Apropos of the laid-back southern California style, the Board on Professional Standards (BOPS) moved forward with collegiality and congeniality on two major proposals at its May 1 meeting in Los Angeles. BOPS plans to send to the institutes for their comments a proposal to allow local institutes increased autonomy selecting candidates requiring waivers. It also approved a bylaw amendment proposal to automatically advance membership from affiliate to active at the time of a candidate's graduation. Donald Rosenblitt, current secretary of BOPS, was elected to the office of chair of the Board and will succeed Lawrence Chalfin at the May 1997 meeting (see article on page 1).
A bylaw change allowing greater autonomy to institutes to select candidates with degrees in mental health who do not have a terminal clinical degree was proposed by the Committee on Preparedness and Progression (COPAP). Phyllis Tyson, chair of COPAP, said the committee has extensive experience evaluating waiver applications and applicants. Because institutes have proven to be rigorous and experienced in evaluating waivers for mental health professionals, the committee recommended institutes should do so without the need to request a waiver. COPAP, in consultation with the Coordinating Committee of BOPS, proposed a possible approach in which the applicant for candidacy would require a degree in mental health, and eligibility and suitability would be based on an overall assessment. (See Chalfin's article on page 8 for a fuller discussion.) Chalfin asked for a full and free exchange. This resulted in the most differing opinions of the day.
Some fellows questioned the wisdom of dropping the requirement for the highest degree in a mental health discipline. This would allow master's-level social workers, among others, to be accepted. Tyson commented that if BOPS were more comfortable with the highest degree requirement it would be used. Some members commented that the intended latitude of the draft might not make it practical. For example, the oversight function by the Committee on Institutes (COI) was unclear. Stephen Morgenstern, chair of COI, replied that COI could develop safeguards.
Irwin Marill said the central issue was where decisions are best made and in his opinion it was with the institutes. Samuel Rubin observed that two major issues were institute responsibility and who The American wishes to train. Michael Singer remarked that the discussion was part of a philosophical change within The American, which has been moving to less centralized control. Several fellows commented that the question was if the Board felt the institutes could be trusted, and it was mentioned that institutes have a self-interest to maintain a high quality. Chalfin commented that he has witnessed a quest for excellence throughout the organization.
The document will be revised and sent to the institutes for a response by September 15. A second draft is planned by October 1 in order to allow a vote at BOPS in December. If approved the proposal will be put into formal bylaw language and sent for a vote to the membership next year.
Richard Fox, chair of the Committee on Membership, reported that upon graduation many affiliate members never apply for active membership. According to The American's bylaws they would have to be dropped from membership after six months. The Membership Committee has found that essentially all graduates meet or exceed minimal training standards. It recommended a bylaw change to automatically advance affiliate members with full clinical training to active membership upon graduation. This recommendation was passed with little discussion, and Fox contrasted the ease of passage to the agony of the past debate on delinking active membership from certification.
Pamela Jennings spoke on the work of the Committee on Racial and Ethnic Diversity and received an enthusiastic response.
Jennings, in her first report to BOPS, explained the goals and activities of the two-year-old committee. It has formed five subcommittees: scientific program, community outreach, recruitment and training, institute progression, and international outreach. Among the goals already reached is the successful new discussion group concerning analysis with analyst and analysand of different cultures, race, or ethnic group. The committee wished advice on how best to get the component institutes and societies of The American involved. Several fellows of BOPS spoke of their institutes experience in reaching out to various local communities, indicating a widespread interest among the institutes toward diversity. Chalfin praised the report.
The most disturbing report came at the end of the long day. Samuel Rubin gave the report for the Task Force on Child and Adolescent Analysis chaired by Martin Silverman. The task force is greatly concerned about the low number of child analytic cases and warned that child analysis “is threatened with extinction in many locations.” The task force recommended that The American act strongly to encourage and facilitate child training. It advised ending the practice of splitting child from adult training and establishing unitary training. It recommended that case finding be improved and training cases begin earlier. Its most far-reaching recommendation was that the minimal standards of training be revised to allow adult analytic credit for a child or adolescent case. The group also called for increasing the number of child papers at the national meetings and in JAPA, and to
repair the rift with the Association for Child Psychoanalysis. Only limited discussion followed, and it revolved around the proposal to allow one child case to replace one adult case in training. Chalfin noted it was late in the day and the ideas deserve full discussion, which will occur at the December meeting.
Arthur Rosenbaum of the Committee on Certification reported that seventeen members had been certified (see box). The committee approved eleven of eighteen new applications and six of six continued applications. Three applications fell under the new rule requiring only two written cases for members seven or more years post-graduation. Rosenbaum will be completing his term, which began in 1990. He reflected that the committee maintained standards while creating a more “user-friendly” application. The extent of evolution was from the requirement to evaluate each and every case to that of three cases of the applicant's choice (preferably recent ones). Also, he noted an important shift from the use of applications to evaluate the quality of institute training. Most recently the committee has been providing helpful feedback to deferred applicants and aid in writing about the analytic process.
Richard Fox announced that there were twenty-seven applicants for active membership. They fulfilled requirements and were unanimously passed by the Board. Twenty were medical doctors, five psychologists, one a doctor of social work and one a professor of law. Nineteen of the twenty-seven were men. The average age was forty-seven, and the average length of training was 8.2 years. The Affiliates Council has been actively recruiting candidates. Seventy-nine new members are affiliates, which means 70 percent of the candidates are members.
Stephen Morgenstern of COI said the committee's goal was facilitating the ambiance within institutes through the use of the site visit, and that institutes must learn to listen to all the voices in the institute. He said there is a need to standardize the way the site report is presented to the institutes and that the committee is writing a site-visit manual and a functional annual report.
The Board unanimously approved the following appointments for training and supervising analysts: Anna Ornstein of Cincinnati; Antonio U. Beltramini, Arnold Rothstein, and Steven J. Wein of New York; Barbara Deutsch and Alan Zients of New York University (NYU); and Gerald I. Fogel of San Francisco. Peter Buckley of Columbia was appointed training analyst, and Burton A. Lerner of Columbia was appointed supervising analyst. Appointed geographic rule training and supervising analysts were Thomas W. Campbell of St. Louis for Nashville and Gerald I. Fogel of San Francisco for Portland. Also appointed training analysts under the geographic rule were Becquer Benalcazar and Kathryn J. Zerbe, both of Topeka, for Kansas City, and John Hitchcock of Washington for Pittsburgh. Frances K. Millican of Washington was appointed supervising analyst for Seattle.
Alan Zients was appointed child and adolescent supervising analyst for NYU. Judith Fingert Chused and Frances K. Millican of Washington were appointed geographic rule child supervising analysts for Cleveland and Seattle respectively.
Donald Rosenblitt announced that the Ad Hoc Committee on IPA Membership had recommended five IPA-trained analysts for membership to The American. The Board unanimously approved Mariam Cohen of LAIPS, Austin Lee of Canada, Janice Lieberman of IPTAR, and Arlene Richards and Kerry Kelly Novik of The Freudian Society.
Deanna Holtzman reported there were no CORST applications. The committee has introduced a limited rolling admissions policy to facilitate late requests. These will need an unanimous vote of the three reviewers and the chair.
The Committee on New Training Facilities chaired by David Carlson reported that development was progressing in Florida, Kansas City, Portland, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Ellen Rowntree will become new committee chair in December.
Samuel Rubin announced approval of the Denver Child Psychoanalytic Program. Calvin Narcissi of Denver thanked the committee and The American for their most helpful assistance.
Lawrence Interbitzen, reporting for chair Sander Abend, mentioned that the Committee on Psychoanalytic Education was studying the topics of confidentiality, ethics, and curriculum. Also, the committee has examined issues of pregnancy of the analyst, the child analytic process, and the impaired training analyst.
Phyllis Tyson reported on twelve applications for waiver and all were approved.