RM>  LP> She further added that to do was to make a
RM>  LP> diagnosis which would create liability for the district to pay 
RM> for the
RM>  LP> child's treatment.  I argued with her on the basis that a) I am 
RM> not a
RM>  LP> doctor & thus am not offering a medical diagnosis
RM> 
RM>  BM>  True but attention deficit and hyperactivity _are_ medical 
RM> diagnoses
RM>  BM>  that can only be made by an MD.  I don't doubt that you've 
RM> probably
RM>  BM>  seen many ADD/ADHD kids and are very capable of identifying 
RM> them
    While I don't doubt most any nurse who's been a nurse 10 years can 
probably "identify" common diseases as readily as any doctor, it's _illegal_ 
to practice medicine without a license.  And unless the school district 
employs a physician to do such work, such a diagnosis would be practicing 
medicine without a license (psychologists cannot prescribe drugs like 
Ritalin).
RM> I don't think Bob is just running logic by you; I think he
RM> is stating the prevailing medical (and legal) point of view.
    And he's telling everyone what the _law_ is.
    Nobody but a _physician_ can write prescriptions for Ritalin or anything 
else.  So if a school psychologist "diagnosed" some kid ADD and his parents 
were dissatisfied with the outcome, they might sue for malpractice on the 
grounds that Ritalin was more appropriate therapy than whatever was done by 
the school psychologist.
RM> You've always been qualified as an OBSERVER, just not as a
RM> diagnostician; that's Bob's point... Have you run this past
RM> the school lawyer(s)? 
    None would have teachers doing "diagnostic" work.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------