A Technical and Almost Never Invoked Rule

Last month, I wrote to the NJ State Board of Psychological Examiners because I found something strange when I read their Laws out loud.

The way I read it, if a person is allowed to practice psychology under the authority of a license given to them by the State of New Jersey, their treatment of patients must be "usual, customary and reasonable", but law 45:14B-31 states:

In applying the standards of "usual, customary, and reasonable," the following guidelines are applicable: If a psychological treatment is "usual" or "customary," an inference that the treatment is also "reasonable" is warranted. If the treatment is neither "usual" nor "customary," then it shall satisfy the criterion of "reasonable."

This law confuses me. I am afraid that it is a permissive statute, allowing psychologists whose practice is unreasonable a get out of jail free card. If I complain to the State Board of Psychological Examiners about my doctors' unreasonable treatment of me - like for example, when a doctor insists that I take psychiatric medication but adamantly refuses to tell me why, and then becomes abusive and insulting when I refuse to put something in my mouth against my will - then this law will let him get away with it.

I got a letter back from the Executive Director of the State Board of Psychological Examiners the other day. I think it means my fears are confirmed:

Click Here to Read This a Statement from the
NJ State Board of Psychological Examiners

I wrote another letter to J. Michael Walker asking what the purpose of this law is. I also spoke to Ed Smith, State Senator Michael Doherty's Chief of Staff. He could not tell me the purpose of it. In fact, he agreed with me that Psychologists have a lot of power and this kind of thing should be carefully examined. My state Assemblymen are both aware of the situation as well.

This matter is not resolved. I will report back when J. Michael Walker writes back to me.

In the meantime, ask yourself: What is the purpose of this law?

Warm Regards,

Erik B. Anderson

Does this look right to you?

Could there be a typo in the NJ State Board of Psychological Examiners Laws?

45:14B-1. Short title
This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Practicing Psychology Licensing Act."
L.1966, c. 282, s. 1.

...

45:14B-31. Definitions

As used in this act:

a. "Administrative information" means a patient's name, age, sex, address, educational status, identifying number, date of onset of difficulty, date of initial consultation, dates and character of sessions (individual or group), and fees;

b. "Diagnostic information" means therapeutic characterizations which are of the types that are found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM III), of the American Psychiatric Association, or other professionally recognized diagnostic manual;

c. "Disclose" means to communicate any information in any form;

d. "Independent professional review committee" means that group of licensed psychologists established pursuant to section 14 of this act by the State Board of Psychological Examiners;

e. "Third-party payor" means any provider of benefits for psychological services, including but not limited to insurance carriers and employers, whether on an indemnity, reimbursement, service or prepaid basis, but excluding

governmental agencies;

f. "Usual, customary or reasonable." In applying this standard the following definitions are applicable:

(1) "Usual" means a practice in keeping with the particular psychologist's general mode of operation;

(2) "Customary" means that range of usual practices provided by psychologists of similar education, experience, and orientation within a similar geographic or socioeconomic area;

(3) "Reasonable" means that there is an acceptable probability that the patient will realize a significant benefit from the continuation of the psychological treatment.

In applying the standards of "usual, customary, and reasonable," the following guidelines are applicable: If a psychological treatment is "usual" or "customary," an inference that the treatment is also "reasonable" is warranted. If the treatment is neither "usual" nor "customary," then it shall satisfy the criterion of "reasonable."

L. 1985, c. 256, s. 1.

Read it out loud. At the risk of sounding crazy, I want to say publicly that I think you'll agree with me that the last sentence of 45:14B-31 f. (3) should read:

"If the treatment is neither "usual" nor "customary," then it shall not satisfy the criterion of "reasonable."

Source: State Board of Psychological Examiners Laws - PDF file - posted 1/8/09 page 7-8

"The New Brunswick Massacre of 9/10/47"

Ed Smith, Chief of Staff
Assemblyman Michael Doherty (Future Senator) 
Displaying the B. Bruce Anderson Memorial Flag
On His Desk - February, 2008

"The New Brunswick Massacre of 9/10/47"
By Ed Smith
The following article appeared in the Community News - PO BOX 557, Woodbine, NJ 08720 - in the week of October 30, 1997.

 50 years ago a quiet seizure of power took place at Rutgers University, in the State of New Jersey. While families looked to the future, trying to forget the fresh and horrible memories of the war, politics were not the big subject of the moment. The armies for the different competing branches of government were still vying for power, waging their century old legal war. The official winner, on September 15, 1948, was to be the judicial Branch.

The victims were to be the people of the State of New ]ersey, doomed to live in a state totally under the control of the Supreme Court. In fact, in 1950, the Supreme Court decided that its rulemaking power was exclusive, displacing any legislation on practice and procedure in the courts (Winberry v. Salisbury).

Read the Rest of the Article Here