One of the unique and more problematic activities of the American Psychoanalytic Association is its examination and certification of its members' competence to practice their profession. Other professional societies are generally associations whose members' competence is determined by universities, licensing boards, or other independent certifying authorities. The American was founded 82 years ago as an association of those interested in psychoanalysis, but in the second decade of its life it was decided that membership should constitute endorsement to the public that an individual is a competent analyst. At that time there were few analysts in this country, and no organized training programs. As analysis grew slowly in the 1930s and 1940s, institutes were formed and the power to oversee and accredit their graduates was centralized in The American. When the present bylaws were adopted in 1946, the Board on Professional Standards came into being as the agency responsible for that function. There were still only a few hundred American analysts, and outside of The American there seemed no other institution available to ensure competence.
As psychoanalysis grew rapidly over the next two decades, many expected educational agencies to emerge. In his 1955 Presidential Address, Ives Hendrick said, “Our success … hugely magnified by our growth in numbers and by the esteem of other medical groups, has given us unsought and unexpected powers, the equivalent of powers of faculty appointment, selection of students, and the curriculum policies of universities, and the powers of accreditation of specialty groups by Boards recognized by the A.M.A. This is the situation today; it certainly will not always be so, and eventually we will be assimilated within the fabric of those cultural sanctions which uphold the more traditional professional disciplines. But at present, it is ‘our’ responsibility and it is up to ‘us’ to do this job with sincerity, intelligence, and intrepidity.” In the 35 years since Hendrick's address the assimilation he predicted has not occurred. From time to time various possibilities have been considered, such as the setting up of a board of psychoanalysis under the auspices of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, but nothing substantive in that direction has ever been done.
The principle that the granting of membership in The American constitutes endorsement of competence long guided the membership committee of BOPS. The term certification was not used until 1977, when a small and hitherto unknown group sought recognition by the United States Department of Education as the sole accrediting agency for schools of psychoanalysis. This effort was opposed by The American, which took the position that since membership was contingent on the Board's approval of each member's training, competence, and character, certification in psychoanalysis was in fact equivalent to certification in the various medical specialties. For the sake of clarity the Board's granting of membership was thereafter called certification, and a separate Committee on Certification was created.
Dissatisfaction with the situation grew over the succeeding years. Many analysts argued that full membership should be automatic upon graduation from an accredited institute. There was opposition both to the principle that The American should have the final say about an analyst's qualifications and to the way that power was exercised. Proposals to “delink” membership from certification were submitted to the membership in 1990 and 1991. The first was defeated narrowly, but the second passed overwhelmingly.
But even now that certification has ceased being a requirement for membership, it remains a source of dissatisfaction and debate. Because of this, a BOPS task force was formed to study the situation. Following is a summary of its report and several other contributions to the continuing debate.