Commentary Concerns About Substandard Training for Prescription Privi leges for Psychologists

This Commentary on the Muse and McGrath study (this issue, pp. 96–103) refutes its conclusion that the amount of training for prescription privileges for psychologists (R!P) is equal to or greater than that for psychiatric nurse practitioners and physicians. First, the sample failed to include only training programs for nurses and psychologists that lead to independent prescribing. Second, training was defined by an arbitrary, nonvalidated list of ‘‘key content areas’’ that excluded much of the standard medical curricula for nurses and physicians to prescribe. Third, the levels of training for which the ‘‘key content areas’’ were assessed omitted undergraduate prerequisites, apprenticeships, supervised practice, and residencies that are a standard part of the nursing and physician programs studied. R!P training remains substandard. & 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol: 66: 104–111, 2010.