A MHDNA ISSUE BRIEF - DO CREDENTIALS MATTER?

Fall 2000	A MHDNA ISSUE BRIEF

MENTAL HEALTH DISSEMINATION NETWORK OF ARIZONA	IN THIS ISSUE:
	THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CREDENTIALS DEFINITIONS: SCREENING, INITIAL ASSESSMENT AND ONGOING ASSESSMENT STANDARDIZATION AND TRAINING PROCESS VS. OUTCOME	THE CURRENT SITUATION IN ARIZONA THE CREDENTIALING LANDSCAPE FOUR OPPORTUNITIES ABOUT THE AUTHOR REFERENCES
A series of reports highlighting mental health issues in Arizona.	A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW: The Executive Director of the Arizona Board of Behavioral Health Examiners responds Alice P. Lin In Arizona and other states, a powerful idea about the manner in which behavioral health services for mental health and substance abuse are provided has begun to take center stage: When all is said and done, recovery and rehabilitation are achievable and should be the primary service goal,¹ considered as part of the holistic mind/body/spirit connection. Further, the deterministic value of diagnosis – service outcomes driven by clinical diagnoses – should be cautiously applied. In this larger context, the arguably minor issue of whether providers’ credentials² should matter in behavioral health screening and assessment offers a unique opportunity for the professional community to take a fresh look at existing paradigms. The questions we might ask are these: If credentials matter, do they matter in all screening and assessment activities? If not, in what specific situations do they matter, and how might we structure our practices to take advantage of other alternatives?