In this, our first message to you as the incoming co-chairs of BOPS, we must begin by expressing our deep gratitude to Eric Nuetzel and Beth Seelig. As chair and secretary of BOPS, they worked as a dedicated team to further the educational mission of our Association. They have been wonderful friends, colleagues, and mentors who shared tirelessly of their time and energy.
Many important and positive developments came out of the June meeting in Denver. BOPS and the Executive Council were informed by Eric Nuetzel and Lynne Moritz that BOPS's manner of acting in regard to reporting to Council (APsaA's board of directors), as well as appointment of fellows and BOPS subcommittees was NOT out of compliance with New York not-for-profit corporate law. This means that at the discretion of the board of directors, BOPS and Council can continue to work together as they have for the past 61 years. Although this arrangement can be changed at any time by the board of directors, both BOPS and Council affirmed their wish to continue to work collaboratively and collegially.
We also held a second Congress of Institutes on Tuesday, June 19. All institutes and new training facilities were represented, and approximately 100 people attended. The very rich discussion seemed to reflect much preparatory thought at the institute level. An overwhelming majority of our institutes favored the continuation of national standards. A majority seemed to favor a continuation of one organization containing both membership functions, as well as educational, standard setting, and accrediting functions.
The Congress of Institutes also considered the Rosenblitt proposal, which was renamed the Exploratory Proposal for Moving Forward. This proposal had two parts. The first reaffirmed the current working relationship between BOPS and the Executive Council. The second part established a joint committee to assess the advisability and feasibility of creating two separate corporations. One would deal with membership issues and the other with the educational, standard setting, and credentialing functions.
During the discussion of the proposal, several interesting ideas were raised. Nuetzel mentioned the Canadian system as a potential model. He had discussed this with Charles Hanley, president-elect of the IPA. In this system two separate corporations, one for membership issues and another for educational and credentialing issues work very closely together. However, final decision making in each arena is left to the individual corporation responsible for it. This arrangement is completely acceptable to the IPA.
An overwhelming majority of our institutes favored the continuation of national standards. A majority seemed to favor a continuation of one organization containing both membership functions, as well as educational, standard setting, and accrediting functions.
Nuetzel and Moritz also mentioned that during their respective terms as BOPS chair and president, 95 percent of their time and energy have been consumed with political conflicts. This left very little time or energy for the accomplishment of the substantive goals that they had hoped to achieve. Several people expressed the opinion that there were inherent contradictions between membership interests and educational, standard setting, and credentialing functions. The goal of the membership organization is to expand membership and keep its members happy. Standard setting and credentialing inevitably make some members unhappy. Others argued that we had reached a point in the development of our profession where an administrative rearrangement was called for. Almost all other professions are structured in such a way that these often contradictory functions are separated in different corporations. This would not mean that the membership would be removed from educational decision making, or that the two separate corporations would not continue to work very closely together. There was majority support for the externalization of certification, as well as for ongoing attempts to keep membership and educational, standard setting, and accreditation functions under one roof. At the conclusion of this discussion, there was overwhelming support (approximately 90 percent in a straw vote) for the Exploratory Proposal for Moving Forward.
It was also decided to continue the Congress of Institutes at the January meeting in New York. On Wednesday, BOPS was strongly in favor of the Exploratory Proposal. On Thursday, the board of directors voted overwhelmingly to establish a joint committee to study the advisability and feasibility of establishing two separate corporations.
At the Denver meeting, there was continued evidence of a strong, positive working relationship between BOPS and Council. In fact, this appeared more evident than at any time in recent memory. We sincerely hope that this continues, while we study together the next steps in the developmental process of our organization and profession.
Cal Narcisi, M.D., and Myrna Weiss, M.D., are co-chairs of the Board on Professional Standards.