their time and energy into research because they can't imagine any other life run into self-doubt / burnout more often. Each person has to find their own balance of how much to devote into their research career versus an alternative career, but I can't imagine 100% towards research is ever a good balance. Or, to put it another way, I find that my colleagues and friends who took time to diversify their skills and experience were able to leave academia and find happiness/success elsewhere when they reached the stage where they were no longer happy in the academic track. But my friends who didn't do this either became successful in academia through their achievements, or they seem to be very unhappy but stuck where they are. So, I think it's important to check in with yourself often, gauge how you feel and have an "escape plan" if this academia thing doesn't work out. For me, even just knowing there's a way out provides me with a lot of peace of mind and helps me manage self-doubt.

Alliant is not reputable. Do not waste an application there and do NOT waste your money going there. In fact, it's advisable to avoid professional schools altogether. You do not need to attend a program that focuses entirely on LGBTQ mental health to study/practice in that area. Look for universities with a faculty member who does research in that area, and apply to those faculty members' labs. There are TONS of programs with faculty that specialize in LGBTQ mental health.

@KevinG I wanted to touch base with you on the clinical psychology piece and licensure because you mentioned acquiring a counseling license as an end goal. You really need to check out the requirements for the state you'll want to practice in. This is a useful guide: http://www.counselor-license.com/
I'm letting you know this because depending on your state, a clinical psychology masters is useless. There are 2 main accrediting bodies CACREP (more about CACREP) and MPCAC (more about MPCAC). CACREP is currently winning the battle because it holds higher standards overall. They require 60 credit hour master programs and believe that psychology and counseling are two different fields with different specialties. Therefore, they are not accrediting clinical psychology programs any more - only counseling based ones.  For more on that here: http://www.cacrep.org/for-students/student-faqs-2/
Several states require CACREP accredited programs over MPCAC ones. Additionally, a lot of other states require a 60 credits. So they mean a CACREP program even though it's not expressly identified. I know a lot of students who graduated a MPCAC program only to find out they had to pay for the additional 12 credits after graduate to get licensed! If you look at this and thing "oh good, my state is safe" I say go for it, but be warned that the ACA is really trying to push for concrete CACREP across the board. You also run the risk of more problems than it's worth if you move into a state with CACREP requirements (or decide to start telecounseling in other states).
The CACREP programs line up for a PhD Counseling or PsyD Counseling. 

Personal mental illness can be crafted in a way that's not a kiss of death, but you don't need to worry about it unless you really want to. From what I see of your profile, you are the ideal candidate (as long as you fit really well with the program). You have strong grades, strong GRE scores, relevant experience (both work and research), and I would assume strong references. I don't see the two 'W's being a problem for you. If I was on the adcom, I would assume that you had time-management or personal life conflicts that took up your time so you withdrew. Additionally, freshman year B's & C's indicate normal freshman, so again nothing you really need to defend here. I see a lot of love for LGBT social and clinical psych on your profile, and I suggest crafting your statement around your current accomplishments.
However, if you insist on adding your personal history into the statement, ask yourself why it is so important to you. My assumption is that your experience has molded your research and professional perspectives. Maybe it's helped you see the field in a new way and consider questions that need to be explored. If you're going to talk about mental illness, talk about those perspectives and research ideas. 
And congratulations. It takes a lot to accomplish what you did both professionally and personally. Good luck!

@MaxwellAlum Yes, you are correct. I was misreading the contract and didn't realize that the World Bank was the one cashing the checks! Contracting agencies are mostly for-profit, so those' contractors are out of luck. Independent contractors can qualify if they're being paid by an appropriate PSLF employee.

Speak with someone at each program (probably the DGS) and tell them your concerns. If you don't test well in math it may not be something you can improve with another testing. However, if you speak to the programs and let them know that you don't do well on tests, they may be able to offer advice. That advice could be anything from "still apply" to "apply and address it in your SoP" to "ehhhh try and improve that quant score." Personally, I don't see any point in delaying your apps when you know what the problem is but haven't spoken with the programs about it yet. They're your best bet of learning if a lower quant will actually hurt your app in this case.

I wouldn't suggest using a public forum like this to discuss and/or report unsubstantiated ethical quandaries for several reasons:
A public forum like this, in nature, is subjective. Ethical reporting needs to be objective for review You may end up 'leaking' a private investigation to the public - which is a different ethical dilemma There's no way to check the honesty or accuracy of a forum discussion I would even be hesitant using this forum as a collection for substantiated ethical dilemmas as we are not set up for that type of database collection, and would end up missing problems. Academic and research honesty are big issues, but an open platform like this that doesn't verify and has such a narrow subject pool isn't the place for it.
 

In terms of research misconduct (e.g. fake results, etc.) then I would say that the number of "good professors" far outweigh the number of "bad professors". I don't think any special actions is necessary to determine who are the "bad professors". Typically, when you are deciding on an advisor, you will talk to a lot of people about it. You might talk to profs/mentors at your undergrad school, your fellow grad students in your program, etc. Usually people do this to find out who is a good "fit" for them, such as whether the prof micromanages or not, work expectations etc. However, sometimes, if you are talking to the right people, you'll find out other "red flags" about the prof as well.
Unfortunately, this "whisper network" method isn't great and plenty of cases of harassment by faculty members that have come to light in the past few years show that many people, especially those most vulnerable, aren't "in the know" about these bad actors.
I would agree with @_kita that public forums aren't a good way to "name" these bad actors. Our grad student organization used to run a "rate my advisor" type service where graduated students can leave feedback on their advisors. However, even this doesn't work well because 1) anyone can say anything, and 2) even if we withheld reviews for 5-10 years and then released them, advisors who find these reviews can probably figure out who wrote them.
I am not sure what the best action would be. I am in favour of formal investigation by an appropriate body (for the appropriate offense) and public announcements of persons found guilty of inappropriate action. For sexual harassment/misconduct, the school's Title IX office should be the appropriate body, however, some schools have Title IX offices that mostly exist to cover up and protect the University. In addition, these results are always confidential and if the offender moves to a different school, no record is transferred. I would like to see expansion of Title IX policy to include a publicly accessible database of investigations that lead to disciplinary actions. However, the current US Government is leaning towards reducing the scope of Title IX.
Another possibility is through the national societies for our discipline. Other professionals, such as doctors, have national regulatory bodies that report on professionals who have violated policy. At this stage, most academic national societies can't really function as regulatory bodies because academics are not regulated and they are not compelled to be a member of their national society. But, I think we can change that. In one of my fields, the American Astronomical Society is the main national society for Astronomy. Almost every faculty member is a member and you need to be a member to vote in their elections and give input which are used to drive national level policies that affect our research. So, it would be pretty strange for a faculty member at a research-oriented school to not be a member. If these societies have the resources to conduct investigations and maintain a database of offenses, that would help keep everyone in check. However, these societies are often reluctant to do such things because they don't have the staff, resources and they are concerned about liability (i.e. they need legal protection in case the offender decides to sue, and in the case where they come to the wrong conclusion about one of their members).
Although I am not sure how to provide these resources to the national societies, I think this is a possible solution. One society (the American Geophysical Union) took the step of including sexual harassment as a form of scientific misconduct (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/scientific-society-defines-sexual-harassment-scientific-misconduct). I think this is a step in the right direction and I hope the other societies I interact with do the same.
Another way might be for funding agencies to develop their own code of conduct enforcement/investigation team. There could be one single body to regulate all federal public funds for all the public agencies. Private funders would have to set up their own system or perhaps they could contract the federal team to do the work. This would require some significant investment from the national government though.

_kita did a thorough response and I'd go with their advice. When I was contacting professors, I'd mention a bit of my background, my research interests, and how I've read some of their work that I think aligns with my interests. I'd mention I had some questions about the program and was wondering if they'd be willing to talk a bit (in nicer language). Since I'm switching fields, I also contacted the DGS of my intended programs. Again I'd mention my background and research interests, then ask about my concerns with switching fields. I'd always thank them in advance for their time.
It is important to note, though, that you should not tell a POI you've read their work if you haven't and shouldn't say you have questions if you don't. Be respectful and honest in your communication with potential advisors.
Results for Me: I contacted all of the programs I was interested in and, of the 7 schools I'm applying to, I spoke on the phone with professors at 4 schools and had a longish email exchange with the DGS at another. One of the schools does not allow for contacting professors before submitting the application so I used their automated system instead and received quite a bit of information. So, allowing for the one school where I can't contact profs early, 5/6 spending the time to speak with me in depth is pretty good. I also learned a lot more information about the program, surrounding area, and the professors by doing this. However, it should be noted that it is definitely not required for acceptance into a program. 

Awesome. Thanks, Kita. Will keep this in mind!

Thanks _kita Also I should mention that this question is a little premature for me right now since I'm still trying to find out a suitable professor with similar interest.

I suggest looking into writing skills-based resumes or functional resumes. That's the best way to make a career direction change. Consider key skills needed in the professional job, and write down how your skills align for the position. For example, I have a resume for teaching skills, one for policy evaluation skills, and one for counseling. All of the same jobs are listed, but my description is tailored to the professional experiences I want the interviewer to see. For the same job (Behavioral Health Clinician) the resumes might look something like this:
Evaluation:
Evaluated and developed recovery treatment plans Evaluated treatment efficacy through analyzing group data Counseling:
Facilitated individual and group psychotherapy sessions Therapeutic techniques included cognitive restructuring, motivational interviewing [...] Teaching:
Conducted recovery staff training sessions to increase treatment efficacy Interviewed and trained new hires You really need to figure out what skills you want to highlight and tailor your CV/resume to those skills.

I suggest looking into writing skills-based resumes or functional resumes. That's the best way to make a career direction change. Consider key skills needed in the professional job, and write down how your skills align for the position. For example, I have a resume for teaching skills, one for policy evaluation skills, and one for counseling. All of the same jobs are listed, but my description is tailored to the professional experiences I want the interviewer to see. For the same job (Behavioral Health Clinician) the resumes might look something like this:
Evaluation:
Evaluated and developed recovery treatment plans Evaluated treatment efficacy through analyzing group data Counseling:
Facilitated individual and group psychotherapy sessions Therapeutic techniques included cognitive restructuring, motivational interviewing [...] Teaching:
Conducted recovery staff training sessions to increase treatment efficacy Interviewed and trained new hires You really need to figure out what skills you want to highlight and tailor your CV/resume to those skills.

I suggest looking into writing skills-based resumes or functional resumes. That's the best way to make a career direction change. Consider key skills needed in the professional job, and write down how your skills align for the position. For example, I have a resume for teaching skills, one for policy evaluation skills, and one for counseling. All of the same jobs are listed, but my description is tailored to the professional experiences I want the interviewer to see. For the same job (Behavioral Health Clinician) the resumes might look something like this:
Evaluation:
Evaluated and developed recovery treatment plans Evaluated treatment efficacy through analyzing group data Counseling:
Facilitated individual and group psychotherapy sessions Therapeutic techniques included cognitive restructuring, motivational interviewing [...] Teaching:
Conducted recovery staff training sessions to increase treatment efficacy Interviewed and trained new hires You really need to figure out what skills you want to highlight and tailor your CV/resume to those skills.

It's different even within each department at the same university. Check out the webpage for each of the departments you're applying to. They should clarify the LOR format.

You can also discuss what you learned about yourself, and systemic problems you want to professionally address, as you went through the mental health system - how you learn, barriers to recognizing and getting appropriate help, etc. That can actually be a powerful personal story that shows a lot of appealing traits to the adcom.

You need to look at the program curriculum and mission statement. Most MSWs are practice based, so have limited research. I don't know enough about SSPs to comment. You'll really have to look at the programs critically to decide which ones are practice v. research.
For myself, I went with the Masters of Health Science in Mental Health at Johns Hopkins. It was a strong public health based research masters with a thesis that allowed the candidate to do a research study (often through a research center), systematic lit review, or policy evaluation. I did a systematic lit review examining mental health evaulation methods. So a mix between the last two. Many of my cohort members were applying to MD, PhD, government, or research jobs after it.

If they say you need both, include both. Check if there are any specific prompts for the cover letter or research statement and try to complement (but not copy) the information in each.

Hi @Hope.for.the.best, when I say career counselor, I don't mean the career center on campuses.  The career center, at most, might provide a "job inventory" test, but they're usually not the best at analyzing it. And when you need to really work within where you're at right now, it would be superficial help at best.  What I mean is a professional career counselor who sits you down, helps you analyze your personal strengths, and helps direct you in future paths that you may not have considered before.  They help you navigate the job market more effectively from a personal strengths-based approach.

I do not recommend adding supplemental essays unless something was requested from the department- especially about academic dishonesty. That is better left for a face to face conversation. One F freshman year should not be a coffin in your application. The committee is likely to dismiss it if the rest of your academics are strong.

A lot of schools will ask you if you would be willing to be considered for masters. But they will not evaluate your application for masters without your approval. That would be highly unethical.

@rheya19 I definitely see where you are coming from. I used to be really sensitized to this with everyone around me. It felt like my personal and professional lives identified me first as a girl (not even woman) to talk down to, pat on the head, and say "you're pretty" before dismissing whatever point I made.  About 5 years ago, the constant derision drove me nuts. That was one part of my decision to re-make my life. The sexist problems in my life did change with the rest of the re-make. As I'm in a sector of health care, most of my co-workers are women, and the CEO is even a woman. My social life became a lot less sexist (which is ironic because a lot of those friends from before are gender non-conforming).  Now my 'female-ness' is about as inconvenient to me as my 'left-handedness' - and I'm not worried about humanizing my hand preference...
Contrarily, I am aware that this is still a social problem that women deal with every day whether in America or globally. Which is why I'm fully willing to say "oh, I don't see it that way, but I can see why someone would. I'll need to be more aware of this going forward."
 

@rheya19 I definitely see where you are coming from. I used to be really sensitized to this with everyone around me. It felt like my personal and professional lives identified me first as a girl (not even woman) to talk down to, pat on the head, and say "you're pretty" before dismissing whatever point I made.  About 5 years ago, the constant derision drove me nuts. That was one part of my decision to re-make my life. The sexist problems in my life did change with the rest of the re-make. As I'm in a sector of health care, most of my co-workers are women, and the CEO is even a woman. My social life became a lot less sexist (which is ironic because a lot of those friends from before are gender non-conforming).  Now my 'female-ness' is about as inconvenient to me as my 'left-handedness' - and I'm not worried about humanizing my hand preference...
Contrarily, I am aware that this is still a social problem that women deal with every day whether in America or globally. Which is why I'm fully willing to say "oh, I don't see it that way, but I can see why someone would. I'll need to be more aware of this going forward."
 

LOL I've been putting far too much time into thinking about this, but I think I figured out why I feel like the term "female" (as a noun) is subtly demeaning: because so much of the world is constantly trying to either infantilize or objectify women. Women have so many fewer fair representations in the media; women have difficulties finding equality and respect in many, many relationships throughout our lives; our experiences in scholarship are "feminist scholarship" whereas men's perspectives are "scholarship;" etc etc. I mean, I get that to most of the world, my main characteristic is "female," but I also know that I am not just my plumbing and someone to sell cosmetics to, and I'd really like everyone else to catch on. Maybe other women here have similar or different opinions.