Caccavale John
California Occupational Injury Center, Downey, CA, USA.
J Clin Psychol. 2002 Jun;58(6):623-33. doi: 10.1002/jclp.10060.
This essay proposes that opposition to prescriptive authority (RxP) is not grounded in or based on any objective data. Opposition arguments fall into the category of ideology, opinion, and inappropriate economic beliefs. Moreover, what scant data does exist with respect to prescribing psychologists, the data disputes the main arguments in opposition to RxP. Major themes expressed by RxP opponents are analyzed, and counter-arguments are presented concluding that RxP opposition is not precedent-setting but part of the historical tension between academic and applied psychologists. The only precedent may be in the way the controversy is resolved.
本文认为，对处方权（RxP）的反对并非基于任何客观数据。反对的论点属于意识形态、观点和不恰当的经济观念范畴。此外，关于开处方的心理学家的现有数据极少，这些数据对反对RxP的主要论点提出了质疑。分析了RxP反对者表达的主要观点，并提出了反驳论点，得出结论：对RxP的反对并非开创先例，而是学术心理学家和应用心理学家之间历史紧张关系的一部分。唯一的先例可能在于解决争议的方式。
