The role of academic psychiatry faculty in the treatment and subsequent evaluation and promotion of medical students: an ethical conundrum.
OBJECTIVE
This article explores ethical and practical issues associated with the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) provision that states health professionals who provide psychiatric/psychological care to medical students must have no involvement in the academic evaluation or promotion of students receiving those services.


METHODS
The authors address the pros and cons of this provision as they relate to the overall well-being of the student.


RESULTS
Arguments in support of this provision include students' desire for confidentiality, avoidance of dual-relationships, and fear of documentation in the academic record. Arguments against this provision include the elimination of student autonomy to select a psychiatrist, the suitability and accessibility of academic psychiatrists to treat students, and the delimiting nature of this standard.


CONCLUSIONS
In general, the LCME provision eliminates potential barriers to the mental health treatment of medical students. However, research and debate on its impact and appropriateness on a case-by-case basis should continue.
Kavan
Michael G
MG
Creighton University School of Medicine, 2500 California Plaza, Omaha, NE 68178, USA. michaelkavan@creighton.edu
Malin
Paula Jo
PJ
Wilson
Daniel R
DR
D000046:Academic Medical Centers; D004995:Ethics, Professional; D005178:Faculty; D017408:Guidelines as Topic; D006297:Health Services Accessibility / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy; D008605:Mental Health Services / Q000600:supply & distribution; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000193:education* / Q000941:ethics*; D013333:Student Health Services / Q000600:supply & distribution; D013337:Students, Medical / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*