The cold war has ended, probably as it began, with neither a bang nor a whimper. Which war? The one that for decades created an invisible wall between members and candidates. Just as delinkage united certified and not-yet-certified analysts, an end to the official stratification of The American by member status was achieved by forward-looking leaders at the administrative meetings held this past May in Chicago. All of us had seen it coming: affiliate members began wearing white name tags at meetings; select candidates had for years been “tapped” in increasing numbers for membership on various committees; and then, eighteen months ago, the Candidates Council, recently renamed the Affiliates Council, was established as an official entity within The American.
Yet, many candidates felt still that we were jostling one another in the large entrance hall, eyeing the watchman who stood at the threshold to the drawing room. A few, no doubt, will insist that the changes I will describe here are illusory, and that Affiliates Council leaders have been duped into compliance. Does it matter that president-elect Glenn Good and I were invited to Chicago to represent affiliate members? That we not only were invited to attend meetings of the Steering Committee, Coordinating Committee, Executive Council, Board on Professional Standards, and Executive Committee, but were also encouraged to participate? Is it truly consequential that Lawrence Chalfin and Donald Rosenblitt seated us with them at the head of the table during the entire BOPS meeting? That they, along with Judith Schachter, David Hurst, Marvin Margolis, and Stephen Firestein, devoted a warm and convivial ninety minutes of the Executive Committee meeting on Sunday to the concerns and projects of the Affiliates Council?
But enough rhetoric. I felt privileged to participate in what from the perspective of candidates was without question an historic meeting of The American. Along with the symbolic significance of these events, substantive changes occurred that will allow affiliate members to participate in nearly every committee of The American. Many committee chairs opened their doors to candidates as full committee members, and they did so publicly, without equivocation, and for the first time. With the support and help of the chair of the Membership Committee, Maimon Leavitt, the Affiliates Council proposal to reduce dues for incoming affiliate members was approved by a vote of the Executive Council. Prior to the vote, the proposal had been amended to reduce the dues still further. Effective immediately, candidates who become affiliate members in their first year will be assessed only $85.00 in dues for each of the first two years of their membership. Those who join in their second year or later will pay the reduced amount for one year. The Affiliates Council has made membership recruitment one of its priorities, and we hope that this easement will attract new members. Thanks are owed to Affiliates Council secretary Katherine Fraser and to the Membership Committee under Nancy Brehm for their enlightened and well-timed proposal. This change sets the stage for what all of us anticipate will be a successful membership drive to be launched by the Affiliates Council this fall.
At the meetings of the Steering Committee and the Coordinating Committee, respectively, David Hurst, secretary of The American and Affiliates Council liaison with the Executive Committee, and chair Larry Chalfin of BOPS encouraged committee chairs to accept candidates as members of committees.
With the encouragement of chair Stephen Morgenstern of the Committee on Institutes, another first occurred: I sat in on about an hour's worth of the committee's deliberations. As it happened, my arrival coincided with the airing of a rather sensitive issue and, as Larry Chalfin later noted, “the world did not end.” Personally, I was impressed by the collegiality and spontaneity of the discussion, as well as by what seemed a respectful restraint exercised by the participants when it came to a question of imposing their collective will upon an institute.
During the three days of the meeting I was struck by the frequent casual comments directed my way, usually in a joking manner, that implied that one must have a screw loose to be involved in committee work. Yet here these analysts were, attending the meeting at their own expense, with no scientific program scheduled, and they were quite passionate about their particular projects. Given the external threats to psychoanalysis, it is not surprising to me that so many are working so diligently on behalf of a far greater number, to shore up both the profession and its standards. It also seemed to me that these same people were having some fun, enjoying each other's company, and getting away from the office.
It was particularly gratifying to hear leaders on both Board and Council emphasize again and again the importance of preserving not just standards, but practice, without which standards are moot. On the other hand, it was dismaying to witness at the Executive Council meeting a confusing commingling of a potentially divisive issue, that of restructuring the leadership of The American, with one as important as maintaining our lobbying presence in Washington.
I wish to address myself now to any candidates who have not yet joined The American. First, we need you to become members. Without you, we are poorer. With you, we strengthen both The American and U.S. psychoanalysis generally. Now that membership is more affordable, we hope that you will join. Second, we want you to think about involvement on a committee. In the labyrinth of The American, you may not know what all of the committees do. Now, thanks in large measure to the dedicated work of Michael Bader, a published guide to The American's functioning, including the mission of each committee, should soon be in the hands of members. This project, long contemplated, would never have been moved to the front burner without the work of the Affiliates Council, and it will greatly assist us in our drive to gather new members. But for us to truly succeed in this effort, it is imperative that all members—affiliate, active, and life—encourage nonmember candidates to join us. Personal contact will do much more than these written words ever can. I am trying to convey the spirit of the enormous changes Glenn Good and I witnessed in Chicago. These changes announced to us in the clearest possible way that candidates are welcome to work on committees, almost without exception, and to contribute their talents fully to The American.
Conferring with Glenn after the meeting, I found that we shared a deeply felt sense that something valuable had occurred for us personally—as candidates, as members, as leaders, and as analysts. We were honored to step over the threshold, the watchman smiling and extending an open hand.