Registration fees for professional development events such as conferences, trainings, and webinars are often seen as a standard practice. But for many low-income individuals in the peer support field, these fees represent more than just a cost. They create barriers that divide, exclude, and demoralise. The very structure of such events, though perhaps unintentionally, often sidelines those who stand to benefit most from peer engagement and professional growth.
The most obvious issue is the direct financial barrier. For someone living on a limited income, even modest registration fees can be a significant burden. What might seem like a small cost to one person could easily consume a week’s worth of groceries or disrupt already fragile budgeting for basic needs. For these individuals, professional development is not just an investment. It is a sacrifice that many cannot afford to make.
More than just the fee itself, the opportunity cost adds another layer of exclusion. Attending an event might mean giving up essentials like transport, childcare, or daily meals. It is not uncommon for people in financial hardship to be forced into impossible decisions. Do they attend a peer conference or ensure they can afford the rent that month? Such choices are not merely inconvenient. They are destabilising. When survival is at stake, professional aspirations naturally take a back seat.
This exclusion has tangible consequences. Many of these events are key avenues for networking, skill-building, and fulfilling continuing education requirements. These activities are critical for staying certified or advancing in the peer support profession. Missing out on them means missing out on chances for growth. And while scholarships or discounts may be available, applying for financial aid can be an uncomfortable and even humiliating process. This reinforces a sense of being on the outside rather than belonging. The message, however unspoken, becomes clear. These spaces are not designed for you.
Over the past decade, peer support has gained recognition in various countries and in many US states as a valid and evidence-based approach to behavioural health recovery. Yet despite this progress, financial gatekeeping remains an issue. The requirement to pay for access, whether to knowledge, community, or opportunity, recreates the same social inequities that peer support seeks to dismantle. Those with financial security are able to advance more quickly, build stronger networks, and access better job opportunities, while others are left behind. This undermines the values of inclusivity, empowerment, and lived experience that lie at the heart of the peer movement.
There is also the psychological impact to consider. For low-income individuals, being priced out of participation can feel like an institutional dismissal of their worth. Instead of feeling valued for their insights and experience, they may feel overlooked and excluded. The result is often a quiet exodus. People abandon the profession not out of disinterest but because the system made it too expensive to stay. Many shift to jobs outside of peer support, not because they lack passion but because they need stability and security. And that is deeply disheartening. It creates a professional culture where only those with privilege can afford to thrive, while others are quietly pushed out through financial pressure.
This kind of exclusion, even if unintended, is a form of micro-aggression. It is a way of saying that your voice matters only if you can pay. Such practices do not just reflect inequality. They reproduce it.
To address these challenges, the peer support field must rethink how access to professional events is structured. Implementing sliding scale fees based on income could be one approach, allowing people to contribute what they can without being priced out. Scholarships and bursaries should be more widely available and distributed with dignity rather than pity. Online platforms could host free or low-cost webinars to reduce travel and accommodation costs. Local peer-led workshops could replace large centralised events for those unable to travel. And perhaps most effectively, organisations could seek sponsorships to help subsidise attendance for those who would otherwise be excluded.
These steps are not about charity. They are about justice. Removing financial barriers is not only sound policy. It strengthens the movement. It brings in a richer diversity of voices, broadens the scope of experience, and ensures that the peer support community reflects the very people it aims to serve.
When registration fees become gatekeepers, they turn professional development into a privilege rather than a right. They limit who can enter the field, who can stay, and who gets to lead. This not only weakens the profession but risks turning peer support into an exclusive club instead of an inclusive movement. If the peer field truly values lived experience, then it must also value the people behind those experiences, regardless of what they can afford to pay.
Rev. Dr Phillip Fleming is the chief executive officer and director of the division of peer support services at Mindful Living. He holds credentials in peer support, EFIT, and an honorary Doctor of Divinity.
