Leads to wrong conclusion. (A) allows to conclude that a certain kind of psychologist SHOULD be allowed to prescribe. But we’re trying to conclude that some psychologists should NOT be allowed to prescribe.

Wrong trigger. The clinical psychologists who aren’t doctors with medical degrees do have training in clinical psychology. So (B) doesn’t allow us to conclude that those psychologists shouldn’t be allowed to prescribe.

Builds a bridge from the premises to the conclusion. (C), restated, means if you don’t have years of training in neuroscience, physiology, and pharmacology, then you should NOT be allowed to prescribe psychiatric medications. We have evidence that clinical psychologists who aren’t doctors with medical degrees don’t have years of such training (because clinical psychology only includes at most a few hundreds hours of such training). So these psychologists, then, shouldn’t be allowed to prescribe psychiatric medications.

Leads to wrong conclusion. (D) allows to conclude that someone SHOULD be allowed to prescribe. But we’re trying to conclude that some psychologists should NOT be allowed to prescribe. Learning what is sufficient for being allowed to prescribe does not establish what is necessary for being allowed to prescribe.

Leads to wrong conclusion. (E) allows us to reach a conclusion that clinical psychologists should get years of training. But we’re trying to prove that certain clinical psychologists shouldn’t be allowed to prescribe psychiatric medications.