Wouldn't the converse also be true? That is, shouldn't it be that only those who are adequately trained in the delivery of psychotherapy be practicing it? I have observed numerous examples of M.D.'s (family practitioners, internists, psychiatry residents) who have received minimal exposure to (much less training in) psychotherapy who engage in and bill for psychotherapeutic services. I have had first hand experience in treating patients who had undergone a halfheartedly conducted trial of "behavior therapy" only to realize later, from their description, that what they had recieved was little more than a "brochure trial" that had been conducted by someone with medical (not psychological) training and who therefore only had a passing familiarity with the key psychological principles and procedures necessary to deliver an adequate course of (and I say again) **psychological** treatment. Because of the "failure" of behavior therapy to help them (incedentally, properly conducted behavior therapy did provide them substantial relief once it was conducted properly by a behavior therapist) they had all but given up any hope of finding relief for their condition and this hopelessness contributed to their suicidal ideation at intake. I cite this as an example of how those practicing certain types of PSYCHO-therapy without the proper training CAN cause significant harm to patients. So, although I agree that professionals should not practice outside the scope of their training and their expertise, I think that the sword must "cut both ways" and that physicians who practice psychotherapy as an avocation should be aware of the damage that they may potentially be resposible for and cease practicing outside of their field of expertise.