The American Psychoanalytic Association has been recognized by the AMA as an accrediting body for continuing education in psychoanalysis since 1972. This accrediting right is now up for review by the AMA and a site visit will take place in December of this year to determine if this accreditation should be renewed. The original accrediting right and the renewal will depend upon the site visitors' determination of the nature of the work of our organization and our overall structure which permits us to oversee continuing education programs at a national and local level.
In the 5 years since the initial accreditation, the American has established a joint committee of Board and Council to formulate policies and programs for the Association. All recommendations and decisions concerning approval of ongoing continuing education programs at a national and local level have been funnelled through this committee. In general, the committee has taken the attitude that it is willing to act as a co-sponsor of programs planned by the Program Committee of the American Psychoanalytic and presented at the semi-annual meetings, as well as acting as co-sponsor of continuing education programs planned by local societies and institutes. These programs have been listed in the August issue of JAMA and for all but 5 of the societies and institutes, the approval of these programs for continuing education participation has come from the American Psychoanalytic Association. Utilizing the resources of the Association, that is the Committee on Institutes and the Committee on New Training Facilities of the Board on Professional Standards and the Committee on Affiliate Societies of the Executive Council, the Joint Ad-hoc Committee on Continuing Education has had a constant stream of information concerning the nature of and the quality of the continuing education activities throughout the psychoanalytic community under its jurisdiction.
The guidelines proposed by the AMA provide for various categories of continuing education activity and credit. The major one is called Category I and represents specific programs sponsored or co-sponsored by the accrediting organization designed to provide an integrated program of continuing education. To qualify for Category I, a program must have an educational objective, a method of arriving at that, which may be via qualified presentors, and a means of evaluating not only the program itself, but what the individuals participating might have learned that will improve their knowledge and their level of patient care. The various programs sponsored or co-sponsored by the American Psychoanalytic and its component societies and institutes qualify in the various areas of having objectives and well recognized plans and means of achieving these objectives. The qualification of evaluation of the program and of what individuals have learned presents more difficulties in the psychoanalytic field than it does for hospital-based undertakings in other areas of medicine. However, the Joint Committee on Continuing Education is attempting to work out a means of evaluating the programs and is developing various guidelines, utilizing methods devised by the American Psychiatric Association as well as those used by individual institutes or societies of the American. The current guidelines emphasize Category I activities as being a major intent of continuing education programs, but, of course, other continuing education activities such as teaching, individual reading, preparation of papers, etc. are of importance and represent ongoing activities of individual societies and institutes. All these various other categories of continuing education also contribute to meeting the voluntary requirements of continuing education programs.
In the psychoanalytic field, study groups have always occupied an honored and valued place as a form of maintaining one's skills and knowledge in the analytic field. Many study groups are organized with the specific educational objective of studying a particular topic in some depth over a period of time. Thus, these study groups have an educational objective and a means of obtaining it. To meet the current requirements of a continuing education program would require merely a record of the topics discussed during the study group meetings and some record of attendance as indicated by the continued participation of the members of the study group. To some extent, continued participation in and of itself is an evaluation of the learning process taking place and it is open to question whether further, more detailed, evaluation is necessary. Formation of study groups and participation in these would, in the opinion of the joint ad-hoc committee, constitute a Category I type of program and would require only informing the joint committee of its formation and/or existence to be accepted by the American Psychoanalytic as a jointly sponsored continuing education activity.
Questions have been raised as to whether psychoanalysts need to participate in continuing education activities in the formal sense desired by the various state medical bodies, specialty organizations and even, in some instances, state legislatures. There is no question that psychoanalysts have tended quite spontaneously over the years to continue to be involved in and absorbed in furthering their knowledge of the constantly evolving concepts within the field of psychoanalysis. As such, most psychoanalysts have not required outside pressure to induce them to continue to keep abreast of developments within their field. Some, therefore, have stated that psychoanalysts do not need to worry about meeting the various requirements of regulatory agencies. While this may be true, once these latter exist, there is no reason why psychoanalysts should not qualify and meet these requirements within the field of their own interest—psychoanalysis—rather than meeting it through participation in the work of other nonpsychoanalytic organizations. It was for that reason that the American Psychoanalytic initially led the way in obtaining accreditation as a sponsoring organization for continuing medical educational activities and will continue to do so. Therefore, means of maintaining its accreditation status at the time of the next site visit in December, 1977, will be undertaken. This has been determined as policy of the national organization in order to better serve the members of the Association in maintaining their position, both within the field and in relation to the larger medical community.
Psychoanalysts have always been devoted to the concept of continuing education in their field and recognize that it is a necessary and important component of their work. Many institutes take it for granted that when they graduate an individual as qualified in the field of psychoanalysis, implicit in such qualification is the capacity to continue a process of self-education and further education within the field. Many of the formal requirements of continuing education, as currently enunciated, do not really deal with the nature of psychoanalytic education, but are geared more specifically to the needs of other specialties. It is probable that within the next few years the actual form of continuing education requirements will change and be modified in light of the experience of various specialty groups. Therefore, current categorizations and definitions that do not fit psychoanalytic needs may well be modified in the next few years and prove to be sufficiently flexible as to meet the needs of psychoanalysts more adequately.
Edward D. Joseph
Chairman, Joint Ad-hoc Committee on Continuing Education