In my last column I stressed a national initiative to address issues of psychoanalytic practice. The National Task Force on Practice Issues, which I head, is under way in the promotion of local psychoanalytic practice committees at each institute/society and hopes they will send representatives to the winter meeting to attend workshops concerned with practice issues. In addition, the national leadership and the societies will plan similar workshops at the local level, such as those held in Boston last April and again this fall. Joyce Root of Boston has agreed to head a workshop subcommittee under Lee Brauers Committee on Psychoanalytic Practice. I strongly encourage attendance at the Friday morning Meeting of Members in New York, at which a “town meeting” on the subject will be led by Drs. Brauer and Root. I assure you that this will be a complete departure from the admittedly rather dull Meetings of Members held in the past, at which the reading of written reports was the main feature. This year the reports will be printed, distributed, and only alluded to or summarized in the meeting itself.
Besides this continuing dialogue on practice issues, an ongoing debate has raged on the issue of delinking certification and active voting membership. Delinkage advocates plan to resubmit the bylaw amendments which last winter failed to gain the requisite two-thirds majority. Then 60% of active members favored the proposal, and it is likely that an even larger percentage of associate and affiliate members support the measure. Dr. Edith Sabshin, Chairman of the Committee on Associate and Affiliate Membership, heads the group that will propose resubmission, and the debate will be taken up again at the December meeting of the Executive Council. Both Board and Council endorsed the measure at the December 1990 meetings in Miami Beach.
Many opposing delinkage are concerned that it might result in a loss of interest in certification as a credential attesting the quality of our graduates. In light of this debate, Dr. Margolis and I have appointed a special Task Force to Assess Members' Views on Certification, chaired jointly by Morris Peltz of San Francisco and Daniel Buie of Boston. They will report at the December meetings. Regardless of the outcome of the delinkage question, and acknowledging the splendid job done by the current certification committee, we feel it important to continue studying the best approach to certification. One issue is whether changes can be effected that will not only maintain standards but also encourage a greater number of applications. We are determined to promote the idea of certification as an important developmental step in an analyst's career, regardless of whether certification remains a requirement for voting membership. We do not believe that certification will become obsolete in the event of delinkage, but we are preparing to see that in either case it does not.
Very closely allied to this matter is the need for dialogue throughout the Association regarding the creation of an external certifying body that will legitimate credentialed members in the eyes of the outside world. At one point in the long effort to gain a subspecialty certification in psychoanalysis under the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, we were given approval and a major hand in the creation and oversight of a subspecialty Board. However, the membership voted against accepting that opportunity. Now the Committee on External Credentialing, under the able leadership of Drs. Carl Davis and Donald Burnham, has made new inquiries and has had discussions from which recommendations will emerge for a new certifying body operating either independently or under existing organizations like the American Board. It seems clear that unless the American Psychoanalytic Association takes the lead in promoting the creation of such a body, other groups will do so, and we will risk being ignored by the psychiatric world and third-party payers. Although it is a daunting task to form alliances with other psychoanalytic organizations without endangering our standards and our autonomy, it is a task that is both possible and necessary. However, no effort by Dr. Burnham's committee or any other component of the Association can succeed in this matter without the membership's thoughtful consideration and backing. A more intense dialogue must be generated among ourselves about what appears to me an essential endeavor if we are to survive; by backing it we may extend rather than sacrifice the influence and prestige of our organization.
External certification would allow a restructuring of the Board and Council along lines suggested in a letter by Robert Pyles in the last number of TAP. I urge you to review that letter. Dr. Margolis and I are appointing a Task
Force to study a restructuring, which Dr. Pyles has agreed to co-chair.
This past summer in Buenos Aires the International Psychoanalytical Association held its 35th Congress—the first time it has met in Latin America. (See article on p. 22) Also for the first time, a Latin American, Horacio Etchegoyen, was chosen as president-elect. He will succeed Joseph Sandler in the summer of 1993, when the Congress is held in Amsterdam. Two years later, in 1995, the 37th Congress will be held in San Francisco, and a North American president-elect will be chosen to succeed Dr. Etchegoyen. The election held in Buenos Aires marks the last time an IPA president will be elected by the relatively small proportion of voting members who attend the Congresses. Henceforth, elections will be by worldwide mail ballot, and members unable to attend a Congress will not be disenfranchised.
Among the highlights of the Congress for Dr. Margolis, Mrs. Fischer, and me, who attended on behalf of The American, were discussions about training standards and their enforcement. These occured both at the presidents' meeting and at a subsequent meeting of training directors. Firm adherance to the standard of a frequency of 4-5 times per week for training and control analysis was reaffirmed. Also, an extensive presentation of the IPA's financial outlook was presented at the Business Meeting, by the new treasurer, Peter Fonagy of London, who succeeded Harold Schlossman of New York. The presentation resulted in a dues increase of $25.00 per member for North Americans and Europeans.
The scientific program, with its focus on psychic change, was varied and rich, thanks to the able leadership of Harold Blum, who chaired the hardworking Program Committee. Over three thousand individuals registered for the Congress, and despite the cordiality and gracious attitude of our Argentinean hosts, we were vastly outnumbered at the scientific meetings. I estimate that North Americans and Europeans together constituted but one-tenth of the total. The popularity of psychoanalysis in the large cities of South America makes especially important our efforts to maintain the IPA's high standards, and I know that Dr. Etchegoyen, like Dr. Sandler before him, strongly supports their maintenance.
I look forward to meeting with you in New York.