 |
 |
|
|
APA’s Board of Trustees voted at its meeting last month in Washington, D.C., to suspend temporarily APA’s involvement in a controversial electronic journal with the American Psychological Association.
The suspension of further activity pending a discussion with psychiatrist coeditor Donald Klein, M.D., and a full status report to the Trustees this month represents a compromise between supporters of APA’s collaboration with psychologists on this project and opponents who say they fear, among other things, that psychologists will use the journal to support gaining prescribing privileges, particularly in California.
Area 6 Trustee Richard Shadoan, M.D., who made a motion to terminate APA’s collaboration, described the psychologists’ efforts to gain prescribing privileges.
"The psychologists are trying to sneak prescribing through parity in California. They also refused to support our parity bill. So they are not going with us."
He also referred to a recent psychologists’ "mini-congress" in Chicago devoted to "drumming up support for prescribing privileges. They are in an all-out war for prescribing."
"Moreover, two psychologists told me recently how anxious they are to receive the journal so they can prepare themselves for the day they can prescribe. They said APA coeditor Donald Klein, M.D., is one of the leading experts in psychopharmacology. We just can’t take that risk," said Shadoan. "Our lobbyists were adamant that it would undercut our efforts to stop psychologists from prescribing in California."
Area 2 Trustee Herbert Peyser, M.D., reported that he reversed his initial endorsement of APA’s involvement with the joint journal after listening to Shadoan’s concerns and proposing a disclaimer for inclusion in the journal, which the psychologists rejected.
The disclaimer read, "This electronic journal will serve the purpose of enhancing, fine-tuning, or bringing up to date matters on psychopharmacology and prescribing. However, it cannot substitute for a long and intense theoretical and practical training and experience in biochemistry, pathology, physiology, and disease, which are required for prescribing."
"Such a disclaimer was anathema to the psychologists, and they came up with one that was very weak," Peyser said. "Therefore, we felt there was no other option but to withdraw under those circumstances."
APA past president Jerry Wiener, M.D., commented, "Although the journal is well-intended, its execution in the climate of the relationship between the two associations, entirely initiated by the American Psychological Association, simply makes it inappropriate and unfeasible.
"Whatever we do that is collaborative and participatory will be taken advantage of by the other APA," he warned.
APA immediate past president Harold Eist, M.D., who has supported collaboration with the psychologists, responded, "It is astonishing to me that we would rush to judgment on a journal that has not yet been published and was developed in a spirit of collaboration.
"I need to point out to this Board that we have achieved four mandated parity bills in the past few months because we worked closely with the American Psychological Association on those issues.
"During the parity debate, the American Psychological Association, in spite of their differences with us, opened their 1-800 line so that we could call our Congressmen, and thousands of our members used it so we could get parity.
"In my opinion, this motion is destructive and has no basis in fact. It should be turned down and defeated. There are too many opportunities and various things happening around the country where we can help our patients jointly to support this kind of motion."
APA Treasurer Fred Gottlieb, M.D., commented, "Anyone can distort anything. Apparently a number of psychologists in California have distorted the proposed outcome journal in a way that says they are going to get prescribing privileges. That’s an extraordinary grandiose distortion because that is not how they are going to get prescribing privileges."
He continued, "I [am] relieved to hear that Don Klein has been invited to participate in our discussions. We should also have written material about how we have been treated badly related to the journal."
APA President Herbert Sacks, M.D., clarified the motion to specify that there be no further action on the journal until a full status report with backup material can be presented at this month’s Trustees’ meeting with Klein present. Sacks appointed a small committee to make the report.