As expected, external credentialing dominated discussion at the meeting of the Board on Professional Standards held December 18, 1996. New information on the charged topic was carefully discussed and BOPS decided that the whole issue deserved further deliberation. Added to the previous options of joining with the Psychoanalytic Consortium or with the Coalition of Independent Psychoanalytic Societies (the four IPA institutes in the United States which are not members of The American) was a revitalized possibility of The American applying independently. The American (with or without the IPS) applying independently and at the same time assisting the Consortium in its efforts was a new fourth alternative. A new joint committee of Board and Council will examine these options.
BOPS also discussed a proposal by the Committee on Preparedness and Progress to eliminate specific educational degrees as eligibility criteria for analytic training. The idea was referred to institutes for discussion with the expectation that a bylaw proposal will be brought to vote at the May Meeting.
Chalfin turned the chair over to BOPS secretary Donald Rosenblitt for the external credentialing discussion. Chalfin felt the discussion would best be led by someone who did not have strong public opinions on the issue. Gerald Margolis, chair of the Board Committee on External Credentialing, summarized the committee's work. Among the many documents reviewed were the materials of the previous Joint Committee on External Credentialing and the relevant regulations of the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary Accreditation (CORPA) and the Department of Education (DOE). In addition, Margolis, Chalfin and president-elect Robert Pyles (representing president Marvin Margolis) met in September with Dorothy Fenwick, Executive Director of CORPA, and separately with Karen Kirchenstein, Director of the Accreditation and Liaison Division of DOE.
The Board committee understood that BOPS itself could become an accrediting agency acceptable to CORPA. This opened new options and old tensions. Previous interpretation of the regulations indicated that BOPS or its Committee on Institutes would have to be independent from The American. The required changes now appear substantially less extensive. Funding of BOPS would be direct rather than through The American. Also, one of each seven members would be a lay-person. Additional requirements, if any, would be determined during the application process.
CORPA only approves agencies that demonstrate ability to accredit institutes. The American has accredited institutes for 34 years. None of the other members of The Consortium have accrediting experience. Fenwick felt that it would take at least ten years for The Consortium to gain the necessary experience to meet CORPA's standards. If The American decided to apply independently, CORPA approval could be granted in approximately two years. The committee believed that the IPS institutes might wish to join The American's accrediting process. Fenwick suggested the the fourth option, BOPS gaining CORPA recognition (with or without the IPS) while at the same time assisting the effort of The Consortium. This is possible because CORPA does not limit one accrediting agency to each discipline.
The report also expanded the prior understanding that recognition from DOE would allow student loans for candidates. Because of the complexities involved in loans, the committee questioned its practicality and desirability.
President Marvin Margolis praised the work of the BOPS committee and cautioned that external credentialing was a lightning rod issue. It embraced the tensions between Board and Council and also the tensions of The American and the Consortium. He added that the Consortium members still bear the scars of The American's past policy of restricting training of psychologists and social workers. He advised forming a new Ad Hoc Joint Committee on External Credentialing as a necessary step to craft a thoughtful decision and an organizational consensus.
During discussion only one or two voices questioned of the value of external credentialing, indicating the evolution of a consensus on this aspect. The debate was: Should The American join with others and, if so, with whom? One view was that past exclusion of others was a tragic mistake and now organizations should work together no matter how long the effort. The opposite was the sentiment was that The American, with its thirty-four year accrediting history, should not join with groups that have no experience and lower training standards.
Robert Cummings thought it would take several years for the Consortium to achieve the necessary unanimous agreement on standards. Standards were much more than the question of three versus four times a week analysis. Standards included curriculum, eligibility and suitability, appointment of training analysts, and terminating training. It was reported that Division 39 had struggled with this issue when setting criteria for member eligibility for Division 39 certification and no agreement could be reached.
Joseph Schachter remarked “Nonaction is an action.” He moved that BOPS recommend that a straw-poll be taken at the Meeting of Members followed by a mail poll of the members asking whether to proceed slowly or move at the current rate. It only gathered two votes.
Because the Council on Higher Education was incorporating CORPA on January 1 Harold Kolansky moved for The American to file a letter of intent to
CORPA. By doing this the application would fall under current regulations if The American decided to apply independently. Rosenblitt excused himself as chair to express his opinion that although the proposal made administrative sense it would be experienced so negatively by Consortium colleagues that he would advise against it. Marvin Margolis and Robert Pyles expressed a similar viewpoint. The proposal gathered only two votes. It appeared that the fellows wished time to integrate the new information and await the investigations of the new joint committee before taking action.
Chalfin and several fellows praised the work of the BOPS committee for the depth and clarity of the report. Gerald Margolis cited Robert Cummings—the committee's major writer. Rosenblitt complimented the Board on the quality of the day's discussion and observed that there were no bad guys, just different visions about how to best serve psychoanalysis.
The second area of major change was introduced by Phyllis Tyson, chair of COPAP. The committee proposed that the type of mental health degree no longer be a criteria for eligibility for psychoanalytic training. Nondegree based standards for selection would be developed and would be rigorous. Quality of character and four years experience following graduation from a mental health care program would be the meaningful essentials.
COPAP has reviewed 216 waiver applications for individuals in the mental health field with degrees other than a doctorate. The committee reported that institutes show excellent judgment evaluating these applicants and can function independently of COPAP oversight. Sixty-seven master's level social workers have been approved and generally have done well in training.
Tyson said that specifying degree is increasingly difficult because of the many types of mental health degrees. There is an opinion that type of degree was less important, especially because of decreased training in dynamic psychotherapy in psychiatric residency training.
The significance in this proposed shift in qualification was discussed. Robert Cummings reported the current waiver requirement made the Southern California Institute less competitive in attracting candidates. He would like to see the elimination of all waivers. Robert Michels cautioned that the lack of “crispness” in defining qualifications might permit some institutes to disregard the qualifications — a pernicious effect. The idea of institute autonomy was discussed. Some felt increased autonomy was a step forward, while others wondered if standards would fall with no oversight. Tyson ended the discussion commenting that the report was a “working document.” Institutes will receive a new version of the proposal in February. The proposal may come to a vote at the Board meeting in May. Chalfin praised Tyson to the applause of the fellows.
Richard Fox, chair of the Board Committee on Membership, reported that the committee reviewed and recommended to council 39 applicants. He noted that the majority, 21, were women. The average length of training was 8.2 years and the average age at graduation was 47.5. Women candidates no longer have a problem gaining experience with male analysands. He noted that institutes have individual patterns of training. He asked the Board for permission for the committee to investigate this area and the request was passed.
The Board approved the training and supervising analyst appointment of Robert A. Nover of Baltimore-Washington, Brenda C. Solomon of Chicago, Richard G. Honig of Cincinnati, Myron Stocking of Denver and David W. Kruger of Houston-Galveston. Appointed from Los Angeles were Helen Desmond, Richard Tuch and Martin E. Widzer. Barnaby Barratt and James W. Kern of Michigan, Robert E. Fischel of NYU, Edwin C. Peck and Alan Sugarman of San Diego, and Sandra W. Bemesderfer of San Francisco also were appointed. Appointed from Southern California were Howard A. Bacal, James A. Gooch, Christine Hradesky and Robert L. James. William C. Wimmer of Baltimore-Washington and L. Noah Shaw of NYU were appointed child and adolescent supervising analysts. Appointed geographic rule supervising analysts for Florida were Suzanne Gassner and Elizabeth Lloyd Mayer.
David Carlson gave his last report after six years of chairing the Committee on New Training Facilities. Carlson's long and outstanding contribution was warmly recognized by a lengthy standing ovation.
Chair-elect Donald Rosenblitt announced his choice of Robert Cummings to become the new Board secretary after the May meeting. BOPS unanimously approved.
Donald Rosenblitt, as chair of the IPA Membership Committee, proposed Sylvia Ginsburg and Barbara Stimmel for membership. Both are members of the New York Freudian Society. Their application passed unanimously.
Lee Brauer, chair of the Practice Committee, asked the Fellows to encourage members to complete the survey on practice. Because some members were uncomfortable using DSM IV diagnosis, Brauer qualified that diagnosis could be omitted. When asked about the possibility of identifying individual members, he replied that could be done but only he had access to that information. Like many other functions it involved trusting the integrity of The American.