Those Who Hesitate are Lost: The Case for Setting Behavioral Health Treatment and Disability Standards, Part II

In the first article of this three-part series, an overview of systematic problems related to behavioral health (BH) treatment and disability was discussed. In this second article of the series, I discuss a number of factors that contribute to the lack of standardization regarding the work of all professionals in the area, including those in the BH field, which serve to introduce imprecision into the BH treatment and disability determination processes. From how professionals are trained and continuing to those who are providing clinical treatment, it is essential to understand how the lack of standardization impacts the treatment itself as well as treatment outcomes. This lack of standardization contributes to poorly identified mental health (MH) conditions, no identification of psychosocial issues, and an overreliance on subjective information, including professional clinical opinion, which leads to poorly defensible professional decision-making as well as poorer outcomes in treatment. In this litigious age, it is not sufficient to employ clinical opinion alone as the basis for treatment decisions. The more sophisticated professional recognizes the importance that one's assessment and treatment decisions may later be questioned in court or in a disability determination hearing. The importance of standardization and utilizing the current scientific standards has become imperative in today's professional evaluation and treatment in the area.