Yes, that was what I was curious about. I wondered how many psychiatrists saw the value in collaborating with psychologists for a number of reasons -- a thorough assessment/testing with quality recommendations, intensive or specialized forms of therapy (which our training typically focuses heavily on), an appreciation of empirically-based findings and research-based treatment, a focus on behavioral change perhaps even without a medication trial, etc. I wondered whether some psychiatrists feel completely capable of wholly treating the patient (assessment, meds, therapy) or if anyone would entertain the idea that something might fall outside the scope of their expertise and then seek an appropriate consult (and, if so, when this would happen). I am gathering that, although some psychiatrists see the value of working with other disciplines, others (perhaps because of lack of exposure or explanation about the value of doing so) don't see the value in collaborating. It is a shame, because multi-disciplinary teams, or at least consulting with professionals from other disciplines, can be extremely beneficial for the patient. I am sorry for anyone who views psychologists as your "helpers" with training on par of PAs or Social Workers (although they also serve in very helpful roles) who exist to do some dirty work you request (obtain a social history, come up with an IQ score, etc.). I hope that you have the opportunity to work with a good psychologist (because there are certainly bad ones) and see the benefit of doing so -- for you and the patient.
