M a r c h 9 , 2 0 2 0 – A P A P r a c t i c e L e a d e r s h i p C o n f e r e n c e , W a s h i n g t o n D C

Advocating for Prescriptive Authority for Psychologists: A National Perspective

Deborah C. Baker, JDDirector of Legal & Regulatory Policy

Office of Legal & Regulatory Affairs – APA

1986: APA’s Council of Representatives accepts a joint resolution submitted by Divisions 12 (Clinical) and 22 (Rehabilitation) that identifies the practice of psychology to include “both physical as well as purely psychological interventions”.

1989: APA’s Practice Directorate staff joins the Defense Department’s Blue-Ribbon Panel to create the Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (PDP) curricula.

1991: The PDP begins training two Navy psychologists.

1995: APA Council votes to adopt a resolution on prescription privileges for appropriately trained psychologists.

1996: Council approves Model Legislation for Prescriptive Authority and the Recommended Postdoctoral Training in Psychopharmacology for Prescription Privileges.

1997: APA Council authorizes the College of Professional Psychology to develop an exam for use by states and provinces in granting prescriptive authority to psychologists.

2009: APA Council approves the revisions to the RxP Model Curriculum & Model Legislation documents and the establishment of a designation system for psychopharmacology training programs for psychologists.

2019: APA approved revisions to existing APA’s RxP policy documents.

Brief history of APA’s support for Prescriptive Authority (RxP)

2

• APA’s Model Curriculum for Education and Training in Psychopharmacology for Prescriptive Authority

• APA’s Model Legislation for Prescriptive Authority

• APA’s Designation System for Education & Training Programs in Psychopharmacology for Prescriptive Authority

• APA Practice’s Legislative Grants program (administered by Committee of State Leaders)

• Staff consultations

APA’s RxP Policies & Tools

3

• Purpose of designation is to afford public recognition of education and training programs that meet certain minimum standards and published criteria

• Committee is composed of 6 members representing specified expertise areas:– Psychopharmacology postdoctoral program directors– Basic psychopharmacology science or clinical psychopharmacology research– Prescriptive authority in psychology, – Prescriptive authority in another health profession, and – Health care system quality assurance

• Responsible for oversight and implementation of APA’s designation system for psychopharmacology education and training programs

• Process is voluntary• Current APA-designated programs:

– Alliant University– Fairleigh-Dickinson University– New Mexico State University

APA’s Designation System for Psychopharmacology Education & Training Programs for Prescriptive Authority

4

Number of RxP bills introduced by year (1999-2019)

6 6

9

4

9

8

9

6

9

8

10

7 7

5 5

2

5

6

5

2

6

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

# of bills introduced annually

PRESCRIPTIVE AUTHORITY ADVOCACY EFFORTS (2020)

Alabama

Arizona Arkansas

California

Colorado

Florida

Georgia

Idaho

Illinois Indiana

Iowa

KansasKentucky

Louisiana

Maine

MassachusettsMichigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

NebraskaNevada

New Hampshire

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Connecticut

Delaware

Maryland

New Jersey

Rhode Island

Alaska

Hawaii

District of Columbia

RxP legislation enactedNo legislationRxP legislation introduced in 2020

Laying the Groundwork for your RxP Advocacy Strategy

• Has a membership survey regarding RxP been conducted within past several years?

• What is the majority opinion within your SPTA regarding RxP?

• Does your SPTA membership support RxP as the primary legislative priority?

• Are there psychologists within your SPTA or your state who are pursuing or have completed RxP training?

• How many? Are they active within the SPTA?

• If not, then how can they be motivated to join/become more active?

• What grassroots activities have been undertaken to increase support for RxP?

Assess support for RxP within your SPTA

8

• Are there any psychologist legislators?• Other lawmakers with experience as health care providers?• Which legislators tend to support psychology/mental health

issues?• Do they hold positions of leadership or influence?

• E.g., committee chairs, party leadership, etc.

• Which legislators might support RxP? Or oppose RxP?• Which legislators may be undecided? Unaware or uninformed?

Assess support for psychology in your state legislature

9

• Are there any opportunities to increase your SPTA’s visibility among legislators?

• Are there issues other than RxP where psychology could take a visible position?

• Or assist legislators in formulating possible legislative solutions?

• Attend or organize fundraising events for key legislators?

• Meet with legislators in home districts?

• Educate your members engaged in the advocacy effort:

• Who are the legislators for their districts?• Who are key committee members?• Which legislators may be undecided

about RxP?

Is your SPTA politically active enough?

10

• Does your SPTA have a lobbyist? Full-time or part-time?

• Does the lobbyist understand and support RxP?

• Has the lobbyist worked on this issue for other kinds of providers?

• Does your lobbyist have good relationships on both sides of the aisle?

• Do you need to add a lobbyist from the majority party?

• Has the SPTA critically assessed its lobbying needs/lobbyist’s effectiveness?

Does your SPTA have a voice in the legislative process?

11

• What is the title used to refer to prescribing psychologists?• What is the regulatory structure overseeing prescribing psychologists?• How is the formulary defined?• Is collaboration required? How is it defined?• Are there limitations on eligible patient populations?• Is there a required supervised clinical training period? How is it defined?• Who qualifies as eligible supervisors?• Is there independent RxP?• Or is it a supervised delegation of prescriptive authority by a physician?

Issues to Consider – Drafting & Negotiating Legislation

12

• What are the key issues that resonate with your legislators? How can RxP be part of that equation?

• Who are the natural allies for RxP?• Other non-physician prescribers?

• Individual physicians?

• Any federal prescribing psychologists in your state?

• Who are other potential allies? • Law enforcement?

• Veterans’ groups?

• Nursing homes?

• Primary care?

• Social service organizations?

• Is there an existing institution that would be interested in establishing RxP training program for psychology?

All Politics are Local (& Allies Can Help)

13

Organized medicine/psychiatry typically claims:

• Dangerous to patients

• Psychologists lack necessary training

• Money making scheme for psychology

Newer tactics:

• Too expensive/too much liability for physicians to supervise

• Require perpetual supervision/formal written collaborative agreement

• Insist on representation on advisory panel to psychology licensing board and slow down the approval process for prescribing psychologists

Know your opposition

14

Reframing the Issues

It’s a patient ACCESS issue

There is a mental health CRISIS

Focus on CONSUMER choice

Time to CHANGE how health services are delivered

QUESTIONS?

dbaker@apa.org(800) 374-2723