The Plan to Renew the American: Con

The call to “Renew the American,” issued by three officers and the chair of our Board on Professional Standards (BOPS), will resonate with many members who have tired of organizational politics and long for an end to our internal wrangling. While this plan contains many good ideas, Renew would completely replace our current bylaws and fundamentally alter the relationships among our members, our local societies, and APsaA in ways that may produce unintended consequences. Some argue that Renew is “good enough.” We do not agree. We think that only a truly collaborative and democratic process can hope to resolve the tensions which have bubbled up repeatedly over many decades. The Renew proposal merely relocates these tensions within new councils and boards.

We'll start with a bit of recent organizational history. In the past two decades APsaA has experienced three important changes. First, in the late 1980s APsaA began allowing its institutes to train non-medical candidates. Second, in the early 1990s non-certified members were made voting members (initially without a vote on APsaA bylaws). Finally, in 2001 a bylaws amendment granted voting rights to virtually all members, including Affiliates. These steps greatly altered the balance of power in our Association.

In a relatively short period, APsaA has moved from an organization in which all members were medical to one in which a substantial and growing minority is non-medical, and from one in which all voting members were certified to one in which most voters (~56 percent) are not certified. At the same time, the balance in most APsaA members' clinical practice has shifted from psychoanalysis to psychotherapy.

These changes have exacerbated some long-standing organizational problems. For many years the Executive Council (our board of directors), which has ultimate authority over and responsibility for all aspects of APsaA's governance, had deferred to the officers and to BOPS. Now, however, with our much more diverse membership and differing practice experiences, our expectations of how APsaA is to be governed have changed. These changes affect the relationships among the Executive Council, the officers, and BOPS. One substantial element of these changes is that the Executive Council has increasingly shouldered its responsibility as the Association's board of directors. This has generated some conflict with BOPS. While the proponents of Renew have called this a crisis, to us it represents an opportunity to bring the differing sides together to discuss and negotiate the issues. Unfortunately, the Renew Plan preempts this essential organizational evolution in favor of an “up or down” vote.

While this plan contains many good ideas, Renew would completely replace our current bylaws and fundamentally alter the relationships among our members, our local societies, and APsaA in ways that may produce unintended consequences. Some argue that Renew is “good enough.” We do not agree. We think that only a truly collaborative and democratic process can hope to resolve the tensions which have bubbled up repeatedly over many decades. The Renew proposal merely relocates these tensions within new councils and boards.

The Renew Plan abandons our original federal model in which each society is represented on our board of directors. Locally elected representatives would be eliminated in favor of a much smaller number of nationally elected ones. The Executive Council, a body that is broad enough to be roughly representative of the range that now characterizes our membership, would be replaced by a much smaller body likely to be filled largely by a select group of members able to afford a national campaign.

The Renew Plan apportions BOPS's current functions to a Council of Institutes (IC) and a Board on Accreditation and Certification (BAC). The latter would be quasi-externalized via the creation of a limited liability company (LLC). In this proposed configuration, APsaA institutes would have to pass muster with both bodies—they would be “approved” by the IC and “accredited” by the BAC. However, only BAC accredited institutes could be approved (and periodically re-approved) by the IC. The BAC's board would establish its own standards. APsaA's board would have no direct input into the BAC's standards or procedures. For example, the BAC could impose TA certification (or anything else its board decided) and the APsaA board could do nothing about that, short of dismissing the BAC board.

The Renew bylaws were prepared in haste by just four people. While the authors undoubtedly worked with the best of intentions, this is their first attempt at drafting a comprehensive set of bylaws and it shows.

Indeed, when they presented their proposal to the Executive Council in June they had to make several changes to their pre-circulated draft. Numerous other flaws went unaddressed. Given the huge number of hurried changes proposed by Renew, we anticipate many unintended and problematic consequences.

In all candor, no set of bylaws can resolve the conflicts in our Association. Bylaws should, however, provide a structure which helps to contain conflict and encourage growth. Unfortunately, the overly complicated structure contained within Renew fails to do that. In addition to a fundamentally altered board of directors (completely devoid of local representatives), Renew proposes four councils plus a new standards-setting LLC insulated from APsaA's own board. If overlaid upon our still divided Association such a structure would multiply the opportunities for strife.

In all candor, no set of bylaws can resolve the conflicts in our Association. Bylaws should, however, provide a structure which helps to contain conflict and encourage growth. Unfortunately the overly complicated structure contained within Renew fails to do that.

We have addressed several weaknesses in the Renew proposal. The proponents will, naturally, emphasize its strengths. Should two-thirds of the membership approve Renew, we pledge to do our very best to make it work. On the other hand, should you agree that the Renew bylaws are not yet good enough, we pledge to work inclusively and across APsaA's divisions in order to create something better. A proposal that emerges from a truly collaborative process undoubtedly would include many of the valuable, forward-looking ideas contained within Renew. We think that a thoughtful, step-by-step approach that brings our bylaws into conformity with New York State law offers the best hope of resolving the tensions which have bedeviled our Association for far too long.