RSS

Tag Archives: The National Psychologist

Transitioning to the ICD-10-CM

By Julia Besser, MA and Lynn Bufka, PhD

Transitioning to the ICD-10-CMPsychologists and other health professionals have a fast-approaching deadline to contend with in their already busy schedules. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a final ruling that Oct. 1 is the mandatory compliance date for all entities subject to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requirements to transition to the ICD-10-CM.

On this date, the ICD-10 coding classification will become the new baseline for clinical data, clinical documentation, claims processing and public health reporting. At this time there is no indication that a delay or extension will be presented: Beginning Oct. 1, claims filed using prior versions of the codes from the ICD-9-CM will be denied as unprocessable.

With nearly five times as many codes as the previous version, the ICD-10-CM proves beneficial for psychologists as more specificity will be routinely captured in diagnoses. This can lead to greater individualized care, advanced treatment planning, superior care coordination across fields and Transitioning to the ICD-10-CM improved reliability in research settings.

However, with the increased diagnostic nuances come a significant administrative learning curve as well. The American Psychological Association Practice Organization (APAPO) has developed several resources to assist members in creating a smooth transition to the new coding system. Three basic steps are recommended to help with the transition.

The first component is understanding how the basic structure of the upcoming ICD-10-CM varies from the current structure of the ICD-9-CM. Psychologists will typically use Chapter 5 entitled Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Disorders. However, disorders related to amnesia and care-provider dependencies, for example, are not found in this behavioral health chapter.

Familiarity should also be developed  with Chapter 6 (Diseases of the Nervous System), Chapter 18 (Symptoms, Signs and Abnormal Clinical and Laboratory Findings, not otherwise classified) and Chapter 21 (Factors Influencing Health Status and Contact with Health Services). And those working in other areas of health will want to become familiar with any additional relevant chapters.

While the former version of the ICD had a mostly numeric structure, the ICD-10-CM utilizes an alphanumeric coding structure. For example, previously the code for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder was simply 309.81. The new coding could be either F43.10, F43.11 or F43.12. Each component of the code refers to specific diagnostic information. The letter “F” in this new code refers to the chapter “Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental Disorders,” while the “43” refers to the section “Anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform and other nonpsychotic mental disorders.” Finally, the numbers following the decimal point refer to specifiers such as “acute” or “chronic.” Further information on coding structure can be found at: www.apapracticecentral.org.

The second recommended transitional step is to take advantage of the many resources provided for making a successful conversion. The ICD-10-CM Tabular List of Diseases and Injuries is made available for free online via the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This is an easily navigated document that includes all chapters, subsections and associated codes.

Alternatively, several ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM code conversion websites are available for free public access. One such site is www.ICD10Data.com. It is important to note that these websites are not sanctioned by the CDC and should not be the sole source for establishing the accuracy of conversion data.

The American Psychological Association and APAPO are committed to being a resource for information regarding this upcoming transition. An APA publication entitled “A Primer for ICD-10-CM Users: Psychological and Behavioral Conditions” was specifically created to assist mental health professionals by providing a thorough overview and detailed instructions on navigating the new system. This resource can be purchased via http://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4317336.aspx. APAPO members have free access to a web-based ICD-10-CM application. This portal includes the ability to search by keyword, navigate categories of diagnoses or even explore graphical interfaces. Further details can be found at http://www.apapracticecentral.org/update/2014/12-18/memberbenefit.aspx.

Members are also encouraged to contact the APA Practice Directorate’s Office of Practice Research and Policy with further questions via e-mail at SPracticeResearchandPolicy@apa.org or by phone: 800-374-2723, ext. 5911.

Related Article: Providers Frustrated, Seek Accommodation as ICD-10 Draws Near

This article was printed in the July/August 2015 edition of The National Psychologist, a bi-monthly publication intended to keep psychologists informed about practice issues.

Professional Development Resources is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Professional Development Resources maintains responsibility for all programs and content. Professional Development Resources is also approved by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; and by theTexas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners.

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Why Are Mentally Ill in Prison Instead of Treatment?

By Stephen A. Ragusea, PsyD, ABPP, from Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips VII

Recently on one of my psychology listservs, one colleague posted the following:

“I witnessed an inmate in a county jail who was acutely psychotic and was kept in solitary confinement for almost two years, naked, lying in his/her own urine and feces. There was no heat in the cell, and the human wastes leaked into adjoining cells. Numerous official and professional persons were aware of this poor person’s plight and no one did anything (or at least anything that was within their ability and authority) to end the inmate’s suffering. Apparently, this is acceptable practice here in Florida, as all persons were found to be practicing appropriately.”

Ethics, Psychology and the Prison MessUnfortunately, the situation described above by one of our colleagues is not uncommon. In my many years of work in prisons I’ve observed similar scenarios many times. I too have seen naked prisoners lying in their own filth. I’ve seen prisons where an entire block of 40 men was on suicide watch. I’ve seen a prisoner who was elderly, demented and paranoid sent to prison repeatedly after being prosecuted for making “terroristic threats.” I’ve seen a psychotic bipolar prisoner tied to a metal chair and drenched with a fire hose to make him “behave.”

As has been true for more than two decades, the United States incarcerates a higher percentage of its population than any other nation in the world. Most prisoners are under the age of 30 and approximately 15 percent are people who meet the DSM criteria for a mental illness. About half of that 15 percent are diagnosable as seriously mentally ill, suffering from problems like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

According to a 215-page report (ISBN: 1564322904) by Human Rights Watch, “One in six U.S. prisoners is mentally ill. Many of them suffer from serious illnesses such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and major depression. There are three times as many men and women with mental illness in U.S. prisons as in mental health hospitals.” One of the report’s authors, Jamie Felner, observed, “Prisons have become the nation’s primary mental health facilities.”

How did we get into this mess? Some of it started when politicians decided that they could get elected and stay elected by being “tough on crime.” They voted for mandatory minimum sentences, taking discretion away from the judiciary. And, although approximately half of these prisoners were convicted of non-violent, drug-related offenses, rather than voting for funding to pay for alcohol and drug treatment, our elected officials decided to spend our hard-earned tax dollars on building more prisons. The result of this national movement was that we currently incarcerate approximately 1 percent of our population. More than 2.5 million Americans now live behind bars. That’s the equivalent of every man, woman and child in the cities of Philadelphia, Columbus and Seattle.

A few years ago the Tallahassee Democrat reported, “Florida’s law enforcement and corrections systems are rapidly evolving into the state’s de facto mental health treatment providers. More often than not, our law enforcement officers, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and parole officers are being forced to serve as the first responders and overseers of a system ill-equipped to deal with an underfunded treatment system that’s stretched beyond capacity.”

To a large degree, the tax money for building and operating prisons was stolen from our public mental health system. Part of John Kennedy’s vision for Camelot included a national system of well-funded community mental health centers that would serve the mentally ill in their own hometowns, thereby permitting the closing of a well-developed system of state mental hospitals that had provided inpatient treatment for the severely mentally ill.

Those of us old enough to remember the 1970s recall an era of widely available, well-funded mental health care provided through local Community Mental Health Centers. Oddly enough, the systematic under-funding and disempowering of our Mental Health Centers coincided with the increase in funding of the prison system to support the “Get Tough on Crime” movement that spread like a well-intentioned plague from sea to shining sea.

Psychologists should lead the battle for prison reform. I would argue that we have an ethical obligation to do so. Specifically, I reference the preamble of our ethical code, which states:

“Psychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of behavior and people’s understanding of themselves and others and to the use of such knowledge to improve the condition of individuals, organizations and society. Psychologists respect and protect civil and human rights and the central importance of freedom of inquiry and expression in research, teaching and publication. They strive to help the public in developing informed judgments and choices concerning human behavior.”

As doctors of behavior, academic psychologists should be researching new solutions to our social problem of crime and punishment. Clinical psychologists who work in the system should be developing and implementing alternative treatment models for the imprisoned mentally ill. And all psychologists should be demanding government action to correct this inhumane, ill-conceived, foolishness. Can you imagine a hundred thousand psychologists remaining passively silent as 275,000 mentally ill Americans are mistreated? We are. Can you imagine psychologists saying nothing as prisons are turned into “the nation’s primary mental health facilities?” We have.

If you think these issues are important, say so to the leadership of your state and national psychological associations. Talk to your elected representatives. Contribute your time and energy to make things change. We can do better. It is our ethical responsibility to do better.

For more information, please read The Treatment of Persons with Mental Illness in Prisons and Jails: A State Survey

Ethics and Risk Management: Expert Tips VII is a 3-hour online continuing education (CE/CEU) course that addresses a variety of ethics and risk management topics in psychotherapy practice in the form of 22 archived articles from The National Psychologist and is intended for psychotherapists of all specialties.

Professional Development Resources is approved to offer continuing education by the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; and by theTexas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Using Hypnosis With Children

By William C. Wester II, EdD

I often work with children and often employ hypnosis. A few anecdotes from my experience will show why I find that so rewarding.

Using Hypnosis With ChildrenChildren are developmentally in motion both physiologically and psychologically. They live in a land of discovery where ideas realize themselves and imagination prevails. Children are always in a creative and imaginative trance-like state.

Children have very creative and active imaginations. A child experiencing a problem generally wants help to move forward by learning a variety of skills that will resolve the problem – and children do not come to treatment with the same baggage of myths and misconception as adults.

To help clarify the myths and misconceptions about hypnosis, the therapist can send the child’s parents, prior to the first session, a brochure entitled “Questions and Answers about Clinical Hypnosis” (2013) Gahanna, Ohio: Ohio Psychology Publications Inc. Another good reference is My Doctor Does Hypnosis (Elkins, 1997 Chicago: American Society of Clinical Hypnosis Press).

The therapist is continually confronted with the issue of determining the most effective strategy based on the medical and psychological need as well as the child’s developmental level. The therapist must decide what level of distraction, hypnosis or metaphor would be most helpful.

It is easy to move from a distraction technique to an induction, especially in an emergency situation. A babysitter brought a young girl into the ER with a severe cut on her hand. She had been playing with her brother, slipped and put her hand through a window. She was hysterical with this injury and without her mother.

I happened to be on the psychiatry unit, and the chief of psychiatry said we were going to the ER. When we got there he basically said that I should “do my thing” to calm this girl down.

After putting on a pair of gloves I approached the girl, introduced myself, pulled her arm out straight and said “that’s the prettiest blue blood I have ever seen.” The girl calmed somewhat and said, “That’s not blue; that’s red,” at which point we were engaged in a discussion.

I then asked her to try something and close her eyes. “I wonder if you can use your mind in a creative way to find the right switch to your right hand. With your eyes closed just see all the wires going to your brain and find the one that operates your right hand.” (Meanwhile, the staff had started to clean the hand).

“As soon as you find the right switch let me know by raising this finger on your other hand,” I said. “That’s great and now for just a moment, turn that switch off so the doctor can fix your hand. You will feel pressure on your hand but you will not feel discomfort because you have your switch off.” (The ER doctor puts several stitches in the hand.)

“The doctor is finished now,” I said, “so you can turn that switch back on but you can still control the discomfort and keep it very low. When you open your eyes we can see if the blood was really red or blue.” She opens her eyes and immediately I said, “You were right and the color is red. Isn’t it great to have learned something new? You did a super job teaching the doctors about how you can control your switches.”

In older children hypnotic relaxation, imagery, arm levitation or eye fixation may be the best induction technique, whereas in younger children the TV technique, “Fluffy the dog” modeling, and the magic carpet imagery may be used.

It is important to remember that all hypnosis is really self-hypnosis and that the therapist is only the teacher or director in the process. Graduate students quickly learn that some form of induction (age appropriate) is fairly easy and the child will go where they need to go. The real work begins after the induction in developing various therapeutic strategies and appropriate suggestions.

I also use magic as a way to develop rapport with children. I never refer to hypnosis as magic even though I incorporate a story of a magic carpet or magic castle in some inductions. At the end of a session the child is given a simple magic trick to practice until the next session.

Click here to read more.

This article is one of many contained in The National Psychologist – May/June 2015 issue. The National Psychologist publication is intended to keep psychologists informed about practice issues. Professional Development Resources provides continuing education credits for reading the paper and completing a brief, online CE quiz @ https://www.pdresources.org/courselisting/category/1/22.

Professional Development Resources is approved to offer continuing education by the American Psychological Association (APA); the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; and by theTexas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Legal, Clinical, and Ethical Implications of Legalized Marijuana

By Stephen Behnke, JD, PhD, MDiv, from Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips VII

Implications of Legalized MarijuanaRecently the APA Ethics Office was approached with a question: What implications does the legalization of marijuana in two jurisdictions have on psychology ethics? The question has no immediate or obvious answer.

Issues will undoubtedly emerge over time as psychologists work within these jurisdictions and between jurisdictions that have different legal approaches to the use of marijuana. Nonetheless, the question offers an opportunity to begin thinking about the implications of evolving jurisdictional laws that govern the use of substances.

A useful framework is to consider the question from three closely related perspectives: legal, clinical and ethical. This analysis first isolates a specific kind of question, and then examines how the different kinds of questions interact. Thus, the analysis offers a two-step process.

From the perspective of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (2002, amended 2010), a central standard is 2.01(a), Boundaries of Competence: “(a) Psychologists provide services, teach and conduct research with populations and in areas only within the boundaries of their competence, based on their education, training, supervised experience, consultation, study or professional experience.”

The issue raised by standard 2.01(a) is whether it is within the boundaries of the treating psychologist’s competence to work with an individual who is using this particular substance. From the perspective of the Ethics Code, there is no distinction among substances – for example between marijuana and alcohol.

The psychologist must have the appropriate knowledge and skill to treat an individual with the particular individual’s pattern of use or gain the requisite knowledge and skills in the ways that standard 2.01(a) identifies. For this reason, there is an inextricable nexus between the ethical and the clinical, insofar as the Ethics Code says that the psychologist must have the appropriate clinical competence. New laws on the use of a particular substance do not seem directly relevant to this aspect of the analysis.

Ethical standard 2.01(f) may bring in the law in a manner that standard 2.01(a) does not: “(f) When assuming forensic roles, psychologists are or become reasonably familiar with the judicial or administrative rules governing their roles.”

Standard 2.01(f) places the ethical mandate for competence into forensic contexts. In a forensic context, the legal status of a substance that a client is using may be highly relevant to a forensic assessment.

Consider a psychologist who is conducting a child custody evaluation. Two parents live in separate jurisdictions, one of which has legalized the use of marijuana, the other has not. Both parents use marijuana in similar ways regarding the amount and frequency. The evaluator may find it appropriate to take into consideration that in one jurisdiction, the parent is using a substance that is illegal.

In this scenario, clinical considerations regarding substance use may be less relevant – if relevant at all – in comparison with the legal considerations of a parent who is engaging in an illegal activity. The clinical perspective may enter the analysis when the psychologist poses the question: Why would an individual engage in a behavior that may be directly contrary to that individual’s stated goal, i.e., maximizing access to his or her children? In this instance, the legal, ethical and clinical questions converge.

One can easily imagine other types of assessments where the legal status of an activity could be relevant. Ethical Standard 9.01(a), Bases for Assessments, states: “Psychologists base the opinions contained in their recommendations, reports and diagnostic or evaluative statements, including forensic testimony, on information and techniques sufficient to substantiate their findings. (See also Standard 2.04, Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments.)”

Standard 9.01(a) is not limited to forensic contexts. For certain jobs, knowingly engaging in activities that are illegal can be perceived as a reflection of one’s judgment. This consideration may be especially important for assessing individuals for leadership positions. Again, the legal, ethical and clinical converge, insofar as ethical standard 9.01(a) states that it is appropriate to take the legal status of an activity into consideration when such information substantiates a psychologist’s recommendation, report or diagnostic or evaluative statement. Likewise, evaluations in a criminal context may depend to a substantial degree on whether an individual is abiding by the law or engaging in illegal behaviors.

How the evolving legal status of marijuana will affect psychologists’ work is an interesting and important question that has no immediate or obvious answer. The nuances and contours of the question will necessarily emerge over time, and the APA Ethics Office will follow the issue with interest.

social stigmaOne especially intriguing area will be that of social stigma. Although social attitudes toward marijuana are changing, it is still viewed with suspicion – much more so than is alcohol – by a substantial segment of our society. It will be important to examine how such attitudes “seep” over into evaluations of marijuana use even in jurisdictions where it has been legalized.

Ethical Standard 2.04, Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments, states: “Psychologists’ work is based upon established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline. (See also Standards 2.01a, Boundaries of Competence, and 10.01b, Informed Consent to Therapy.)”

Part of the challenge for psychologists in jurisdictions that have recently legalized marijuana will be to examine the extent to which their work – grounded in research, data and clinical experience – is interpreted and applied by decision makers whose attitudes may be influenced by factors that do not have a basis in the “established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline” of psychology.

When psychologists have a reaction of “Wait, that’s not what I was saying about the research,” they may consider ethical standard 1.01, Misuse of Psychologists’ Work:

“If psychologists learn of misuse or misrepresentation of their work, they take reasonable steps to correct or minimize the misuse or misrepresentation.”

Psychologists may look to the research regarding marijuana to see where and how social attitudes deviate from the data. Although it is much too early to know exactly how evolving marijuana laws will affect the application of the Ethics Code, it is reasonable to assume that ethics educators across jurisdictions will have ample opportunity to think about this interesting ethical question as time goes on.

Ethics and Risk Management: Expert Tips VII is a 3-hour online continuing education (CE/CEU) course that addresses a variety of ethics and risk management topics in psychotherapy practice in the form of 22 archived articles from The National Psychologist and is intended for psychotherapists of all specialties.

Professional Development Resources is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Professional Development Resources maintains responsibility for all programs and content. Professional Development Resources is also approved by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; theOhio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; and by theTexas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

My Patient Committed Suicide

By Jeffrey N. Younggren, PhD; Eric Harris, JD, EdD and Joseph Scroppo, JD, PhD, from Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips VII

Probably no area of professional practice is more upsetting and traumatic than the suicide of a patient. In addition to the fear that the psychologist will be sued and the existential questioning about what might have been done differently, the loss of a patient is like the loss of a family member and must be mourned and dealt with.

My Patient Committed SuicideIntense feelings of anxiety and grief can make it difficult to determine how to behave with regard to the family, police, the medical examiner, insurance companies and one’s colleagues.

Traditional risk management thinking was that once a suicide occurred, interaction with the survivors was too risky. After many years of experience, we find that everyone does better if the psychologist is allowed to be human and able appropriately to share feelings of caring for the patient with the family. Expressing condolences, attending the funeral and meeting with grieving family members are important for the family and the psychologist coping with the loss. They are more likely to reduce risks of lawsuits and licensing board complaints than to precipitate them.

  • When a client commits suicide, the need to process the loss is intense but it is important to remember that one’s judgment may be adversely impacted. Consultation and peer support is crucial but there is a risk that things said may be used against the psychologist if there is a lawsuit. Talking to colleagues and supervisors about your feelings is not problematic, but sharing uncertainties about what you did or might have been done to prevent the suicide should only be discussed with your therapist, your lawyer, your supervisor or your spouse. These are the only privileged relationships off-limits to a plaintiff’s attorney.
  • Access to records changes after a suicide. Individuals who have rights to the information about the deceased are dictated by law. However, sometimes rigid adherence to the law is not the best risk management strategy. If someone wants access to records of a patient who committed suicide, immediately seek legal advice from someone familiar with the demands of psychological practice.
  • The best risk management for potentially suicidal patients occurs before a suicide. Careful documentation of regular suicide risk assessments, consultation with other involved professionals and family members where appropriate is what will be looked for by lawyers on both sides.
  • It is important to remember that while one out of four psychologists loses a patient to suicide, malpractice suits are far less frequent than board complaints. Also, while a malpractice suit is very unpleasant, it is rarely career damaging in the long run.

Ethics and Risk Management: Expert Tips VII is a 3-hour online continuing education (CE/CEU) course that addresses a variety of ethics and risk management topics in psychotherapy practice in the form of 22 archived articles from The National Psychologist and is intended for psychotherapists of all specialties.

Professional Development Resources is approved by the American Psychological Association (APA) to sponsor continuing education for psychologists. Professional Development Resources maintains responsibility for all programs and content. Professional Development Resources is also approved by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC); the Association of Social Work Boards (ASWB); the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA); the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA); the Commission on Dietetic Registration (CDR); the California Board of Behavioral Sciences; the Florida Boards of Social Work, Mental Health Counseling and Marriage and Family Therapy, Psychology & School Psychology, Dietetics & Nutrition, Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, and Occupational Therapy Practice; the Ohio Counselor, Social Worker & MFT Board; the South Carolina Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs; and by theTexas Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists and State Board of Social Worker Examiners.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Ethics and Risk Management: Expert Tips IV

Ethics and Risk Management: Expert Tips IV is now available!

Ethics & Risk Mgmt: Expert Tips IVThis 2-hour online course addresses a variety of ethics and risk management topics in the form of 12 archived articles from The National Psychologist. Topics include: the risks and benefits of alternative treatment; Medicare puts providers in peril; the treatment of children whose parents are in the process of divorcing; keeping client needs uppermost in termination; the pitfalls facing psychologists who become involved in their patients’ custody disputes; security is necessary for test validity; tips for working with the duty to protect; are anger, violence and radical ideologies mental illness or different beliefs?; the role of the psychologist; issues in determining top authorship in publications; managing multiple relationships; and LGBQT issues in psychotherapy. This course is intended for psychotherapists of all specialties. Course #20-41 | 2010 | 25 pages | 16 posttest questions

Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips I

Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips II

Ethics & Risk Management: Expert Tips III

Professional Development Resources is recognized as a provider of continuing education by the following:
AOTA: American Occupational Therapy Association (#3159)
APA: American Psychological Association
ASWB: Association of Social Work Boards (#1046)
CDR: Commission on Dietetic Registration (#PR001)
NBCC: National Board for Certified Counselors (#5590)
NAADAC: National Association of Alcohol & Drug Abuse Counselors (#00279)
California: Board of Behavioral Sciences (#PCE1625)
Florida: Boards of SW, MFT & MHC (#BAP346); Psychology & School Psychology (#50-1635); Dietetics & Nutrition (#50-1635); Occupational Therapy Practice (#34). PDResources is CE Broker compliant.
Illinois: DPR for Social Work (#159-00531)
South Carolina: Board of Professional Counselors & MFTs (#193)
Texas: Board of Examiners of Marriage & Family Therapists (#114) & State Board of Social Worker Examiners (#5678)
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 24, 2010 in General

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 
%d bloggers like this: