This article describes a collaborative pilot project between the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the Joint (Departments of Justice and Defense) Program Steering Group that seeks to determine the benefit of telehealth in a corrections environment. This pilot project is currently being conducted between a hub site in Lexington, Kentucky, and remote sites in Allenwood and Lewisburg, Pennsylvania. Results to date are consistent with previous literature and suggest a high level of patient acceptance of this technology and mode of service delivery. The particular advantages of telehealth for correctional settings, including increased access to the full range of psychology services for inmates, the maintenance of institutional security, increased access to the inmate population for research purposes, and professional consultation for correctional psychologists are discussed.

It is clear that adequate academic and continuing education/training for correctional mental health professionals is imperative if their practice is to be effective. To help shape such training, the clinical and correctional knowledge ranked most meaningful and relevant by psychologists practicing in federal prisons is determined. Overall, results suggest nine core bodies of knowledge representing a mix of clinical (e.g., psychopathology, suicide prevention, psychopharmacology) and prison-based domains (e.g., interdepartmental communications, safety, confrontation avoidance) form the heart of their work. In terms of where such knowledge was obtained, graduate school is frequently endorsed for the more clinical domains, but the correctional domains are transmitted namely through on-the-job training. Recommendations for training psychologists to practice in corrections include the development of a two-tiered training strategy that offers a curriculum in basic psychological knowledge unique to corrections and an advanced curriculum that builds on foundational clinical knowledge obtained in graduate school.

Does interest in prescription privileges for psychologists differ between psychology interns and their mid-career mentors? In December 1995, surveys soliciting information about attitudes toward prescription privileges were mailed to interns and directors of training at all 525 intern sites that were members of the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers. Of those responding, more than 70% of both interns and training directors supported, in principle, prescription privileges. A majority of interns expressed a willingness to seek training and prescriptive authority, given their availability, whereas only one-third of training directors would do so. These results have training implications and suggest the potential for a schism within the profession.Would you like to have the authority to prescribe psychotropic medication? If prescription authority were available, would you undertake additional training to obtain it?The debate over expanding psychologists' scope of practice to include prescribing psychotropic medication moved from the margins to the center of professional discourse in August 1995.At that time, the American Psychological Association's (APA's)Council of Representatives passed a motion to support prescription authority for psychologists (Martin, 1995). The arguments on both sides have been well articulated. Proponents of prescription privileges (e.g., DeLeon, Fox, & Graham, 1991;DeLeon & Wiggins, 1996) have asserted that to obtain such privileges would be a natural extension of psychological practice; that it is in the public interest, insofar as psychologists could provide access to quality care to underserved populations, such as the elderly; and that it is consistent with the evolution of the health care identities of other nonphysician providers (e.g., optometrists and nurse-practitioners) who have gained prescription privileges in at least some states. Opponents (e.g., DeNelsky, 1991DeNelsky, , 1996Hayes & Heiby, 1996) have noted concerns about the potential of a medication quick fix to undercut the efficacy of psychotherapy, changes in length of training and emphasis, the likelihood of ' 'full-scale war with both psychiatry and medicine" (DeNelsky, 1991, p. 189), and its related financial cost.

A survey of 497 interns, residents, and psychologists indicated general satisfaction with their career choices and training. A majority of respondents (about 68%) desired more training in career/workplace issues and 44% wanted additional training in the biological bases of behavior. Some believed that the financial and time commitments needed to become a psychologist might outweigh the long-term benefits. Limitations of the study including low sample size were discussed. Results were also discussed in terms of abbreviating the current training curriculum to maintain competitiveness in the workplace, and in terms of the costs versus benefits of becoming psychologists.

This article considers innovations in the assessment and treatment of incarcerated individuals. The emphasis is on immediate patient needs and inmate management concerns, rather than on rehabilitation. Assessment of this diagnostically complex population is framed in dimensional and biopsychosocial terms. Scarce resources, new scientific knowledge and technology, organizational barriers, and role transformations for psychologists will guide improvements and future research in correctional mental health care, as reflected in specific areas: dimensional assessment, suicide risk assessment, neuropsychological correlates of chronic maladaptive behavior, prescriptive authority for psychologists, and telehealth. In particular, outcome research based on a broader range of interventions will be increasingly crucial to the effectiveness of correctional psychologists' work. In the near future, the degree of impact that psychologists have will depend largely on their individual and collective initiative in promoting the benefits of their services.

Seventy-nine training directors of internship programs based in prisons, jails, and selected forensic settings received surveys concerning several aspects of their programs. Fifty-three responded for a return rate of 67%. Whereas these programs are seen to exist on a continuum with few sharp lines of distinction between them, there are enough differences to warrant applying the term correctional psychology internship specifically to those programs offering training experiences primarily in general population prison/jail settings. Different training emphases and staffing patterns were among factors distinguishing corrections-based internships from their more traditionally forensic counterparts. Both forensic and prison programs offer a wide variety of training experiences and continue to enjoy administrative support.

This study assessed the views of psychology interns, residents, and psychologists regarding various aspects of the American Psychological Association's prescriptive authority initiative, willingness to seek prescriptive authority, and views regarding psychopharmacological training. Results demonstrated continuing support for prescriptive authority legislation and for a training curriculum that begins prior to completion of the doctorate. Personal interest in pursuing training for prescriptive authority decreased markedly as tuition rose above $10,000 and time to completion extended beyond 2 years. Results are discussed in terms of the costs versus benefits of such training.

This study, which replicated a 1995 survey of intern and training director attitudes toward prescription privileges (R. K. Ax, M. R. Forbes, & D. D. Thompson, 1997), found a slight decline in support for prescription privileges. It also noted that factors such as age, position, degree, type of internship program attended, and nature of internship setting were all predictive of willingness to pursue prescription privileges. Attitudinal factors most predictive of willingness to seek prescriptive authority were also reported. The study suggested that previous survey findings have been influenced by several of these variables, which may account for some of the variability of past surveys. Findings were discussed in terms of career status and options, workplace experiences and demands, and the costs versus benefits of pursuing prescription privileges.Has the ongoing prescription privileges debate changed the attitudes of psychologists or psychology interns? In 1995, with the prescription privileges initiative ascendant and recently endorsed by the American Psychological Association (APA) Council of Representatives (Martin, 1995), Ax, Forbes, andThompson (1997) surveyed the attitudes of psychology interns and their training directors about this innovative scope of practice. They found that about 72% of both interns and training directors thought that APA should continue to seek prescriptive authority but that only 52% of interns and 34% of training directors indicated a personal interest in seeking prescription privileges. Others have reported similar findings for psychology graduate students, interns, and practicing psychologists (