Two major proposals dominated discussion at the Board on Professional Standards meeting on December 13. BOPS approved the bylaws of the Psychoanalytic Consortium; it then advised discharging the Joint Committee on External Credentialing and forming a new BOPS committee to deal with that issue. The Board also approved the exploration of a proposal to allow “local option” in accepting applicants for training who currently must be granted waivers. Lawrence Chalfin, chair of BOPS, opened the meeting by announcing that Bobbi Fisher has been retained to develop a strategic plan for a public information initiative. Chalfin also reported on his work as liaison to the American Psychiatric Association and took issue with Judith Schachter, president of The American, who in a TAP column (29/4) had described BOPS as “the accrediting and credentialing committee of the Council” (see Chalfin's column, page 8).
Much of the morning session was devoted to discussing the report of the Joint Committee on External Credentialing, chaired by Allan Rosenblatt. At the time the committee was formed, it was felt that a joint committee of Board and Council would best represent all interests. BOPS secretary Donald Rosenblitt reported that the Coordinating Committee had discussed the report of the External Credentialing Committee and was appreciative of the difficult work it had accomplished. However, Rosenblitt also reported a strong consensus that options on accreditation of institutes require further evaluation and that this would more appropriately be done by a committee of the Board. When the joint committee was established, the general belief was that credentialing might involve the certification of individuals, but this has turned out not to be the case.
Because Chalfin was an active participant in debating the issue, he relinquished the chair to Rosenblitt in the interest of fairness. Rosenblatt then reported his committee's recommendation that The American take one of two actions. The first option would be to form a credentialing board independent of The American, perhaps including the four independent IPA institutes; the second would be to join with other members of the Psychoanalytic Consortium in forming a board. The Consortium is composed of Division 39 of the American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, and the National Membership Committee on Psychoanalysis in Clinical Social Work, together with The American.
Rosenblatt said that although the NAAP/ABAP bid to become U.S. accrediting agency for psychoanalysis has been denied by the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation, NAAP/ABAP is known for its tenacity. It may choose to litigate the CORPA decision or claim in a few years to have rectified its deficiencies and reapply. Rosenblatt reported that nineteen institutes had responded to a survey on the credentialing question, and thirteen leaned toward working with others. Within the committee there was disagreement; four of the original ten members had recently resigned. Those who opposed circulating the survey were offered the opportunity to file a minority report, but they declined. Rosenblatt pointed out that the committee had been charged “to study and recommend measures the association can take to promote psychoanalytic practice through seeking credentialing of our members by outside organizations.” He observed that the current Board may consider this an unacceptable mission.
Those who had resigned then spoke. They praised Rosenblatt's integrity in chairing the committee meetings in a fair and open manner. Their reasons for resignation varied. Some felt that the final report was tilted too much in favor of external credentialing and failed to present the opinion against it. Others mentioned that the need for external accreditation was no longer urgent and that the issue was only causing division within The American. It was mentioned that the original committee never reached a consensus and that a great deal of external pressure had been exerted on the committee. The report generated much discussion from the floor; suggested action ranged from doing nothing, to The American's forming its own board, to joining with the IPA institutes, to working with the Consortium. It was noted that with so much disagreement within the organization, the committee was faced with an impossible task.
Judith Schachter assured the Board that there were no immediate plans to vote on joining a credentialing organization, and that in fact none currently exists. Personally, she disagreed that a new committee of BOPS should be established; she did not think it would unearth any possibilities left unexplored by the joint committee. However, she allowed that a committee of BOPS might inspire more confidence and might ease recent tensions.
The afternoon session began with a vote on a motion by Harold Kolansky. He moved that BOPS recommend (1) that the president of The American and the chair of BOPS discharge the Joint Committee on External Credentialing, with a vote of thanks to the chair and to committee members past and present; and (2) that the chair of BOPS appoint a new committee of the Board, representing a wide range of opinion, to explore options for both internal and external credentialing. The proposal was carried, with only three dissenting votes. The following day, the Executive Council voted to recommend continuing the joint committee (see article, page 4).
Chalfin resumed the chair for discussion of the bylaws of the Psychoanalytic Consortium. Two sticking points emerged. One area of contention was whether bylaws were at all needed. The other was the statement, in the introduction to the bylaws, that the Consortium “is committed to ensuring the highest standards of training and practice.” Both points spoke to a concern that to affiliate formally with groups with lower standards of analytic training than The American would be lend tacit approval to those standards.
Marvin Margolis, who has been instrumental in organizing the Consortium and has represented The American there, said that the bylaws were intended to protect member organizations; they specify that no action can be taken by the Consortium without the unanimous approval of all four parties. Many spoke in favor of passage, in the belief that it is safer to have bylaws when involved with other groups. The American has been an active member in the Consortium in the arenas of health care lobbying and the CORPA decision.
Several voiced the concern that “ensuring the highest standards” might be interpreted as agreement by The American that the standards of all member organizations are indeed the highest. Morton Reiser proposed, as an amendment, that the phrase be changed to “promoting high quality training”; the proposal was narrowly defeated. Richard Fox's motion that the bylaws be approved was then passed, with only seven in opposition.
Phyllis Tyson, chair of the Committee on Preparedness and Progress (successor to CNMCT), reported that the committee had now processed 208 applications for waiver and had recommended 194 on behalf of 25 of the 29 institutes. Tyson commented that the institutes have learned to evaluate nonmedical applicants effectively. She and her committee recommended a “local option” whereby institutes may accept, without requesting a waiver, candidates holding the highest clinical degree generally awarded in any one of the traditional mental health disciplines. The Board, without dissent, authorized Tyson, in collaboration with other appropriate Board leaders, to present a specific proposal at the May meeting. She requested one waiver, which was approved by the Board.
Rosenblitt then presented the report of the Ad Hoc Committee on IPA Membership, which recommended that membership be approved for five analysts from IPA institutes. The Board unanimously approved Carole L Betts, Roni O. Cohen, Helen K. Gediman, William M. Greenstadt, and Gail S. Reed. Rosenblitt commented that they were “a quite distinguished group who have successfully achieved requisite educational experiences through their formal and post-institute training experiences.”
Arthur Rosenbaum, chair of the Committee on Certification, announced that 18 of 26 applicants were approved (see accompanying box). Of 16 new applications, 10 were approved; of 10 deferred applications, 7. One applicant applied under the new seven-year rule, which allows fewer case summaries for analysts who are seven years past graduation. Rosenbaum observed that in spite of recent changes making the procedure less difficult, there has been a decreasing number of applications for certification. Prior to 1991, about fifty members applied each year. The greatest hurdle to achieving certification, he reported, seems to be writing about psychoanalytic process; about half of all applicants fail to describe it adequately.
Kenneth Cohen, chair of the Ad Hoc Committee on Training Analyst Selection, reported on the committee's survey. Half of the institutes have responded to a second questionnaire. The results show no universal policy on training analyst selection, although the character of the proposed training analyst is a major factor in selection. Procedures for reviewing the analyst's clinical work vary widely from institute to institute. No institute reports a requirement for a particular theoretical orientation. Cohen added that in the past decade there have been thirteen requests for waiver of the immersion standards.
Richard Fox, chair of the BOPS Committee on Membership, announced 47 new members. Seven are general members, and 40 are affiliate members; 21 are men, and 26 are women. Their average length of training is 8.8 years, and their average age at graduation is 42.6, a decrease from last year. The total membership of The American has risen by 75 since May.
Stephen Morgenstern, chair of the Committee on Institutes, asked that 17 members be approved as training analysts. Approved by the Board were Aimee P. Nover of Baltimore-Washington; Ellen G. Blumenthal of Boston; Rena L. Kay and Sarah M. Knox of Cincinnati; and Candace Cotlove, Barnet D. Malin, and Miriam F. Tasini of Los Angeles. Also approved were Jacquelyn A. Robinson of New Orleans; Suzanne M. Gassner, Steven H. Goldberg, and Abby Wolfson of San Francisco; Joanne Seltzer of Southern California; Kathryn J. Zerbe of Topeka; Pirkko Graves, Karl Derek Hawver, and Susan G. Lazar of Washington; and Stanley G. Possick of Western New England. Approved for appointment as geographic rule training analyst was James S. Robinson of New Orleans. Samuel Rubin of the Child Analysis Committee then called for a vote for child/adolescent supervising analysts. Approved were Calvern E. Narcisi of Denver, Sterrett Mayson of the Philadelphia Association, and Mary Jane Otte of San Francisco. Approved as geographic rule child supervising analyst was Robert D. Gillman of Cleveland.
Edward Schiff, chair of the Ad Hoc Committee on Selection Issues, presented a comprehensive document covering the qualities needed in analysts selecting candidates. Schiff emphasized the need to be flexible, to look for potential, and to have a broad perspective rather than relying on static, objective criteria. Chalfin praised the report as “thoughtful, inspiring, and illuminating.”
David Carlson, Richard Fox, Deanna Holtzman, Gunther Perdigao, and Phyllis Tyson were elected to the nominating committee to select two candidates for the chair of BOPS. This was the first such election in which the entire committee was required to be elected by the Fellows.
Ralph Roughton reported, as chair of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee on Issues of Homosexuality, that nine or ten institutes had openly gay candidates. He cautioned that public perception of The American in regard to its attitude about homosexuality remains negative and that the need to reexamine beliefs and attitudes remains.
Deanna Holtzman, chair of the Committee on Research and Special Training, requested and received approval for a CORST waiver.