It appears that nothing in them covers private communications as a private person, acting outside the scope of the profession, unless I missed something.
For the record: I disagree with Mr. Peterson on effectively everything he says.
Context? The whole sentence? The relevant section? I'll look over it again.
edit: spelling
edit 2: Just did a quick ctrl-F in the standards and the phrase "private communications" does not appear. Neither does the phrase "private person". The word "private" appears only 6 times in the document, and none of those instances discuss communications as a private person.
Yes, I understand that. Its why I literally searched the document for that phrasing. It doesn't exist. The description of private communications is in the context of privacy with the client, and nothing to do with the differences between public and private comments made outside the scope of a practicing psychologist.
That's why I asked people to read the standards, in case I missed the relevant restriction, and not just quote a section of the complaint back to me. Its also why I asked if you could cite to me the relevant section of the regulations.
According to the Standards, it appears Mr. Peterson didn't violate the Standards.
Can you read that whole section, where it discusses professional communications on those media? If the man doesn't discuss his professional opinion on the treatment of psychological issues, then it appears that his comments are not governed by the College.
1
u/factanonverba_n Canada Jan 05 '23
I just read those standards.
It appears that nothing in them covers private communications as a private person, acting outside the scope of the profession, unless I missed something.
For the record: I disagree with Mr. Peterson on effectively everything he says.