After a spirited discussion, the Board on Professional Standards at its May meeting in Boston voted 34 to 15 for a motion, stating that it viewed the Limited Voting Rights Proposal and its attendant suggested bylaws changes to be “ill-advised, ill-formulated, and to present significantly divisive hazards to all components of the American Psychoanalytic Association.”

The bylaws changes necessary to implement the Proposal were presented to the Board for the first time. The proposed change provoking the most intense debate was the stipulation that the Council retained the power to decide whether an issue to be voted upon by the membership pertained to educational and thus Board concerns.

A late alteration, received only days before the meeting, allowed for the challenge by a single councilor to mandate the appointment of a five person ad hoc committee, chaired by the Chairman of the Board, with two members appointed by the Chairman of the Board and two by the President to make the decision.

Although it was maintained by its proponents that this provision provided a safeguard for the Board, it was argued that such a committee, with the controlling vote to overrule the Council presumably held by the Chairman of the Board, would place him in an undesirable “no-win” position.

In other actions, the Board heard, in connection with the COPE report, a discussion of potential legal problems about the issue of informed consent, in conducting research involving use of institute educational records and clinical data. It was pointed out that, although such issues must be considered, attempts to totally protect the Association from any “worst case” legal scenario might completely paralyze its studies of educational matters.