CURRENT MATTERS - LEGAL UPDATE

2017

28 FEBRUARY 2017: A teleconference was held on Tuesday 28 February 2017. The new incoming Ex-co was elected and we would like to congratulate the following officebearers with there new positions:

Chairperson: Dr Joseph Phetla (Educational)

Vice-Chairperson: Dr Lizette Matthews (Educational)

Treasurer: Mr Kevin Fourie (Counselling)

Secretary: Mrs Estie Barnard (Industrial)

Additional members: Dr Johan Landman (Industrial)

Dr Deon Swartz (Educational)

Dr Abed Moola (Industrial)

Mrs Ronlynn Lotriet (Educational)

Mrs Marilyn Adan (Counselling)

Dr Doreen Ross (Industrial)

20 FEBRUARY 2017: ReLPAG’s annual general meeting was held on Saturday 18 February 2017.

We, the current Committee members, had an amazing journey so far and we are thankful to all who attended, especially those that had to travel a significant distance.

The AGM was very successfull due to the fact that the attendees took part enthusiastically. Apart from

Mr Kevin Fourie - Counselling psychologist

Dr Johan Landman - Industrial psychologist and

Dr Lizette Matthews - Educational psychologist

who made themselves available again, 6 additional nominations were received and accepted on the new committee of ReLPAG:

Mrs Estie Barnard – Industrial psychologist

Dr Deon Swartz – Educational psychologist

Dr Joseph Phetla – Educational psychologist

Dr Abed Moola – Industrial psychologist

Mrs Ronlynn Lotriet – Educational psychologist

Mrs Marilyn Adan – Counselling psychologist

The Ex-co and other office bearers still need to be decided upon by the elected members. Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer, the current chairperson, has stepped down as well as Dr Susan Kriegler. Both however agreed to be still available in an advisory capacity should the need arise.

16 FEBRUARY 2017: Late registration will still be accepted until Friday, 17 February 2017. Please register and join us as important matters will be discussed.

URGENT NOMINATIONS NEEDED FOR NEW EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS

8 FEBRUARY 2017: Some of our Ex-co members won't be serving on the Committee anymore and therefore new Ex-co members need to be elected at the Annual general meeting on 18 February 2017. For the election to be just and fair according to ReLPAG's Constitution, nominees must be present at the annual meeting. A nomination form needs to be completed and sent back to us by not later than 17 February 2017, by either

Fax: 086 218 1370 or

E-mail: psychoadmin@lantic.net

7 FEBRUARY 2017:

It is very important that us all get involved in the activities of ReLPAG to address the problems with the medical aids and to develop the new SOP for your category of registration.

An article Psychologists hit as payments dry up by Michelle Gumede was published today in the Business Day newspaper. This article gives further insight to all about the struggle now that certain medical aids have decided to adhere to their funding decisions taken before the court case and thereby keeps on honoring an erroneous law passed in 2011 that has been declared invalid already in November 2016.

POLMED has also sent out a letter to Psychology Service Providers specifically informing them that POLMED will not change their funding decision after the Court's ruling. View this document: POLMED's funding decision - Educational and Industrial psychology claims

Open letter of encouragement from Industrial psychologist, Mrs Estie Barnard:

I believe there are different levels of desperation. The past few weeks I have found myself hovering between total despair and a very, very deep depression.

I write this on behalf of myself, not anyone else. My practice has suffered tremendous losses because of medical aids stopping payment. I have HPCSA cases regarding Scope of Practice against me. My personal life is suffering due to the stress, anxiety and depression I am experiencing. So, I was elated in November 2016 when the High Court Case was finally heard, and at least SOMETHING POSITIVE came from it. Since then, my hope has dwindled, as I receive emails from RELPAG requesting members’ assistance regarding the upcoming meeting on the 18th of February, only to find out that members are not registering.

What is it? Not taking responsibility? Hoping that something will happen without any participation? It is time that we decide whether we want results, or if we want to stop everything and just use a passive approach – hoping and praying and doing nothing.

Colleagues, urgent matters need to be discussed on the upcoming meeting as in the email sent out by RELPAG. I beg you, please become involved, we have come this far, why stop now? With the hard work of the EXCO, and their dedication and the financial contributions received, a tremendous feat was achieved. History was made. How can it just be left? A new EXCO needs to be elected, decisions about the way forward need to be made, i.e. if legal proceedings should be brought against medical aids not making payments to non-clinical psychologists, or if legal proceedings should go ahead regarding Section A of the court Case. We can only achieve something through a united effort.

Please become involved and be part of history in the making.

Sincere Regards

Estie Barnard

25 JANUARY 2017: Details of the Annual General Meeting:

Date : 18 February 2017

Time: 10h00 – 14h00

Venue: Cabanga Conference Centre (www.cabanga.co.za)

RSVP: 03 February 2017

A registration fee of R150.00 is requested to cover the costs of the venue.

For accommodation please request a list of recommended accommodation nearby at the following link:

http://www.cabanga.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Cabanga-Functions-2016.pdf

Open this link for directions:

http://www.cabanga.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Cabanga-Contact-details.pdf

Please complete the registration form below and sent it back to us on or before 03 February 2017 together with the proof of payment (registration fee).

ReLPAG AGM registration - 18 Feb 2017: PRINT in PDF Format

ReLPAG AGM registration - 18 Feb 2017: PRINT in WORD Format

18 JANUARY 2017: The ReLPAG Ex-Co wants to wish everyone a prosperous and hopeful new year.

We hope that those Medical Aids which stopped payment to non-clinical psychologists will start making payments again in this new year.

ReLPAG ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

An important Annual General Meeting will be held on 18 FEBRUARY 2017 and we sincerely hope that all ReLPAG members will be able to attend as important decisions need to be made e.g.

Should Medical Aids such as GEMS, POLMED, Medihelp and Bonitas not start payments to non-clinical psychologists again, what steps should be taken?
Should we use the money that will paid out from the court settlement against The Council of Medical Schemes and Medical Aids, or should we go back to court on Part A.
A detailed history of the ReLPAG case and what exactly happened during the settlement process will be given.
New Ex-Co members need to be elected.

Please complete the AGM registration form below and send it back to us on or before 31 JANUARY 2017 (venue to be announced).

ReLPAG AGM registration - 18 Feb 2017: PRINT in PDF Format

ReLPAG AGM registration - 18 Feb 2017: PRINT in WORD Format

CO-OPERATION WITH OTHER ORGANISATIONS

As ReLPAG is of the opinion that it is important to work together it is now of the utmost importance that all psychologists of all categories work optimistically together as one big organisation representing all psychologists in private practice.

It is suggested that we work together with PP4PS, SANAPP and EPASSA, as per the attached presentation.

View ReLPAG's Proposal Presentation for co-operation with other Organisations:

in Power Point Format

in PDF Format

2016

The date for registration for ReLPAG's annual meeting has been extended until 16 February 2017

NOMINATION FORM FOR ReLPAG'S EX-CO

CLICK for the AGENDA of the Annual meeting to be held on Saturday, 18 February 2017

A COURT SETTLEMENT WAS REACHED BETWEEN THE APPLICANTS AND THE 1ST TO 4TH RESPONDENTS ON 14 NOVEMBER 2016

ReLPAG's response to CPF and HealthMan - 16 Dec 2016

ReLPAG's response to EPASSA - 16 Dec 2016

JASA's letter to CAMAF post hearing - 13 Dec 2016

JASA's letter - MedicalBrief - iro Dr Serfontein's comments - 1 Des 2016

Final Filed Court Order - 14 November 2016

Post court settlement Memorandum - ReLPAG Advocates Cooke and Brown - 21 Nov 2016

Draft Court Order - Applicants and First to Fourth Respondents - Nov 2016

JASA's full press release - Regulations limiting Psychologists invalid - 15 Nov 2016

Article Cape Times newspaper - Psychologists’ regulations suspended for 2 years - 21 Nov 2016

Article Beeld newspaper - Psigoloë mag weer eise indien by fondse - 21 Nov 2016

(Article Netwerk24 - Psigoloë mag weer eise indien by fondse - 21 Nov 2016)

CLICK TO VIEW

16 DECEMBER 2016:

RELPAG's RESPONSE TO CPF AND HEALTHMAN ENTAILS: View Here

JASA has indicated that the order implies that those medical aids who have failed to pay psychologists who do work outside the scope of practice (despite their having competency in the relevant area of practice) due to the regulations, will have no reason to continue to withhold payment. It would be both unreasonable and opportunistic for medical aids to continue to rely on these regulations during the 24 month period set for public consultations and a reconsideration of how psychological practice may best be regulated.

There is a remaining dispute between the parties as to the proper interpretation of the regulations. According to the Serfontein, “If a practitioner transgresses the scope contained in these regulations, complaints can be laid against them at the HPCSA.” According to the applicants, this is an incorrect interpretation of the regulations, which define the scope of the entire profession of psychology, rather than delimiting the professional (registration) categories. The proper interpretation of the regulations is a matter which the applicants brought before the court as Part A of their application, but has not been adjudicated on. Part A has been postponed, but the applicants can approach the court again at any time and will do so if the approach of medical aids or the HPCSA requires this.

The applicants have received legal advice showing that the law allows psychologists of any registration category to do any work for which they can demonstrate their competence, as is set out in the Ethical Code governing psychologists. According to this advice, the respondents’ and the Clinical Psychology Forum’s arguments in papers before the court do not provide a sufficient basis to refute their view and that psychologists who continue to serve their clients and patients despite registration category should have nothing to fear from the law. ReLPAG members are invited to obtain a copy of our advocates’ opinion from psychoadmin@lantic.net in order to satisfy themselves of the legal position and forward it on to the medical aids.

In addition, the court order provides that where disciplinary action may be pending against a practitioner for exceeded the scope of their registration category, the Professional Board must consider postponing the proceedings pending promulgation of new regulations by the Minister of Health. Once new regulations have been promulgated, whether this happens during the two year suspension period or thereafter (or never), it would not make sense to undertake disciplinary proceedings as laws do not apply retrospectively and the invalid regulations would have been replaced, despite Serfontein’s contention that “Should the actions fall outside the new scope, the practitioner will then be disciplined accordingly”.

JASA further pointed out that any decision based on the regulations to refuse payment to a psychologist who is competent but working outside their scope, amounts to a disregard for the constitutional right to healthcare (which includes psychological care) of South African patients, and a flagrant indifference to the implications of the High Court order. ReLPAG members are invited to report any medical aids who fail to pay them based on a scope of practice argument to the ReLPAG board on psychoadmin@lantic.net, forwarding all relevant information to us, so that we may write to the medical aid informing them of the legal position and requiring them to resume payments.

RELPAG's RESPONSE TO EPASSA'S CIRCULAR ENTAILS: View Here

EPASSA joined the court application as an amicus in support of JASA and ReLPAG. However, on 14th November 2016, shortly after the settlement was made an order of court, EPASSA’s Dr Martin Strous issued a circular in which he criticised the settlement, describing it as “disastrous”, a “serious setback” and referring to ReLPAG’s “withdrawal”. ReLPAG wishes to put the record straight- they did not withdraw from the application, but settled it. EPASSA’s attorneys and advocates were present on the day that the settlement was negotiated and made an order of court, and they did not raise any objection to the terms of the settlement.

The settlement achieves just what the applicants had set out to achieve - the invalidity of the offending regulations. In addition, the provision in the court order dealing with disciplinary hearing in effect achieves their goal of avoiding any further disciplinary hearings against psychologists accused of acting outside the scope of their registration category. While the applicants would have wished to avoid the 2 year suspension period, it is not an unusual provision in matters where legislation is declared invalid, and the applicants are actively undertaking advocacy to persuade medical aids to resume payments to psychologists which they previously refused due to the regulations.

There is a remaining dispute between the parties as to the proper interpretation of the regulations. The applicants have postponed that portion of the application and can return to court at any time in order to have that aspect decided.

13 DECEMBER 2016:

JASA'S LETTER TO CAMAF MEDICAL SCHEME POST HEARING: VIEW Here

A new member of ReLPAG brought it to our attention that CAMAF recently refused payment to her on the grounds that treatment of a patient “falls outside her scope of practice in terms of her registration as a Counselling Psychologist.” Mr Johan Smith QC and CEO of JASA strongly reacted hereto in a letter addressed to Mr Brennan Glansbeek of CAMAF, attaching the Final Filed Court Order as well as the expert opinion of our Lawyers set out in the Post court settlement Memorandum. He stated that as is evidenced in the attached court order in the above matter, ReLPAG and JASA successfully challenged the validity of the Scopes of Practice which, since 2011, created the impression that psychologists may be limited only to providing the psychological services which are listed under the scope of practice for the registration category in which the psychologist is registered. He also stated the following inter alia: "The order implies that those medical aids who have failed to pay psychologists who do work outside the scope of practice (despite the psychologist having competency in the relevant area of practice) due to the regulations, will have no reason to continue to withhold payment. It would be both unreasonable and opportunistic to continue to rely on these regulations during the period set for public consultations and a reconsideration of how psychological practice may best be regulated. Based on the legal advice received the applicants contend that the law allows psychologists of any registration category to do any work in respect of which they can demonstrate their competence, as is set out in the Ethical Code governing psychologists. Certainly any decision to refuse payment to a psychologist who is competent but working outside their scope, based on the regulations, amounts to a disregard for the constitutional right to healthcare (which includes psychological care) of South African patients, and a flagrant indifference to the tenure and implications of the High Court order."

1 DECEMBER 2016: Trudie Broekmann of JASA takes on MedicalBrief with regard to Dr Johann Serfontein's article iro the Court Order which was recently issued by the Western High Court. Dr Serfontein is a physiotherapist making statements about the law and the impact of the aforesaid Court Order.

25 NOVEMBER 2016: THE FINAL FILED COURT ORDER of 14 November 2016 was issued on 25 November 2016. View Here.

21 NOVEMBER 2016: In the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape Division, Cape Town (Case No: 12420/13) before the Honourable Ms Justice Baartman and the Honourable Ms Justice Steyn on 14 November 2016 an agreement was reached between the Applicants and the First to Fourth Respondents. ReLPAG and JASA challenged the validity of the Scopes of Practice for the Profession of Psychology (2011 Regulations) and succeeded in having it declared invalid by means of a court order. During the 2 year period of the suspension of the 2011 Regulations, the First to Third Respondents shall consider, in each case of pending disciplinary proceedings against a practitioner for acting outside the scope of his or her registered scope of practice, postponing disciplinary proceedings pending the promulgation of new regulations by the Fourth Respondent. We haven't received the filed Court Order yet. The Draft Court Order can be viewed Here. A copy of this order shall be served by the Applicants’ attorneys on the Fifth Respondent and on the Council for Medical Schemes.

ReLPAG was awarded the majority of costs, including the costs of 2 counsel, for the expenses of litigation. The case attracted publicity in the press after JASA's media release (articles in the Cape Times and Beeld). ReLPAG's advocates, Darryl Cooke and Gavin Brown, issued a Memorandum (expert opinion) on 21 November 2016 regarding the interpretation of the Scopes of Practice for psychologists in the light of the recent court settlement. Regarding the stance of medical aids they state in paragraphs 104-105 as follows:

"It appears from the evidence in the High Court application that several medical aids are refusing claims only on the basis of a practitioners' professional category. Implicit in this rigid approach is the assumption that psychologists are constrained to practise within the confines of their professional categories. For the reasons given above (preceding paragraphs), we are of the opinion that this assumption is misconceived, and not supported by the relevant legislative instruments."

They concluded in paragraphs 106-107 as follows:

"We consider that psychologists are constrained by the 2008 Regulations to practise within the scope of the profession of psychology, and by the Ethical Rules to practise within their competence. However, we do not consider that psychologists are additionally constrained to practise only within their professional categories."

15 NOVEMBER 2016: Trudie Broekmann on behalf of JASA issued a PRESS RELEASE on 15 November 2016 stating:

"The order was the result of a settlement reached between the parties after the Minister acknowledged in papers that the regulations had not been properly passed. A costs order was made against the Minister of Health and Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) for the major part of the applicants’ legal costs, including the costs of two counsel."

14 NOVEMBER 2016: FULL DETAILED INFORMATION WILL BE COMMUNICATED TO YOU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

A PRESS RELEASE WILL ALSO BE ISSUED SHORTLY

NOTES ON THE OUTCOME OF THE COURT SETTLEMENT:

1. Please pray/meditate and thank GOD as a settlement was reached.

2. The law of Sept 2011 which The Council of Medical Schemes (CMS) as well as the medical aids who seized payments relied on, was declared invalid by the Court on 14 November 2016 because it was unlawfully made. This is the same law that caused the crises in the psychology profession.

3. As part of the settlement all of our costs will be reimbursed in a couple of months.

4. We now have to negotiate and/or fight with the medical aids individually to persuade them to make payments again as the law they used as guideline was declared invalid.

VIEW Signed Court Order dated 29 August 2016 HERE

First to Third Respondents - Confirmatory affidavit Prof Young - Nov 2016

Fourth Respondent's Supplementary Heads of Argument - Nov 2016

ReLPAG's letter of objection to MEDIHELP - 31 Oct 2016

MEDIHELP - Non-payment - SOP - 31 Oct 2016

First to Third Respondents' Supp Heads of Argument and Confirmatory affidavit Prof Pillay - Oct 2016

Applicants' Supplementary Heads of Argument - October 2016

EPASSA (Third Amicus) Heads of Argument - October 2016

CPF (Second Amicus) Heads of Argument - October 2016

CPF (Second Amicus) Filed Replying affidavit - 12 Oct 2016

EPASSA (Third Amicus) Filed Replying affidavit - 11 Oct 2016

SECTION27 (First Amicus) - Letter to Deputy Judge President Goliath - 7 Oct 2016

SECTION27 (First Amicus) - Replying and Confirmatory affidavit Dr Kirsten - 7 Oct 2016

PsySSA - Facilitation meeting ReLPAG and PBP - 18 Oct 2016

Settlement proposal (revised) 23 April 2016

First to Third Respondents’ Answering affidavit to affidavits of Amici – Sept 2016

PsySSA feedback - Facilitation meeting with ReLPAG and PBP - 28 Sept 2016

ReLPAG's Answering affidavit iro filed affidavits by Amici - 7.2 of Court order - Sept 2016

A Batchelor's letter to all Respondents and Amici curiae - 21 Sept 2016

E-mail - PsySSA's response to ReLPAG - CPF Affidavit - 20 Sept 2016

ReLPAG Letter to PsySSA - CPF Affidavit - 19 Sept 2016

Fourth Respondent's Heads of Argument - Sept 2016

E-mail - A Batchelor to Attorneys First to Third Respondents - 14 Sept 2016

Applicant's Application to strike out - First to Third Respondents and Fourth Respondent - 1 Sep 2016

Ministerial Task Team Report findings iro investigation of HPCSA dated 25 October 2015

Ministerial Task Team Report - Strategy for RPL - Jan 2013

Before SOP promulgation - SA Psychologists, the HPCSA and Ethical Code - Nov 2010

9 NOVEMBER 2016: A positive outcome is in sight - Keep praying/meditating

Thank you very much for your contributions over the years - please stay involved now in this critical time.

Please go to the FINANCES PAGE to obtain more information regarding our financial situation currently.

PsySSA’s endeavorment to act as facilitator between ReLPAG and the PBP of the HPCSA was unfortunately unsuccessful. Feedback will be given at a later stage. All the Supplementary Heads of Arguments from all parties were submitted as was ordered by the court (View Here).

Last week Thursday, 3 November 2016, the two Honourable Judges ordered a pre-trial meeting between the Applicants, Respondents and the legal teams of all the Amici curiae. They strongly suggested that a settlement should be reached by all parties before the end of this week. Should a settlement not be reached, the case should go ahead in court as scheduled from the 14th – 17th of November 2016.

Please be assured that the Ex-Co of ReLPAG will do everything in their power to assure that we, as non-clinical psychologists, will be able to continue to practice as we have in the past (some for a few decades) before the promulgation of the Scopes of Practice in Sept 2011. The Ethcial code of Conduct of the HPCSA has always been there as guideline to work within the boundaries of our competency based on formal education, training, supervised experience and/or appropriate professional experience long before the CPD system was implemented.

The Minister’s advocates stated that there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that:

The Minister was apprised of all the grounds on which the HPCSA’s recommendation was made and/or
That the Minister consulted the HPCSA (See Par 81 of the Minister’s Heads of Argument, view document Here).

On the grounds of the Minister’s concession in his filed Supplementary Heads of Argument (View Here), the HPCSA and the PBP have conceded that the decision to promulgate the 2011 Amendment Regulations regarding the Scopes of Practice was invalid and subsequently being set aside (View Here, see Par 5-6 of the First to Third Respondents’ Supplementary Heads of Arguments in regard with the Amici submissions and remedy).

At the case management conference held on 3 November 2016 the court expressed the view that in light of this concession the condonation issue must accordingly fall away. Nobody disagreed with the court on this aspect.

Thus far, the protracted fight has cost R1.35 million of our member’s hard-earned money.

2 NOVEMBER 2016: ReLPAG's chairperson compiled a follow-up letter to MEDIHELP requesting them to reply within 21 days advising ReLPAG on the following matters (View Here):

(1) Their source(s) regarding the interpretation of the concepts of “learning” and “development” on which they relied upon for making their decision, or whether it was made on the sole discretion of the scheme

(2) Their interpretation the scope of practice for Counselling psychologists.

(3) Their interpretation the scope of practice for Clinical psychologists.

1 NOVEMBER 2016: The Fourth Respondent's Supplementary Heads of Argument was submitted on 1 November 2016. This document can be viewed Here.

31 OCTOBER 2016: NO MEDIHELP BENEFITS FOR INDUSTRIAL AND EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGISTS FROM 1 NOVEMBER 2016

Medihelp announced on the 31 of October 2016 (View letter Here) that they will no longer consider services rendered by Industrial and Educational psychologists for benefits on any of its benefit options. This will be effective from 1 November 2016 and requested non-clinical service providers to inform their Medihelp patients that they themselves will in future be liable for the payment of services received by non-clinical psychologists.

Medihelp states that the HPCSA dictates how they should grant benefits for the services rendered by the respective practitioners and informed service providers that they only regard clinical psychology to be a supplementary healthcare service which qualifies for benefits.

ReLPAG's chairperson immediately reacted to Medihelp's letter to its service providers by contacting Mr Heyn van Rooyen, Principal Officer at Medihelp and objecting to their decision as the Honourable Minister of Health has already conceded that the Act which was referred to was unlawfully made. Mr John Smyth QC's letter of warning to medical aid societies was also attached thereto. He is the honorary director of JASA. This document can be viewed Here.

The Applicants' Supplementary Heads of Argument was submitted on the 31st of October 2016. This document can be viewed Here.

The First to Third Respondents' Supplementary Heads of Argument in regard with the Amici submissions and remedy was submitted on 31 October 2016 together with Prof Pillay's Confirmatory affidavit. This document can be viewed Here.

19 OCTOBER 2016: EPASSA (Third Amicus Curiae) submitted their Heads of Argument on 19 October 2016. This document can be viewed Here.

17 OCTOBER 2016: The CPF (Second Amicus Curiae) submitted their Heads of Argument on 17 October 2016. This document can be viewed Here.

12 OCTOBER 2016: The CPF (Second Amicus Curiae) requested an extension and subsequently filed their Replying affidavit (by Mr William Griffith, chairperson of the Clinical Psychology Forum), in response to the Answering affidavits of the First to Third Respondents, on 12 October 2016 in accordance with 7.3 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here).

11 OCTOBER 2016: As a consequence of the late service of the Answering affidavits of the First to Third Respondents, the Second and Third Amici Curiae couldn't file their Replying affidavits in time. EPASSA (Third Amicus Curiae) filed their Replying affidavit (by Dr Martin Strous, chairperson of the Educational Psychological Association of South Africa) dated 11 October 2016 in accordance with 7.3 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here).

7 OCTOBER 2016: SECTION27 (First Amicus Curiae) has filed their Replying affidavit (by Ms Marije Versteeg-Mojanaga, director of the Rural Health Advocacy Project) dated 7 October 2016 and submitted a Confirmatory affidavit (by Dr Doret Kirsten) along with it in accordance with 7.3 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here). SECTION27 also submitted a letter to the Honourable Deputy Judge President (DJP) Goliath stating as First Amicus Curiae that they sought to adduce evidence and make legal submissions in their application that the effect of the Regulations Defining the Scope of the Profession of Psychology is, first, to unduly limit access to mental health care services in a manner that undermines the rights enshrined in section 27 of the Constitution, and second, has a dire impact on mental health care users. They continue by stating that in the light of the Minister's concession, it is now common cause between the Minister and the Applicants that the Regulations Defining the Scope of the Profession of Psychology, should be set aside.

5 OCTOBER 2016: ReLPAG is willing to discuss further details of an amicable settlement based on the proposals made in a previous communication (view the document “Settlement proposal 23 April 2016” in the READ MORE . . . section above) and would also be happy to consider constructive proposals from the PBP that would allow competent, non-clinical psychologists to continue practicing in a competent, ethical and professional manner, as they always did in the past. ReLPAG however see little point in further negotiations if the approach of the PBP is going to again boil down to “the rigid barriers between the Scopes of Practice boundaries being impermeable and non-negotiable”. PsySSA has scheduled a follow-up facilitation meeting on 18 October 2016 from 14:00 - 19:00 between ReLPAG and the PBP of the HPCSA.

4 OCTOBER 2016: Due to all the work that needs to be done by ReLPAG’s lawyers, the account with them is accumulating on a daily basis. We therefore urge each and every one to please dig deep into their pockets and make a donation for the next two months to enable ReLPAG, as an organisation of which all of you are part of and for your own survival as well, to get the account with the lawyers up to date. View the most recent Statement of Account received from A Batchelor Attorneys & Associates Here or view it in the READ MORE . . . section of the FINANCES PAGE.

28 SEPTEMBER 2016: Prof Gertie Pretorius on behalf of the First to Third Respondents submitted their Answering affidavit in respect of the affidavits of the Amici Curiae on the 28th of September 2016 in accordance with 7.2 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here). The affidavit of Prof Pretorius refers to Confirmatory affidavits of Prof Pillay and Prof Young which were not attached.

We received feedback compiled by PsySSA representatives on 28 September 2016 following the PsySSA meeting of 11 Aug 2016 between the Professional Board for Psychology (PBP) of the HPCSA and ReLPAG. PsySSA indicated that they will remain available to provide ongoing facilitation in this important matter and suggested that all parties strive to secure a date as soon as possible for such a follow-up meeting of ideally 3 to 4 hours. Prof Juan Nel of PsySSA is awaiting the PBP's reponse re suitable dates to be communicated to ReLPAG.

26 SEPTEMBER 2016: ReLPAG submitted their Answering affidavit in respect of affidavits filed by Amici Curiae according to 7.2 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here) whereby the Applicants and First to Fifth Respondents could deliver any answering affidavits, in response to the affidavits delivered by the First to Third Amici Curiae by 23 September 2016.

22 SEPTEMBER 2016: A big round of applause to all our colleagues that went out of their way to supply us with their own affidavits and that of their patients.

21 SEPTEMBER 2016: ReLPAG's attorneys, A Batchelor & Associates, requested all the Respondents as well as the Amici curiae to respond to certain matters regarding the case. They stretched among other, the importance that the Judges be informed as soon as possible whether the question of validity of the ammendment remains in issue. View this document in the READ MORE . . . section.

20 SEPTEMBER 2016: In response to ReLPAG's letter to PsySSA, Dr Anthony Pillay (President of PsySSA) confirmed that the South African Society for Clinical Psychology (SASCP), which is a Division of the Psychological Society of South Africa (PsySSA), has a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Clinical Psychology Forum (CPF). He further confirmed that neither PsySSA nor the SASCP supported the CPF amicus curiae application.

19 SEPTEMBER 2016: ReLPAG requested an urgent answer from PsySSA to indicate whether PsySSA actually does support all the information in the CPF’s affidavit by Mr Griffith which he intends putting before the Court as facts. This question arised after Mr Griffith included a Memorandum of Understanding between the CPF and the South African Society for Clinical Psychology, a division of the Psychological Society of South Africa (PsySSA) and whereby he indicated to the court that he has the support of both these divisions and therefore indirectly of PsySSA as well.

We have received the Heads of Argument from the Fourth Respondent, the Honourable Minister of Health, from our lawyers today in accordance with 7.1 of the Court order dated 29 August 2016 (View Here). Please note the concession by him in relation to the 2011 Amendment Regulations wherein the Minister concedes that his decision to promulgate such regulations was unlawfully made. We suggest you start by reading the conclusion of the Heads of Argument. You can view the document Here.

16 SEPTEMBER 2016: The Deputy Judge President (DJP) allocated two judges to our case, i.e. Judges Baartman and Steyn and thereby recognised that ReLPAG submitted a significant application.

Alicia Schoeman (CMS) with Freek Robinson, Dr Susan Kriegler and Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer

Freek Robinson with Dr Susan Kriegler and Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer

Please cast your vote !!!!

14 SEPTEMBER 2016: With regard to inter alia the HPCSA National Survey our legal team requested certain information (among other reports submitted by the Second Task Team and the practice guidelines and/or draft practice guidelines for psychologists) from the Attorneys for the First to Third Respondents. View this document Here.

13 SEPTEMBER 2016: The Council for Medical Schemes (CMS) has also mailed a CMS Awareness Survey to all members and beneficiaries of medical aids aimed at improving their service. As members of medical aids, please complete.

12 SEPTEMBER 2016: FINAL OPPORTUNITY - You have until the 16th of September 2016 to complete the HPCSA's National Survey.

10 SEPTEMBER 2016: The results of the viewers question on Robinson Regstreeks revealed that 86 % viewers said YES to the question reflected below:

We appreciate the effort put into the vote to ensure a posivite outcome!

8 SEPTEMBER 2016: The HPCSA has sent out a reminder (dated 5 September 2016) to all registered psychology practitioners to complete the National Survey that they initially mailed on the 29th of August 2016. We quote them as they motivate participation and assure respondent anonymity: "It is therefore extremely important that you contribute to this project of the Council by completing the survey. The higher the response rate to the survey, the more of a true reflection will be obtained of the range of activities, contexts and clients that psychologists engage with. Completion of the survey is voluntary and is not expected to take you more than 15 minutes or so. Please note: An independent service provider has been contracted to conduct the survey on behalf of the HPCSA. Your participation in the survey will therefore be totally anonymous. No person affiliated with the HPCSA will be able to identify the results of any respondent. There is no particular interest in any individual practitioner's work content or work context." View the HPCSA Reminder document Here.

We were informed that the Professional Board wants to release scope of practice guidelines for Educational Psychologist as soon as possible. It is important that all our members’ should complete the HPCSA survey that was sent out.

Members who did not receive the survey should request it as follows:

Address your e-mail to NcumisaM@hpcsa.co.za
Write HPCSA Survey in the subject line.

The HPCSA has advised, inter alia, that the survey results will assist the HPCSA to take a pro-active approach to:

assess the state of access to psychological services in South Africa;
determine the current competency profiles of psychology practitioners;
establish whether the education and training (including CPD training) of psychology professionals need to be adjusted to meet the needs for psychological services in the country;
ensure that an adequate number of psychology practitioners is trained over the next ten years.

It is very important that all ReLPAG members sent us a copy of your completed survey. For more information in this regard click Here. After completing the survey, but before submitting, you need print each page of your questionnaire then fax it to: 086 218 1370 or scan the printed version and e-mail it to: psychoadmin@lantic.net. Please view the latest ReLPAG Communiqué on the Documents Page in this regard.

4 SEPTEMBER 2016: Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer and Dr Susan Kriegler's interview by Freek Robinson on Robinson Regstreeks was broadcasted on kykNET, Channel 144, at 19h30 on Sunday the 4th of September 2016.

Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer and Dr Susan Kriegler were interviewed on the 19th of August 2016 by Freek Robinson, for the program Robinson Regstreeks on KykNET at Stark Studios in Linden, Johannesburg. Two medical aids, POLMED and GEMS were invited inter alia to join the discussion but waved it. The Council for Medical Schemes (CMS) was represented by one of their attorneys, Alicia Schoeman. We request all members to publish comments on the Robinson Regstreeks Facebook page (kykNET Robinson Regstreeks).

Please also post a tweet on Twitter, to Facebook, on LinkedIn, etc. with regard to Mr Freek Robinson’s viewers' question at the end of the program, as we want to make the most of this publicity opportunity and to raise general public awareness. The viewers' question (Moet mediese fondse vir alle sielkundiges se dienste betaal? ) has already been published on Twitter and you can vote this week only. Log in to Twitter and search for the following Twitter handle: @kykNETtv . Then scroll down until you see the following:

PERSVERKLARING

Robinson Regstreeks, Sondagaand 4 September, 19:30

Duisende pasiënte kan nie meer sielkundige behandeling kry nie, omdat mediese skemas eise vir sekere sielkundige dienste weier. ‘n Aksiegroep het nou ‘n hofsaak begin. Om ‘n perspektief te gee is Dr Susan Kriegler, Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer, beide Opvoedkundige sielkundiges, en Alicia Schoeman, ‘n regsverteenwoordiger vir die Raad op Mediese Skemas in die ateljee.

Many parents with children in crises find themselves stranded these days as result of certain medical aids' refusal to pay Educational psychologists. This soundcloud link will take you to a podcast of a debate between Prof Basil Pillay, Chairman of the Professional Board for Psychology of the HPCSA and Educational psychologist, Vanessa Gaydon on POWER FM 98.7 hosted by Lawrence Tlhabane (July 2016).

29 AUGUST 2016: We have received the Signed Court order from our legal team which state our court case to proceed on the 14 -17th of November 2016.

ReLPAG's case was in the news today highlighting our struggle to survive in an article written by Katharine Child for The Times newspaper: Angry shrinks need someone to talk to. Dr Susan Kriegler (Educational psychologist) and Dr Johan Landman (Industrial psychologist) both made valuable contributions. The Ex-co of ReLPAG would very much like the story to be shared as widely as possible and would like to encourage our members to share the story on their Facebook pages, as well as on any other social media platforms you have access to. Please read ReLPAG Communiqué 20 of 29 August 2016 to view some ways in which to share the story on Facebook.

GOOD NEWS - EPASSA HAS BEEN ALLOWED AS AMICUS CURIAE BY ALL PARTIES

15 AUGUST 2016: Advocate Gavin Brown, one of our legal representatives as well as some of the other parties' legal representatives met with Judge Samela on the 15th of August 2016 to discuss matters. Judge Samela indicated that he will be on circuit court duty in November and only returning a day or two before the proposed date in the draft order. Judge Samela asked Advocate Brown to find out whether the matter can rather be postponed to the following week, 21–24 November 2016. Advocate Brown explained the complexities faced in finding mutually agreeable dates but undertook to approach all those concerned to establish whether those dates would be plausible. Judge Samela also expressed his concern that 4 days was insufficient. All parties will be consulted to consider the postponement with the probability of 2 additional days the following Monday and Tuesday, 28 and 29 August 2016.

11 AUGUST 2016: PsySSA'S FACILITATION MEETING BETWEEN ReLPAG AND THE PROFESSIONAL BOARD FOR PSYCHOLOGY (PBP) OF THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS COUNCIL OF SOUTH AFRICA (HPCSA) WAS HELD THURSDAY AT EMPERORS PALACE.

Regarding the above facilitation meeting we wish to inform you that it was decided at the start of the meeting that all information and discussions will be treated strictly confidential and therefore we can not furnish you unfortunately with any new information. As the meeting progressed towards the end of the afternoon it was decided that the decisions taken during the meeting will be drafted and circulated between all attendees as soon as it becomes available for further discussion. ReLPAG was represented by: Dr Kobus Scholtemeyer (Educational psychologist); Mr Kevin Fourie (Counselling psychologist); Dr Susan Kriegler (Educational psychologist); and Dr Johan Landman (Industrial psychologist). PsySSA was represented by: Prof Juan Nel (Clinical and Research psychologist); Prof Sumaya Laher (Research psychologist); Dr Helen Dunbar-Krige (Educational psychologist); and Dr Ewald Crause (Counselling psychologist). The PBP of the HPCSA was represented by, among other: Prof BJ Pillay (Clinical psychologist); Dr T Moloi (Clinical psychologist); Prof C Young (Counselling psychologist); Prof D Maree (Research psychologist); and Mr R Phala (Counselling psychologist).

4 AUGUST 2016: The Educational Psychological Association of South Africa (EPASSA) admitted their Amicus Curiae Application to the Court.

29 JULY 2016: ReLPAG's legal team together with the representatives of all the parties and the Amicus Curiae including the Educational Psychologists, who are yet to bring an application, attended a meeting with the honourable Judge Samela in his chambers in Cape Town. The Judge immediately said that it was clear that the matter would not be able to proceed on the 15th of August 2016 and that it was in the public interest for all parties to be given the opportunity to put forward their case. We advised him that from the Applicants’ point of view there are psychologists in dire financial circumstances and that a postponement would make their situation worse. To our disappointment, he ruled that the court case will be postponed until the 14th - 17th of November 2016. Although we are disappointed, this postponement will help us to raise more funds for the court case.

The Educational Psychology Association of South Africa (EPASSA) is applying as Amicus Curiae too. They have indicated that their affidavit is almost complete to be admitted as Amicus Curiae in our court case. See ReLPAG's latest Communiqué on the Documents Page of the website.

26 JULY 2016: PsySSA confirmed the 11th of August 2016 for the facilitation meeting between ReLPAG and the Professional Board. The problem though is that there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the Clinical Psychology Forum (CPF) and the South African Society of Clinical Psychology (SASCP) which may jeopardise the objectivity of PsySSA. The Memorandum can be find on Page 16 of the document Amicus Curiae Application - Clinical Psychology Forum 25 July 2016.

25 JULY 2016: The Clinical Psychology Forum applied as Amicus Curiae (Friend of the Court) on 25 July 2016. In order to be admitted as an Amicus Curiae the Clinical Psychology Forum (CPF) needs to show that is will make submissions which are relevant, will assist the court, and are different from those of the other parties according to our legal team. The court has a discretion regarding whether or not to admit an Amicus Curiae, and if admitted, the terms and conditions under which it may participate in the court proceedings. Ultimately the court should be guided by what is in the interests of justice.

VIEW THE FINANCES PAGE REGARDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE ROLE OF THE COUNSEL FOR MEDICAL SCHEMES (CMS) AND CERTAIN MEDICAL AIDS NOT PAYING ANYMORE

19 JULY 2016: We have just received very disturbing news from BONITAS MEDICAL AID. They have informed their members that no consultations with an Educational psychologist will be covered for adult beneficiaries - individuals aged 21 years and older. See the attached document extraction from Bonitas in this regard. Bonitas have now followed the example of both POLMED and GEMS. All members need to understand why these Medical Aids acted this way. They stopped payments to Educational psychologists on the advice of the Council for Medical Schemes (CMS). The CMS interpreted the Promulgated SOP of psychologists as published in Sept 2011.

This act was promulgated and signed by the Honourable Minister of Health after it was submitted by the Professional Board of Psychology (PBP) of the HPCSA. A letter of warning against accusations of fraud and inteference of justice, compiled by Mr John Smyth of JASA, has been sent to Bonitas and Medscheme today. As ReLPAG members are all practicing psychologists we know that with each Medical Aid who stops making payments to our practices, our budgets are getting tighter, but now more than ever, we have to stand together and win this Court case because this is the only option we have left as our livelihood is now threatened more than ever. View ReLPAG's Communique 17 of 19 July 2016 on the Documents Page in this regard as well as the Finances Page.

We certainly realize how difficult it is for each of us to contribute to the Court case, but it is our only option because most of the other Medical Aids are just awaiting the outcome of the Court case to also make their decision regarding payments to all non-clinical psychologists.

25 JULY 2016: Paul Herman of News24 interviewed Dr Martin Strous, Chairperson of the Educational Psychology Association of South Africa (EPASSA), the largest in SA, and published the article "Children stranded as medical aids refuse funds for educational psychologists" on 25 July 2016. According to Dr Martin Strous as many as seven public and private medical aid schemes have refused to pay for the services of his profession since earlier this year. He stated among other "What is needed is for the HPCSA's Professional Board for Psychology, which regulates the profession of psychology, and the Council for Medical Schemes, which regulates medical aids, to act in a way that will stop this injustice." Three other Educational psychologists also spoke up about the detrimental effect that the non-payment of the medical aids had on their patients (the public) as well as on themselves as service providers.

21 JULY 2016: ReLPAG accepted PsySSA's suggested dates (10 - 13 August 2016) for the facilitation meeting between them and the PBP of the HPCSA as there were no earlier dates available for the parties to meet.

15 JULY 2016: PsySSA replied to ReLPAG's letter and suggested to both ReLPAG and the Professional Board for Psychology (PBP) the following dates to be considered for the facilitation meeting: 10 - 13 August 2016. PsySSA states that many of there leadership are out of the country before the mentioned dates. This is problematic for ReLPAG as the High court case already commences on the 15th of August 2016.

12 JULY 2016: ReLPAG’s Ex-co decided during an urgent telephone conference on Monday 11 July 2016 how to react on this proposal of PsySSA, after consulting with their legal team. ReLPAG replied on 12 July 2016 to PsySSA's letter, stipulating among other the following: (1) Acceptance of the agreement without prejudice to the parties’ respective positions in the pending litigation; (2) Three or 4 representatives from each party to be present; (3) The facilitation meeting is a matter of urgency and should take place as soon as possible; (4) Any agreement reached between the parties would have to be ratified by all the Applicants' and the Respondents' legal teams and ultimately be made an Order of the Court.

7 JULY 2016: PsySSA has received a letter from the Professional Board for Psychology indicating that they are, in principle, agreeable to them facilitating a meeting between RELPAG and the Professional Board for Psychology. They have, however, indicated the following: “Please be informed that the Board has agreed to engage with ReLPAG as suggested by PsySSA, provided that it is made clear that the meeting is without prejudice to the parties’ respective positions in the pending litigation, and that neither party may thereafter use what was said in that meeting in an attempt to advance its case in the litigation be applied. Kindly provide us with proposed meeting dates so we can communicate to the Board representatives who will be attending the meeting.”

CURRENT MATTERS - LEGAL UPDATE

​

​