title: Commentary: Medical subspecialty enforcement?
abstract: From its inception, the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law (AAPL) has decided not to investigate and adjudicate complaints of unethical conduct of its members or others, but rather refers the complainant to other organizations, such as the "local district branch of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), the state licensing board, and/or the appropriate national psychiatric organization of foreign members" (AAPL Ethics Guidelines). Loss of APA membership, however, terminates one's AAPL membership upon AAPL notification. Further, the AAPL Ethics Committee "may issue opinions on general or hypothetical questions but will not issue opinions on the ethical conduct of specific forensic psychiatrists or about actual cases" (AAPL Ethics Guidelines). This referral policy has been criticized at times with various proposals for change. Candilis and colleagues have thoughtfully considered several alternative courses of action. Extending those considerations, this Commentary considers the practices of other health care professional organizations and some implications of the proposal offered by Candilis et al.
authors.affiliation: Dr. Wettstein is Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA. wettsteins@aol.com.
authors.forename: Robert M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Wettstein
mesh_terms: D000574:American Medical Association; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry / Q000941:ethics*; D017408:Guidelines as Topic; D006801:Humans; D012955:Societies, Medical / Q000941:ethics*