Want to better understand how we can evolve this community to support your needs. Looking forward to your replies.
Law & Ethics
According to the APA, it is estimated that at least 20% of police calls for service involve a mental health or substance use crisis, and for many departments, that demand is growing. Many of these incidents have brought into question the adequacy of officers’ training to respond to mental health calls, and as a result, more police departments are teaming with mental health clinicians—including psychologists—out in the field or behind the scenes via crisis intervention training.
Click here to read more about how the integration of psychologists and crisis intervention training into emergency responses may better help people in crisis
Saturday Self-Care Challenge!
As mental health professionals, we frequently tote the importance of self-care to our clients. But why is it that we often neglect our own self-care needs? This is a friendly challenge brought to you by Washington Psychological Wellness, encouraging you to engage in self-care today! Whether it be going for a walk, taking a bath, yoga, meditation, whatever, just do something! Mental health professional to mental health professional :)
What is your self-care routine for today!?
The integration of AI in psychiatric and psychotherapeutic treatment has commenced. This integration is no longer a matter of whether or not AI should be implemented in treatment. Nor is there any question concerning whether embodied AI applications should or shouldn't function as sole treatment modalities, sans practitioner. Rather, the questions that remain surround the ethical and legal implications for related AI implementation. State licensing requirements and national regulatory boards currently mandate and govern practitioners' ethical and legal requirements. Logically, it stands to reason that the practitioner who implements AI in treatment would still be subject to state law, and any related board requirements. But what about AI treatment apps that may be developed overseas and used in treatment by either the patient or practitioner across state lines? Would any related legal fallout surrounding such issues constitute subject matter jurisdiction at the federal level, thereby potentially leaving federal ancillary jurisdiction decisions at the discretion of the federal court over state law? There is likely no legal precedent at either the state or federal level respective of AI implementation and treatment. Perhaps only one thing is certain; this change will broadly impact an array of individuals across occupations, both financially and legally.