breaking news

Prosecutors argue Parlin did not kill Blair, Sheltons, but is guilty

Serafine: Legislators should certify psychologists, not license them


The Sunset Commission will hear testimony today about whether Texas laws for licensing psychologists can be made to be constitutional. Given the first draft of the commission staff report, it seems more likely the Legislature will be led down the path of never-ending litigation in contravention of our basic American right to free speech. They should consider certification instead.

In January, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the Texas psychologists’ licensing law violated the First Amendment because it allowed the state to forbid and punish anti-smoking and weight-loss counselors, life coaches and many others — just about anyone providing a service that was broadly about behavior. It was overly broad and thus unconstitutional.

Sadly, the Texas law was similar to those in most states, and to laws for counselors, marriage and family therapists, and others whose job is to talk, listen, and to give advice about the problems and joys of life, whether the advice is implicit or explicit.

Psychologists implicitly give advice when they dispense therapy. Why should the government decide who is allowed to dispense mental health advice? Does the government know what’s best for us in the arena of mental health? The answer is no.

Previously, state governments had treated occupational licenses as somehow exempt from the constitution. If that were true, in my view, there would be no limit on how far government could go in limiting our freedoms. We would be left with freedom only in the domain of what was secret, or for which we never got paid. Being paid for something does not entitle the state to regulate it.

The self-interest of professional organizations — such as the American Psychological Association and the Texas Psychological Association — is really what’s at work here. They want to keep unlicensed people from offering similar or better services at lower prices — or different services that some people might prefer.

Texas lawmakers will not be able to redefine “the practice of psychology” without violating the First Amendment. Psychologists themselves can’t even agree upon fundamental questions about best practices in psychology: Are dreams important? Are we driven by subconscious factors? What is the best way to change behavior? Is more communication a good thing?

Nonetheless, the Texas Psychological Association and the Texas Board have been working to develop a new statute. You would be practicing psychology if you are taking payment to observe, describe, diagnose, evaluate, assess, interpret and modify human behavior by applying education, training, methods and procedures for the purposes of three types of activities. The first is “predicting, remediating or eliminating” mental illness. The second is “facilitating the enhancement of individual, group, or organizational effectiveness.” The third is “assisting in legal decision-making.”

This definition is still too broad and will ensnare life coaches, business advisors, political consultants, court mitigation specialists, fortune tellers, hypnotists, expert witnesses and countless others engaged in helpful, legal activities involving talking and listening, giving advice or expressing opinions.

The way out of this quagmire is for state legislators to certify psychologists, not license them. Certification would merely put the state’s stamp of approval on the psychologists it recommends without punishing people who operate without that approval. The public would then be free to choose.



Reader Comments ...


Next Up in Opinion

Editorial: After ‘poverty pimps’ flap, Austin ISD must focus on kids
Editorial: After ‘poverty pimps’ flap, Austin ISD must focus on kids

We by no means excuse the words former Austin Independent School Board President Kendall Pace used in a private text to a fellow board member. Her language was uncouth and unprofessional. The fallout cost Pace her position on the board as those she offended along with political foes turned up the political heat. Pace’s judgment in making derogatory...
Letters to the editor: May 26, 2018
Letters to the editor: May 26, 2018

When Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said we live in “a violent culture where we devalue life,” he neglected to take responsibility for his role in dehumanizing his fellow Texans. He obsessively promoted the bathroom bill, which unnecessarily violated the privacy of schoolchildren. He fights to destroy public education, a building block of our democracy...
Commentary: How Texas can keep drivers of electric cars plugged-in
Commentary: How Texas can keep drivers of electric cars plugged-in

Today, the average Texas commuter drives more than 14,600 miles per year. With more than 28 million people calling the Lone Star State home and more than 24 million registered vehicles on the road, this adds up to a significant amount of harmful tailpipe emissions that threaten our health and our economy. As more vehicles are registered in Texas and...
Editorial: After ‘poverty pimps’ flap, Austin ISD must focus on kids
Editorial: After ‘poverty pimps’ flap, Austin ISD must focus on kids

We by no means excuse the words former Austin Independent School Board President Kendall Pace used in a private text to a fellow board member. Her language was uncouth and unprofessional. The fallout cost Pace her position on the board as those she offended along with political foes turned up the political heat. Pace’s judgment in making derogatory...
Commentary: Austin’s plastic bag ban is rubbish. Go check the landfill
Commentary: Austin’s plastic bag ban is rubbish. Go check the landfill

As the Texas Supreme Court will soon make its decision regarding the legality of plastic bag regulations in Texas, this is a good time to revisit the arguments used to promote plastic bag bans. A review of the data shows that plastic bag regulations don’t reduce litter overall — and, in fact, they incentivize products that have far greater...
More Stories