Selected items from the May meeting in San Juan of the Board on Professional Standards appear below. Other actions taken in the meeting are reported elsewhere in this issue.
Dr. Laurence B. Hall spoke of the increasing difficulty candidates are having in finding analytic cases suitable for supervision. He cited objective evidence that fewer young people seem to be seeking even low-fee analysis. Intensified study of this important problem is planned by appropriate Board Committees.
An early draft of work done by the Council Committee to Study By-laws is now being studied, and a preliminary report will probably be available by the next meeting. In addition, Board procedures continue to be studied, and individual committees are in the process of formally defining their own policies and procedures.
Dr. Leonard L. Shengold, Chairman, reported that work continues on gathering statistical data from institutes and societies. He urged that those who have not yet done so appoint a liaison representative to facilitate the data gathering.
A brochure has been prepared that provides candidates and graduates with an outline of current membership policies and procedures.
The Committee is not seeking further action on its own recommendation for changes in membership categories, pending further research and discussion. However, it continues to oppose granting voting privileges to non-certified members.
Wide ranging discussion ensued from the floor, focusing on the “Limited Voting Rights Proposal,” sponsored by ten societies, which had been precirculated at the request of the Chairman of the Board on Professional Standards. No action was taken on the proposal at this meeting.
Dr. Justin Krent, Chairman, spoke of his useful participation in the first CAPE scientific program, which dealt with the certification process. He then noted that in recent years there has been significant improvement in the quality of applications and inferred that, as a result of collaborative efforts between the Board and member institutes, overall analytic training has undergone a distinct improvement.
A tendency was found in applicants for certification in child analysis to model case summaries after those of adult patients, thus omitting material germane to child analysis. To help such applicants, the Committee is revising the application forms for certification and providing appropriate guidelines.
Dr. Herbert Schlesinger, Chairman, reported that outcome research on the careers of special candidates is continuing. He warned that research and special candidates face increasing financial problems, since they are not expected to have a significant private practice and thus lack the income to pay for the ever-mounting cost of training.
Dr. David Sachs, Chairman, reported that the Committee was examining its policies and procedures, preparatory to writing a manual.
Although the death of Dr. Gabriel Casuso leaves only one Geographic Rule Training Analyst in Miami, it is likely that, with the continuing support of the sponsoring Baltimore-D. C. Institute, it will maintain itself, since there are possibilities of several GRTA appointments in the future. Portland similarly sustained a sharp blow to its training program with the death of Dr. Robert Forman, leaving it with only one GRTA, as well. Again the role of the sponsoring Seattle Institute will be crucial in its future maintenance.
Prospects for the growth of psychoanalytic training in Dallas are quite good. The Committee recommended, and the Board approved, the appointment of Dr. Thomas Sonn of Dallas as a New Orleans Training and Supervising Analyst under the geographic rule.
Dr. Shelley Orgel, Chairman, reported that site visits were made to the Boston Institute, Seattle Institute, and Southern California Institute. Site visits are imminent or in process to the Los Angeles Institute, Baltimore-D.C. Institute, Michigan Institute, Pittsburgh Institute, and Western New England Institute. In 1982, visits will be made to the Philadelphia Association, the Institute at New York University, and the San Diego Institute.
Collaboration between the Committee and the individual institutes has become increasingly effective with evidence of deepening trust. Previously concealed difficulties, latent problems in a training program, controversial issues, etc., are being revealed, making it more possible for effective help and liaison work to proceed.
Dr. Richard Simons, Chairman, reported that the Committee has established an annual welcoming meeting for new Affiliate and Associate Members that has proved extremely useful. About forty new members have attended the last two sessions.
A forum has been established wherein distinguished analytic researchers can present their work to new members. These exchanges have also proved extremely gratifying.
To establish communication with new Affiliate and Associate Members from the start, a welcoming informative letter will be sent to all new candidates. When a candidate becomes eligible for Affiliate Membership, a second letter will be sent, inviting application and explaining the structure of the Association as well as the certification process. Upon graduation, a third letter will be sent, inviting the graduate to apply for Associate Membership. For this procedure to be effective, it is necessary for institutes to supply accurate records of everyone in all phases of training.