The Practice Advice Service provides information to College members and members of the public about relevant Legislation, Regulations, Standards of Professional Conduct, and other practical considerations. Answers are provided by College staff in response to specific inquiries and may not be applicable or generalized to all circumstances. Information is provided to support College members in exercising their professional judgment with respect to ethical matters and is not an appropriate substitute for advice from a qualified clinician or legal professional.
QUERIES
During the second quarter of this fiscal year (September 1, 2024- November 30, 2024), the College’s Practice Advice Service addressed 386 inquiries. The five most common topics queried during this period, in descending order, were:
- Supervision; most involving supervision of non-registrants, the difference between supervision and consultation and the supervision of controlled acts
- Mobility; most involving registrants wishing to practice in other jurisdictions
- Records; most regarding successor Health Information Custodians, retention, and destruction of records
- Fees and Billing; setting of fees, prepayment and retainers, and issuing receipts
- Release of and Access to Information; consent, information about children, and client right of access to information
Many of these questions, and answers to them, can be found on the Professional Practice FAQ page of the College website which includes the following recent additions.
Consultation Agreements When Consulting Within One’s Own Team
Q: I am a member of a multidisciplinary staff group that meets regularly to discuss challenging cases. When I provide input to colleagues about patients that I am not directly involved in treating, would this constitute consultation and thereby require consultation agreements with each participant in these meetings?
A: Standard 4.7 of the Standards of Professional Conduct directly addresses this issue. In summary,
If you were not designated to make specific recommendations to others by virtue of your specialized expertise, it would not be considered “consultation”. Rather, it could be simply understood as team discussion or team development.
If, however, a relationship were established with specific individuals or groups, where you have been designated to provide advice or information regarding psychological or behavioural matters, and there are plans for you to meet with them to provide advice or information more than once, then it would be considered to be formal, ongoing consultation and you would be required to have formal consultation agreements.
If you participate in consultation with the same group regularly, there is no reason you cannot have an agreement that multiple parties can sign onto, if it includes everyone with whom you require an agreement. You could update this agreement whenever someone new joins the team. The consultation agreement is intended to clarify the nature of a consultation relationship, and serves as protection for all participants including you, in that it provides clarification to the individuals involved concerning responsibility for services.
On a practical note, in institutional settings, such as hospitals or clinics, if your employment contract and the consultee’s employment contracts address the required terms referred to in the Supervision Standard, this would be considered to constitute a consultation agreement. Otherwise depending on the nature of the consultation services you provide you would require consultation agreements with each individual.
If you are a participant in actual clinical decision-making with respect to the clients, as opposed to being simply a resource for the decision-makers, then you are more than a consultant and have the same obligations as any member of the College providing services to a client, in a way that is analogous to an assessor or file reviewer who does not provide intervention but must comply with all of the Standards with respect to client care, whether you have interacted directly with the client.
Artificial Intelligence
Q: To what extent may I use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in my practice, for example in writing assessment reports?
A: Information obtained from computer-generated assessments, reports, or statements must not be substituted for a member’s professional opinion.
Members are free to responsibly use technological advances as an adjunct to their professional services, including the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to draft or edit reports. However, it is the position of the College that these professional activities must always be actively mediated directly by members who are authorized to provide the services and that members must remain fully accountable for services provided in their names.
To date, there is insufficient scientific evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of using ChatGPT or other Artificial Intelligence (AI) to assess or treat mental health conditions and the risk to clients may outweigh any potential benefits. Anyone considering the use of AI to assist or augment their services should ensure, as part of the informed consent process that clients understand how technology is being used to assist them, what the risks are of technological error, and what risks there are to their privacy when personal information is being used in an AI context.
Registrants considering the use of AI tools are strongly advised to carefully review Standard 17. 2 of the Standards of Professional Conduct.