In the recent referendum approximately sixty percent of those who voted were in favor of the proposal to “delink” membership from certification. This, however, fell short of the two-thirds majority required for passage. Many of us who had worked to develop the amendment were disappointed by this outcome but recognized that we may not have been effective in making the case for this important step in the development of the American. We have formed an informal “Group to Strengthen Membership” in hopes of achieving passage of this crucial bylaws amendment. We feel that maintaining the linkage of certification with membership is not in keeping with the intent of certification and that it weakens both certification and membership.
In recent years the leadership of the American has been much more aware of the need to make the organization responsive to the concerns of the membership and to increase involvement and participation in its activities by a wider range of members. The bylaws amendment, carefully crafted by the Task Force and approved by both the Board and Council, is but another step in this process of making the American more accessible to its members. It serves to differentiate the functions of the Board and Council and will not undermine the role or authority of the Board in setting and maintaining educational standards.
Fewer than fifty percent of the graduates of our affiliated institutes in recent years have become full time members of the American. There are now more than 800 graduates who are limited to an “associate” membership and many more who never join at all. Meanwhile the ranks of the active membership are aging at an alarming rate; currently 37% of full members are in the “life member” category, a percentage that has been increasing steadily in recent years.
Many recent graduates are not eager to pursue certification immediately upon completion of their training and, in fact, most analysts who are certified achieve this some years after their graduation. This is not a reflection on their analytic education but represents the natural progression in the establishment of one's analytic identity. We see little advantage in relegating our younger colleages to a provisional category of membership—a situation which is potentially harmful to both the individual and the organization.
On the other hand, if the membership is going to continue to be linked with certification this threatens the integrity of the certification process. In attempting to make certification “user friendly” there are inevitable pressures to address the membership problem described above. In his report to B.O.P.S. in New Orleans, Dr. Arthur Rosenbaum, Chairman of the Certification Committee, acknowledged that “… the confusing membership issue entered into our deliberations as an intrusion. Though realistic, it is experienced by the committee in a manner that invites compromise.”
We plan to continue our educative efforts and to reintroduce the delinkage amendment at the meetings of the American in December with the hope that it will be resubmitted for a vote of the members early next year.
For the “Group to Srengthen Membership,”
Richard P. Fox, M.D.
Edith Sabshin, M.D.
Dan Buie, M.D.