Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 858 - MENTAL HEALTH REGULATORY AGENCY, OREGON BOARD OF PSYCHOLOGY
Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 858 — Mental Health Regulatory Agency, Oregon Board of Psychology
1. Overview and Purpose
Chapter 858 of the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) governs the Oregon Board of Psychology (OBOP), which is part of the Mental Health Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
The OBOP is responsible for licensing, regulating, and disciplining psychologists in Oregon to protect the public and ensure competent mental health services.
The rules provide detailed procedures and standards for licensure, continuing education, practice standards, ethical conduct, and disciplinary processes.
2. Scope of Chapter 858
The rules apply to:
Psychologists licensed in Oregon.
Applicants seeking licensure as psychologists.
Supervisors and training programs for psychologists.
The chapter covers:
Licensure requirements.
Continuing education.
Professional conduct and ethical standards.
Complaints and disciplinary procedures.
Hearings and appeals.
3. Licensure Requirements
Applicants must:
Hold a doctoral degree in psychology from an accredited program.
Complete supervised professional experience.
Pass required examinations (e.g., the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology - EPPP).
Licenses must be renewed periodically, with proof of continuing education required to maintain competence.
4. Standards of Practice and Ethics
Licensed psychologists must adhere to professional ethical standards consistent with national guidelines (e.g., APA Ethics Code).
The rules specify:
Confidentiality obligations.
Boundaries of professional relationships.
Prohibitions against fraud, misrepresentation, and unprofessional conduct.
Requirements for informed consent and recordkeeping.
5. Complaint and Discipline Process
The OBOP investigates complaints against psychologists alleging misconduct or incompetence.
Allegations can include:
Professional negligence.
Ethical violations.
Criminal conduct affecting fitness to practice.
The Board may impose sanctions such as:
License suspension.
Probation.
License revocation.
Fines or reprimands.
6. Contested Case Hearings and Appeals
Licensees subject to disciplinary action have the right to a contested case hearing under the Oregon Administrative Procedures Act.
Hearings allow presentation of evidence, witnesses, and legal arguments before an administrative law judge or Board panel.
Final decisions can be appealed to Oregon courts for review on grounds such as abuse of discretion or lack of substantial evidence.
7. Relevant Case Law Principles
a. Licensing and Due Process
Courts uphold the OBOP’s authority to require licensure qualifications and enforce standards, provided applicants receive due process.
Example: A court upheld denial of licensure where the applicant failed to meet educational or examination requirements, affirming the Board’s discretion.
b. Disciplinary Authority
Courts defer to the OBOP’s expertise in disciplinary matters if procedures are fair and findings are supported by evidence.
Example: In a case where a psychologist was disciplined for breach of confidentiality, the court affirmed the Board’s decision based on clear violations of ethical rules and harm to clients.
c. Scope of Practice
Legal challenges over scope of practice are resolved by reference to OAR Chapter 858 and relevant statutes.
The Board has authority to define and enforce the boundaries of psychological practice to protect the public.
d. Confidentiality and Client Rights
Cases often highlight tensions between client confidentiality and reporting obligations.
Courts recognize psychologists’ duty to maintain confidentiality unless exceptions apply (e.g., harm to self or others).
8. Summary
OAR Chapter 858 provides a comprehensive regulatory framework for licensure, practice, and discipline of psychologists in Oregon.
The rules protect the public by ensuring that licensed psychologists meet high professional and ethical standards.
The OBOP has broad authority to investigate complaints and impose sanctions but must do so with procedural fairness.
Case law supports the Board’s regulatory powers while safeguarding due process and balancing public safety with individual rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments