Article archive / December 1, 2010
Originally published: . Volume 2, No. 4. Source pages: 5.
The Medical Board is proposing to keep phrasing in their rules for physicians interacting with MPs, which could be misinterpreted as a prohibition against physicians consulting with psychologists who are not MPs.
The phrase currently states, “General Prohibitions,” number “A. 3. A physician shall not consult and collaborate: […] 3. With a psychologist who is not an MP; […]”
The phrase and its multiple interpretations were brought to the attention of the psychology board by the Times publisher who asked the board to explain its meaning.
At the board’s September 2010 meeting, members discussed that this phrasing could conflict with their past opinions. Past opinions allow psychologists to discuss matters with their patient’s physician, if the psychologist has training in this area and needs to support continuity of care.
Also, psychology board members discussed that the phrasing may be confusing to some, and possibly interpreted as a prohibition against consulting with a psychologist who does not prescribe.
The psychology board suggested to the medical board that the wording be deleted.
However, the medical board declined this suggestion. Their proposed correction is to add the words, “… as defined in §7203 of these rules…” This addition refers back to a specific definition of consult or collaborate, earlier in the document, and to a definition that has to do with MPs only.
The proposed change is published in the November issue of the Louisiana Register. The proposed phrasing is “A physician shall not consult and collaborate, as defined in §7203 of these rules: […] 3. with a psychologist who is not an MP: …”
The original wording had been reviewed by Dr. Glenn Ally in 2008, who was then on the LSBEP.
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.