There are many reasons why someone might see a psychologist, ranging from panic attacks, suicidal ideation, to couples therapy, to brain injury assessment, assessment for disability, anger management, etc. The new BC legislation threatens access to treatment and assessment because the government has taken over the regulation of the profession. In so doing, they have indicated that any complaints will be investigated by a committee including only one psychologist. Other people on the committee might be lay people or members of another profession. Psychologists are concerned about these changes for many reasons.

Representatives of the government will be empowered to inspect the files of people who have seen any health care provider for 17 years after the person has stopped seeing the health professional. In the past, the people investigating or looking at file would have been psychologists charged with the responsibility to ensure proper care and respect for confidentiality. Under the new legislation, however, the people looking at your information will be directly controlled by the government, whatever government is in power. Having the government empowered to look at psychotherapy or assessment files by psychologists or other health care providers opens the door to politically motivated investigation.

Many psychologists have indicated that they cannot continue to see clients under these conditions and have already started the process of registering in another province or country (14% in an ongoing survey of health professionals).

The HPOA is like to make it difficult to get psychological assessments for civil cases, disability, neuropsychological assessment, forensic risk assessment, and child custody. Psychologists play an important role in legal cases and assessment of disability, including in cases of motor vehicle accidents, insurance claims, and workplace injury. A reduction in availability of assessments is likely to delay many different types of psychological assessment.

The new College of Health and Care Professionals has proposed that psychologists and others can be disciplined for making false or misleading statements to clients or the public. While it is easy to agree that false statements should not be made, the term misleading is open to interpretation, depending on which government is in power. If a profession has an opinion on a controversial topic, even if that opinion is based on research, they will not be able to express their opinion. Such topics might include medical assistance in dying, learning disability, drug policy, or brain injury. The HPOA is basically gag order on all health professionals, even those who are researchers in areas of interest. If this or a future government might regard your opinion as misleading, you will be reluctant to express any opinion to clients or the public.

This type of threat to our health professionals is reminiscent of Trump’s America, or some Orwellian dystopia, not what one would expect in BC

.

Defensive Practice is prioritizing avoidance of complaints over providing care. Those people who are most in need of help, such as people who may be emotionally labile or who have had difficulties with previous health care providers will have extra difficulty getting help, simply because any complaints will not be investigated by individuals familiar with psychological practice. That is like your driving being evaluated by someone who has never driven a car.

In addition, complaints can be made public even before they have been investigated to determine if there is any merit to a complaint. That means someone can make a false complaint and it could totally ruin the reputation of a health care provider, even if it is later found to be false.

No wonder, therefore, 59.6% of health care professionals in a recent ongoing survey (744 professionals so far) have indicated that they will be changing their work hours or changing the types of clients they see.