Wed 29th July 2009, 2:23pm
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Wed 29th July 2009, 9:17am)
Currently, however, psychologists undergo accredited university training, publish in peer reviewed journals, are licensed under laws that permit public input (including some non-psychologist members) into the criteria, and provides the public with a system of professional responsibility and a grievance process that oversees and punishes abuses. They are also not subject to blanket immunity for their misdeed and are subject to civil liability for any malpractice.
And if a psychologist gets you declared mentally incompetent, then you aren't allowed to bring civil suit against them or otherwise avail yourself of all of the above, because that psychologist has arranged to have you declared a nonperson. Sadly, this still happens, and of late it's been happening more. The pendulum swings, as always.
Wikipedia is just one of the battle grounds on which this broader battle is being fought. Fundamentally, this issue isn't about Wikipedia, except insofar as Wikipedia is a great forum for issue advocacy. But we knew that already. Yawn. Move along, nothing new to see here.