Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger
I guess that's true if you aren't interested in actually debating the issue but, instead, dictating from a position of authority.
That's an argument from authority. And that's fine; they are well-qualified experts in the field. They are not the only authorities in the field, however. Plenty of equally qualified experts have spoken out against them. There is also a higher authority in play: the APA, which writes the standards and the DSM. That process occurs through consulting the science and debate amongst committees to reach consensus.
It's much like the climate change debate: You have the scientific organizations who set the standards, do the research, debate positions etc who put out position statements in agreement that CC is happening and it's caused by humans. Then you have a few scientists who disagree with them. When you weigh the two, which side to choose seems obvious.
Take the layperson's view and let's look at an area where neither of us can claim expertise: climate change. The major organizations have reached a consensus and there are individual scientists who disagree. Who do we as laypeople trust? I'd bet that we both side with the organizations. So why shouldn't we trust the opinion of the APA over individual practitioners who disagree with them?
I didn't need to; they spontaneously responded with several commentaries. Why shouldn't I trust those commentaries?
I trust that the APA does. Should I not trust them? I'd like to see the research that shows that, in some cases, the in-person exam is inferior to public record information, if you have it. Some individual expert's opinion is not evidence.
They do, indirectly. How do State Boards determine malpractice, for instance? By determining whether or not the physician followed the standard of care -legally defined as, the customary practices of the average physician. Where does the average physician learn these customary practices? In residency, the first place they actually practice medicine. Ultimately, the specialty organizations have the biggest influence in the residency programs.
IANAL, but I think this is probably true. Rights, in any case, are a red herring. The issue here is whether or not professionals should
make such speech, not whether or not they legally can