Although it would certainly be a good practice for psychiatrists to inquire about visual changes in this often-underserved population, requiring at least annual slit-lamp examinations seems ill founded. My informal survey of three sources (university clinic, private ophthalmologist, private optometrist) revealed costs ranging from $110 to $195 for an initial assessment, far more than the authors’ estimate of $23 for an examination. And what is one to do when a lens opacity is found in a patient who may already, by virtue of diabetes, hypertension, nutrition, or age, be at a higher risk for cataracts? If the patient is otherwise responding well to a particular atypical antipsychotic medication, it would seem risky to change it. Despite the authors’ disclaimer that their recommendations should not "subject [providers] to legal consequences," it is likely that enterprising attorneys will indeed seize upon the opportunity to sue psychiatrists for failure to have ensured one or two slit-lamp examinations per year in a schizophrenic patient who develops a cataract. Why make such a recommendation when the evidence for it is, as the authors acknowledge, absent?