Regarding Paul Sherman and Jeff Rowes’s “Psychological Warfare (Licensed) in Kentucky” (op-ed, July 17): Like John Rosemond, I also am an advocate of good old-fashioned limit-setting and consistent discipline, and that’s the advice I have been dishing out to parents for 25 years. However, I slogged through five years of graduate education, two years of supervised postdoctoral training, studying for and passing the National Board of Psychology written and oral exams and 15 years as director of the postdoctoral fellowship in child/adolescent psychology at a multispecialty clinic in Texas. After practicing as a licensed psychologist in Texas for 18 years, I had to take and pass the onerous State Law Ethics exam in California after moving to the state, in order to continue to practice my profession. I am also required to document 36 hours of continuing education every 24 months, in order to maintain an active license.
State licensing boards are designed to protect the public from any “Tom, Dick or Harry” who decides to hang out his shingle and call himself a psychologist. Feel free to keep dispensing what sounds like good advice, Mr. Rosemond. Just don’t call yourself a psychologist in a state that stipulates that you must have a doctorate and the relevant training to do so.
Patricia E. Hunter, Psy.D.
Until this case is settled, I suggest that Kentuckians seeking advice on raising their teens pay a licensed Kentucky psychologist or write to an advice columnist without identifying their state of residence and subscribing to an out-of-state paper. The Kentucky AG may also consider this letter an offer of legal advice even though I am not an attorney licensed in Kentucky. As such, this letter may never reach the eyes of residents of Kentucky. If you have friends in that state having difficulty raising their children, pass along this tip. But be careful, the Kentucky AG may accuse you of practicing law without a state license. So offer your advice sub rosa.
Mark Mehall
If the First Amendment doesn’t protect Mr. Rosemond, could a state in which he isn’t licensed prohibit him from saying to someone, “you seem to be experiencing anxiety, so I recommend that you take a few deep breaths or do some exercise”? Could a layman be charged with practicing law without a license if he says to someone where smoking is prohibited, “I recommend that you don’t light that cigarette because you could get a hundred-dollar fine”? Would the layman step into another potential conundrum, i.e., unlawfully practicing medicine, if instead he made his recommendation “because smoking is bad for you”? What about giving someone a tip on a hot stock?
Todd Bank
I have been a long time fan and follower of John Rosemond’s advice column and parenting books. I referred to his advice on numerous occasions through the years of raising our two children, who are now 19 and 17. We are reaping the benefits of his advice now as we are enjoying their teenage years and watching them succeed academically and in relationships.
In regard to the First Amendment, this article reminds me of the “boiling frog” metaphor, and I hope it’s a wake-up call to all of us. I applaud the Institute for Justice for taking action on behalf of John Rosemond, Steve Cooksey, Ron Hines and our country. As Thomas Jefferson put it: “The only security of all is in a free press.”
Kelly Putre, M.D.