Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 139.2(b)(5)
Labor Code section 139.2(b)(5) sets qualifications for psychologists to act as QMEs.
The WCJ found Dr. Shirikian met these qualifications to be a QME in psychology.
From the decision · page 2II.
The Qualified Medical Evaluator (QME) in psychology, Dr. Sylvia Shirikian, Psy.D.,
was qualified to address decedent's alcoholism. The Labor Code requires that a psychologist
meet one of the following requirements to be a QME in psychology:
(A) Is board certified in clinical psychology by a board recognized by the administrative
director.
(B) Holds a doctoral degree in psychology, or a doctoral degree deemed equivalent for
licensure by the Board of Psychology pursuant to Section 2914 of the Business and
Professions Code, from a university or professional school recognized by the
administrative director and has not less than five years' postdoctoral experience in the
diagnosis and treatment of emotional and mental disorders.
California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 35.5(c)(1)
California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 35.5(c)(1) requires QMEs to address all contested medical issues within their scope.
Dr. Shirikian addressed all contested psychiatric issues within her scope as QME in psychology.
From the decision · page 3(C) Has not less than five years' postdoctoral experience in the diagnosis and treatment of
emotional and mental disorders, and has served as an agreed medical evaluator on eight
or more occasions prior to January 1, 1990.
(Lab. Code § 139.2(b)(5)(A)-(C).)
Further, the QME "shall address all contested medical issues arising from all injuries
reported on one or more claim forms prior to the date of the employee's appointment with the
medical evaluator that are issues within the evaluator's scope of practice and areas of clinical
competence." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35.5(c)(1).) The QME has an obligation to advise the
parties in writing if any of the disputed medical issues are outside of the QME's scope of practice
and area of clinical competency so that the parties can request an additional evaluation in another
specialty. (Cal. Code Regs., tit.
California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 35.5(d)
California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 35.5(d) requires QMEs to notify parties if issues are outside their scope.
Dr. Shirikian did not notify any issues were outside her scope; no additional evaluation requested.
From the decision · page 3(C) Has not less than five years' postdoctoral experience in the diagnosis and treatment of
emotional and mental disorders, and has served as an agreed medical evaluator on eight
or more occasions prior to January 1, 1990.
(Lab. Code § 139.2(b)(5)(A)-(C).)
Further, the QME "shall address all contested medical issues arising from all injuries
reported on one or more claim forms prior to the date of the employee's appointment with the
medical evaluator that are issues within the evaluator's scope of practice and areas of clinical
competence." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 35.5(c)(1).) The QME has an obligation to advise the
parties in writing if any of the disputed medical issues are outside of the QME's scope of practice
and area of clinical competency so that the parties can request an additional evaluation in another
specialty. (Cal. Code Regs., tit.
8 CCR 31.5(a)(10)
8 CCR 31.5(a)(10) governs requests for replacement QMEs in different specialties.
Applicant requested a replacement QME in the same specialty; no good cause found for replacement or additional QME.
From the decision · page 13As noted in applicant's Trial Brief, applicant argues that there is good cause for the court
to order an additional panel pursuant to 8 CCR § 31.7(b). Applicant argues that Dr. Shirikian, a
psychologist cannot adequately address causation for applicant's alcohol abuse. However, as noted
above when questioned what type of doctor could address the causation aspects of alcohol abuse
Dr. Shirikian stated that she was able to do so and obtained the training to do so when she obtained
her degree. The problems with analyzing the causative factor of applicant's disorder was not due
to Dr. Shirikian's education or training but due to the lack of evidence as the applicant is deceased.
In addition, 8 CRR § 31.7 addresses when a party requests an additional PQME in a different
specialty; applicant is requesting the same specialty (psychology) that has specific expertise in
alcohol disorders. It is unknown how applicant would obtain such a list. As applicant is requesting
the same specialty, it would be considered a replacement PQME and addressed under 8CCR § 31.5.
This section allows for 16 specific reasons a party may obtain a replacement PQME, none of which
pertain to the matter at hand. It is therefore found that there is no good cause for either a
replacement or additional PQME.