The case against prescription privileges for psychologist
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8716796 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Garland Y DeNelsky (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1996 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 207-211 |
| Publication date | 1996-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Psychologist (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0003-066X • E-ISSN: 1935-990X |
| Publisher | American Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1037//0003-066x.51.3.207 |
| PMID | 8881527 |
| OpenAlex | W2076202936 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
The right to prescribe psychoactive medications could have major effects on the practice of psychology, on its education and training, on the marketing of psychological services, and on the public's perception of the field. This article presents the case against psychologists pursuing prescription privileges, including discussion of several arguments advanced by proponents of prescription privileges. Although APA has endorsed the effort to secure prescriptive authority, there is no requirement that states actually change their licensing laws so that their psychologists can prescribe. The costs (and potential risks) involved in pursuing prescription privileges are discussed
Field (mathematics · Medical prescription · Perception · Political science · Public relations · Counseling Practices and Supervision · Medicine · Nursing · Pharmaceutical industry and healthcare · Psychology · Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,13 |
| Citation span | 1996 - 2000 (5) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |