In my first few months as President I have become aware of a new optimism and a renewal of interest among the membership. Of late, the Executive Committee and members of Board and Council have been reviewing reports from our many committees and task forces, and hope soon to discuss their recommendations on a broader basis. To this end, we are planning a Working Conference, to be held perhaps next June, in which a series of small workshops will discuss in detail the deliberations and conclusions of certain of the task forces created last year; which are studying issues of membership and organizational structure of The American.
Meanwhile, in meetings with the leadership committee on Psychoanalysis of the National Federation of Societies for Clinical Social Work over the past two years, we have been made aware of the clinical work required of graduate students pursuing Diplomate in Clinical Social Work. Ms. Rosemarie Gaeta, Chair of the committee, asks for recognition by The American of the Diplomate as being equivalent to the M.D. or Ph.D., for purposes of admitting MSWs holding that credential without requiring a national waiver for full psychoanalytic training in The American. This entire matter involves further examination and discussion on all organizational levels which are studying issues of membership and structure of The American. This serves to illustrate so clearly that important matters of policy in The American are decided through judicious and reasonable process involving all units and layers of the organization.
As many of you may know, it has been customary in recent years for officers of The American to meet regularly with their counterparts in both the American Psychiatric Association and the International Psychoanalytical Association. These meetings, at which topics of mutual interest and concern are discussed, have been productive and are to be continued. If members have any ideas or comments regarding our relations with these organizations, I would be delighted to hear from them.
Over the past three years, officers of The American have taken the initiative in meeting with other mental health organizations, including Division 39 of the American Psychological Association and the four provisional affiliate societies of the IPA. Lately these meetings have centered on issues of common concern such as third-party payers (government agencies, insurance companies, HMOs, etc.), and proactive measures to inform these agencies fully about the efficacy and cost effectiveness of psychoanalysis and psychoanalytic therapy in the treatment of mental health problems.
On July 21 a joint meeting was held in London between the presidents of all societies affiliated with the IPA and the IPA Executive Council. Marvin Margolis and I attended as representatives of The American, along with Helen Meyers, Gunther Perdigao, and Edward Nersessian, who represented their respective societies. The meeting had been called by Joseph Sandler, IPA President, to address an issue of major importance. A group of European and South American societies, headed by Paul Israel of France and James Innes-Smith, formerly of Canada and presently of Belgium, proposed a change in the structure and governance of the IPA. Some of these societies, particularly the European, had been meeting to discuss these changes for the past few years. Finally, on July 20, a pre-meeting was held to formulate specific proposals for presentation at the joint meeting the following day. Drs. Meyers and Nersessian attended the pre-meeting. After a series of modifications, the final proposal for changes were as follows: (1) a Council of Presidents from all IPA Affiliate Societies would replace the nine vice-presidents provided for in the current arrangement and, with the remaining elected officers, would constitute the IPA's executive body; (2) these officers would be elected by the Council of Presidents instead of by the membership. The proposal met strong objections from the American, Canadian, and British societies, including the four North American societies not affiliated with The American, and some of the South American societies. The proposed changes in governance were opposed for several basic reasons: (1) the proposals are regressive and less democratic in nature; (2) they would render the IPA a federation rather than a membership organization; and (3) the position of The American would be significantly weakened unless voting procedures included the principle of proportional representation.
The American's position was clearly stated: while the establishment of a Council of Presidents might be a very favorable development, it should be constituted as an advisory rather than an executive body, the IPA officers, including the vice-presidents, should continue to be elected by the membership at large and should continue as the Executive Council with their present power intact. In a final comment at the meeting, I extended my compliments to Paul Israel and James Innes-Smith for their dedicated efforts to improve the IPA's governance. The meeting ended in a very conciliatory and friendly fashion, with a considerable reduction in tension. Representatives were appointed from each of the three geographical areas (Europe, South America, and North America) to consult with leaders in their areas to nominate a slate of persons, of whom one will be selected by Dr. Sandler from each of the three major geographical areas. They will then confer with the Executive Council of the IPA in formulating specific proposals for further discussion and an eventual vote by the IPA membership.
I wish to emphasize the general position of The American's Executive Committee regarding the importance of belonging to this international psychoanalytic organization and to maintaining a strong presence there. The more we broaden the base of psychoanalysis throughout the world, the more we strengthen our own base. We must bring a strong influence to bear in order to maintain standards of training and practice at their current levels and to advance psychoanalysis as an important science of the mind and a major therapeutic interventions for disturbances of the mind.
Closer to home, The Title Key Word and Author Index to Psychoanalytic Journals, edited by Paul Mosher and first published by The American in 1987, appeared last year in an updated Second Edition. Again Dr. Mosher has donated all proceeds to The American. Sold at a very moderate price, this is an extremely useful softcover volume which, if commercially published, would cost two to
three times as much. I urge its purchase by all.
The Index was prepared by Dr. Mosher using the Jourlit database developed by Stanley Goodman and Vann Spruiell, who retain the copyright but have given their express consent for this publication. As often such highly specialized activities go unsung, I wish to congratulate all concerned on a major contribution to the field of psychoanalysis.
In this connection, another new development is in the offing, as plans are presently being formulated to publish, on a single CD ROM disc, both an index and the actual content of every work in the major psychoanalytic journals from the very beginnings to the present. I will lend whatever support I can to the progress of this major undertaking, and would like to add a strong note of appreciation to the Committee on Scientific Activities, chaired by Alvin Frank, and to Dr. Vann Spruiell's subcommittee. I look forward to seeing many of my colleagues at the December meetings.