SCOTUS Catch-all |

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 1K
  • Views: 48K
  • Politics 
wmheel1287 said:
In almost every licensing issue, the licensing boards are authorized by statute to regulate certain activities and create administrative rules that align with the statute.

I know nothing of this particular case, but separating state licensing boards from staye law almost never makes sense as an argument.
Click to expand...
Do we want experienced and knowledgeable medical professionals regulating doctors or do we want state bureaucrats regulating doctors?
 
wmheel1287 said:
In almost every licensing issue, the licensing boards are authorized by statute to regulate certain activities and create administrative rules that align with the statute.

I know nothing of this particular case, but separating state licensing boards from staye law almost never makes sense as an argument.
Click to expand...
I would go further and say never. A state licensing board is a creature of statute. It can do nothing without authorization by the legislature.
 
heelinhell said:
I was a licensed psychotherapist back in the day and there were no state regulations per se about what you could say to a patient. We had an ethical standard that spelled out in detail how we should conduct our practice.

No ethical therapist would advise that a kid or adult commit suicide and if they did the recourse would be to sued for malpractice, and I am pretty sure the patient or family would win in court.

Conversion therapy was not a thing when I was in practice, but I did have gay patients.

If conversion therapy( which is ineffective and harmful to those who go through it ) was brought to my attention by one of my gay patients wanting to pursue it, my first impulse would not have been, yeah dude, go for it. My first impulse would have been to explore his motivation ( often wanting to no longer suffer the societal hardship ? ) and explore how he would imagine his life to be as a converted gay person within his new identity and society in general.

But if parents sent a kid to me wanting him to undergo conversion therapy, that would pose an ethical problem for me and I would probably advise the parents to seek another therapist.
Click to expand...
The state regulated what you could say to patients. The law (even the conversion therapy law) may not specifically state what you can and cannot say in the therapy room, but it does proscribe the outer bounds of permissible speech.

All professional licensing boards require services to be provided to the public in accordance with accepted standards of professional conduct. It is not just malpractice as a remedy. The state can and does pull the license of professionals who perform their services below the accepted standard of care.

If a therapist "treated" a patient by advocating that he get bitten by rattlesnakes to remove the demon from inside of him, the state would pull the license -- as that therapist is speaking to patients in a way that is prohibited by the state.
 
Calheel said:
The state regulated what you could say to patients. The law (even the conversion therapy law) may not specifically state what you can and cannot say in the therapy room, but it does proscribe the outer bounds of permissible speech.

All professional licensing boards require services to be provided to the public in accordance with accepted standards of professional conduct. It is not just malpractice as a remedy. The state can and does pull the license of professionals who perform their services below the accepted standard of care.

If a therapist "treated" a patient by advocating that he get bitten by rattlesnakes to remove the demon from inside of him, the state would pull the license -- as that therapist is speaking to patients in a way that is prohibited by the state.
Click to expand...
understood...

How would the state know that a therapist advocated and was proved to have advocated a patient being bitten by rattlesnakes ?
 
heelinhell said:
understood...

How would the state know that a therapist advocated and was proved to have advocated a patient being bitten by rattlesnakes ?
Click to expand...
When the dead patient's relatives complained to the state (presumably after confession by therapist, patient, or diary).
 
ZenMode said:
Not what I said. I said the opposite.
Click to expand...
Dude, I responded before your followup. Your followup, by the way, was a direct contradiction of what you insinuated with your question. When pointed out that licensing boards operate via statute, you moved the target by saying "do we want professionals or beurocrats making those decisions" (something close, not an exact quote). We all then pointed out that the licensing boards are composed of trained professionals.
 
wmheel1287 said:
Dude, I responded before your followup. Your followup, by the way, was a direct contradiction of what you insinuated with your question. When pointed out that licensing boards operate via statute, you moved the target by saying "do we want professionals or beurocrats making those decisions" (something close, not an exact quote). We all then pointed out that the licensing boards are composed of trained professionals.
Click to expand...
"do we want professionals or beurocrats making those decisions"

Right.. do we want medical boards creating rules or state legislators, which is what states are trying to do with counselors. We want medical boards or counseling boards, not legislators.
 
Calheel said:
When the dead patient's relatives complained to the state (presumably after confession by therapist, patient, or diary).
Click to expand...
Good enough... Did those therapists get stripped of their license ? Did those dead patient's relatives sue in a court of law ? If so, did they win ?

not being snarky.... I honestly want to know because as I said before, it has been quite a few years since I retired from the biz.
 
ZenMode said:
"do we want professionals or beurocrats making those decisions"

Right.. do we want medical boards creating rules or state legislators, which is what states are trying to do with counselors. We want medical boards or counseling boards, not legislators.
Click to expand...
That is a philosophical viewpoint that has nothing to do with how things work. What we want does not change the fact that legislatures do have the power to control how licensing boards regulate via statute. The licensing boards can only operate within the framework of the statutes.
 
ZenMode said:
"do we want professionals or beurocrats making those decisions"

Right.. do we want medical boards creating rules or state legislators, which is what states are trying to do with counselors. We want medical boards or counseling boards, not legislators.
Click to expand...
You appear to be confusing bureaucrats with legislators.

When a legislature passes a law, it is the legislators that pass the law and the bureaucrats who administer the law.

When a particular medical procedure becomes politically controversial, such as conversion therapy, the legislature will pass the law in response to citizen pressure. That is what happened in California and elsewhere.

You appear to be saying that you don't want any specific legislative prohibitions on medical practices because legislators (whom you call bureaucrats) don't understand medicine. You would prefer that to be handled by boards publishing general guidelines (even though that is far more in the nature of bureaucrats).

So, you have both vocabulary problems and legal problems.
 
heelinhell said:
Good enough... Did those therapists get stripped of their license ? Did those dead patient's relatives sue in a court of law ? If so, did they win ?

not being snarky.... I honestly want to know because as I said before, it has been quite a few years since I retired from the biz.
Click to expand...
This is a hypothetical. I did not mean to imply this actually happened. But I am sure one could find many cases of therapists being stripped of their license for providing improper care to patients -- almost all of which would be speech related.
 
Calheel said:
You appear to be confusing bureaucrats with legislators.
Click to expand...
Yes, I lump them together as a collective of unqualified people to make medical decisions.
Calheel said:
When a legislature passes a law, it is the legislators that pass the law and the bureaucrats who administer the law.
Click to expand...
(y)
Calheel said:
When a particular medical procedure becomes politically controversial, such as conversion therapy, the legislature will pass the law in response to citizen pressure. That is what happened in California and elsewhere.

You appear to be saying that you don't want any specific legislative prohibitions on medical practices because legislators (whom you call bureaucrats) don't understand medicine. You would prefer that to be handled by boards publishing general guidelines (even though that is far more in the nature of bureaucrats).

So, you have both vocabulary problems and legal problems.
Click to expand...
I think this is getting overly complicated. We, despite what KBJ may believe, talking about medical procedures. We are talking about conversations... just words.
 
ZenMode said:
Yes, I lump them together as a collective of unqualified people to make medical decisions.

(y)

I think this is getting overly complicated. We, despite what KBJ may believe, talking about medical procedures. We are talking about conversations... just words.
Click to expand...
Words are medical procedures when the procedure is talk therapy.

California has no issue with religious leaders performing conversion therapy. It is when medical professionals attempt it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top