This is my first column as chair of the Board on Professional Standards. The sixty-five member Board consists of two Fellows from each of the twenty-nine institutes; one Fellow-at-Large (the immediate past chair of the Board), who serves a three-year term; the officers of the Association (president, president-elect, secretary, and treasurer); and the secretary and chair of the Board. The chair is elected by the Fellows, from a slate chosen by a five-person nominating committee, and appoints the secretary with the approval of the Fellows.
The Board was originally created as a national body with responsibility for setting standards for membership, certification, and the education of candidates. Educational standards for candidates are enunciated in a set of written requirements and are maintained and continuously reevaluated by the Boards standing committees. The Committee on Institutes is responsible for periodic site visits; the Committee on New Training Facilities aids in the development of educational procedures in study groups and other programs applying for institute status; the Committee on Nonmedical Clinical Training and the Committee on Research and Special Training set standards of eligibility and procedures for evaluating applicants for waivers; the Committee on Child and Adolescent Analysis sets standards in those areas; the Committee on Membership determines eligibility for membership; and the Committee on Psychoanalytic Education studies our educational processes. The Committee on Certification certifies graduates and offers conferences and workshops to familiarize candidates and graduates with its procedures.
The Board has an opportunity to benefit from the experience of the Committee on Institutes. COI, increasingly knowledgeable about institute functioning, has become more aware of the issues involved in psychoanalytic educational organizations, and of institute patterns of evolution, decline, and recovery. In recent years many institutes have reorganized in the direction of greater faculty participation and responsibility. These internal changes, along with external pressures related to the changing environment for analytic practice and education, have created both challenges and opportunities for our educational programs. COI has come to understand that many different paths can be taken to an education that meets our standards.
A revision of the published standards is currently under way. Fellows and institutes will play essential roles in this process. I anticipate that the new standards will emphasize and clarify the principles underlying our educational procedures and will reflect the changes I spoke of in my
recent TAP interview (28/2): “Psychoanalysis has become more open, theoretically better balanced, and mature. There has been a decrease in dogma as well as in the authoritarian stance taken by analysts and analytic teachers. Our institutes are less stratified, and we generally convey a more inquiring attitude, with a greater emphasis on learning than on the authoritarian passing down of knowledge. Our students and faculty are more inquiring…. All of this has enriched our science and our educational processes.”
An approach that emphasizes principles may facilitate the Board's ability to provide balanced and creative solutions to problems engendered by institute change and external pressures. The Board has a complex task and needs to balance its many responsibilities, most of which come into play in any issue it confronts; these include the protection and furtherance of candidate education, the viability and growth of institutes, and the development of graduates and faculty. All of our actions, however great or small, should reflect a process of thoughtful consideration ensuring that our ideals will be manifested in our deeds.
I believe that the Board should work together with the institutes in a collegial and creative manner that facilitates solutions to problems. It should be available as a consultative body, an ally of the institutes rather than an outside force imposing rules. It must be careful that it does not inadvertently encumber an institutes development.
While Fellows of the Board represent their institutes, their responsibilities are in fact broader, as they also represent the Board as a standard-setting body for The American. Traditionally, most of the Board's business has been conducted by its committees, which then report their deliberations and recommendations to the Fellows for discussion and approval. In recent years, however, a number of issues, whether it be waivers, bylaws changes, or whatever, have required full Board participation and discussion. Because decisions on such matters will continue to be an important part of the Board's business, BOPS must better structure its approach to these matters so that Fellows can be more fully informed on the many complex issues they must decide. The officers of the Board and Council should not alone decide in matters of great import for the future of psychoanalysis, nor should they unduly influence such decisions. What is required is a truly democratic process of discussion and communication by the Fellows and by the institutes, which must ultimately bear the consequences of change or failure to change.
Fellows are chosen from the most distinguished and experienced educators in the institutes. They, along with the institute directors and the chairs of local education committees, have been underutilized and underrecognized as a source of leadership. To allow their more effective participation, the Fellows and the institutes' education committees will be more fully informed, in a more timely fashion, so that when votes are taken we will all feel confident in the outcome.
We need also to reflect on ways of structuring Board meetings that will allow us the time for discussing important issues and engaging the creative interest of the Fellows. Just as local faculty meetings and the recent Meeting of Members have, in order to free up time for substantive discussion, moved away from requiring full reports from every committee, so too should Board meetings facilitate such exchanges of information and opinion.
These changes are important in our effort to become a more truly democratic body. The American has many members who can bring their imagination and creativity to bear on our profession and its needs and concerns. I welcome the ideas of any member, graduate or candidate, who wishes to speak to me personally, thereby giving greater voice to the wisdom that abides in our membership.