Prescriptive Authority for Clinical Psychologists: A Review of the Debate

Abstract

This review of current discourse and research on the granting of prescriptive authority to clinical psychologists indicates that the mental health profession is divided into two distinct perspectives regarding this issue. Both perspectives were examined along with pertinent evidence as provided in the available discourse and research. These authors concluded that while each perspective offers varying levels of applicability, the empirical evidence supports the efficacy of granting prescriptive authority to clinical psychologists. The client stands to benefit from this proposal in three ways: improved efficiency of treatment, better possibility of insurance coverage and reduced incidence of overmedication that may be associated with the medical orientation of those currently holding prescriptive authority.Keywords: prescriptive authority, clinical psychologists, improved efficiency of treatment, better possibility of insurance coverage, reduced incidence of overmedication As set forth in the preamble of the American Psychological Association's (1993) code of ethics, the fundamental thrust of the psychologists' efforts should be directed toward the health and well-being of their clients. Furthermore, the code provides guidelines to assist psychologists in achieving these goals by stating that they should utilize only those methodologies which they are adequately trained to effectively use and will recognize the limitations of these methodologies and of themselves as professional psychologists. Throughout the relatively brief history of psychology many changes have occurred in the areas of methodological and theoretical orientations that have challenged the interpretation of these ethical guidelines and caused considerable discord within the field of psychology.