Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Muddying the Mental Health Waters
Psychiatry is far from being the only mental health profession. A review of the statutes in just this author's state of Alaska reveals separate professional licensing boards for social workers, marital and family therapists, nurses, professional counselors, psychologists, psychological associates and, of course, physicians. AS 08.03.010. Psychiatry is indeed not even the only subspecialty among physicians who treat mental health problems. Far more prescriptions for selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs, used to treat depression) originate from family medical practitioners than from psychiatrists. And, increasingly, nurse practitioners – who recently, in this state and others, received prescription powers within narrow confines (“advanced nurse practitioner” AS 08.68.410) – also prescribe psychotropic drugs solely to treat mental health problems.
Not all this seeming confusion is harmful: Alliances are often formed between different mental-health professionals for the treatment of a common patient. The most common alliance is the joint treatment by a psychiatrist and a psychotherapist, such as a psychologist, marital and family therapist, or social worker specializing in individual therapy. The arrangement allows a patient to receive individual therapy from a licensed therapist – which is necessary because insurance companies, by often refusing to reimburse psychiatry expenses, have eliminated the exclusive therapy province of psychiatrists. It also allows the patient to receive drug therapy and, if needed, hospitalization, from the only mental health care provider able to provide those services, the psychiatrist.
Legal Ramifications of Joint Therapy
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?