Dear Colleagues,
I know that the seemingly endless conflicts of the last several years have left many of our members convinced that APsaA has lost its way. Some of us may even have given up hope that things could ever be different. I am eager to reach these members with this post.
It's true that the rifts in our association are troubling, and that they have bedeviled us for too long. But while no cure is going to make everyone perfectly happy, there are relatively simple and workable solutions to at least some of our problems, and many of us have been working towards them for years. These proposals enjoy the kind of wide support that can eventually lead to a less fragmented, and more hopeful, sense of ourselves and our organization. I hope you will take just a moment to digest them.
1) I think all candidates should have the widest possible choice of analyst AND that each individual institute should have the final decision on what qualifications are required to be a TA at that institute. This was the main purpose of what was called the “local option” bylaw amendment. I do understand why some thoughtful colleagues opposed this proposal but, in my opinion, much (although not all) of the opposition was rooted in older struggles over control and hierarchy.
These conflicts no longer serve our more diverse and democratic organization. All of us wish to ensure that the quality of analytic training and treatment remain high; there is no disagreement about that. But we can’t do that according to the rules that governed the much more homogeneous APsaA of the past. We need to work together in the context of an organizational structure that accurately reflects our more diverse membership. That is what the local option amendment would allow us to do, and for that reason I endorsed and fully supported it.
2) I think that certification does have value. It is hard to argue with the wish that colleagues and potential analysands can rest assured of a practitioner’s competence and expertise. However, our certification process comes from within our organization; it is opaque to outsiders, and sometimes to ourselves, and so it does not have the value, meaning, and credibility that we need to offer the public in this day of multiple therapies. I support the kind of transparent, national, and independent certification process that most other disciplines have relied on for decades.
It isn't true that these changes are “too radical," or that they will somehow split or degrade our great organization. I just don’t believe it. Our association is sometimes slow to adapt to real changes in the psychoanalytic world, but it is robust. Just think of how fearful the APsaA leadership was, not so long ago, about letting in skilled clinicians from other disciplines! But we did let them in, and we are the stronger and the richer for it.
Most of us -- candidates, faculty, and even many of our most renowned training analysts -- know that these changes are essential. They are daunting, yes. But that doesn’t mean they are dangerous if we can move forward in a thoughtful and democratic fashion. The local option amendment and certification reform both acknowledge our past growth and both facilitate growth in the future. If we oppose these relatively simple measures, we will remain tangled in a paralyzing history of old conflictual ruts while the rest of the psychoanalytic world moves ahead towards a more vibrant and productive future.
I do not mean to simplify the issues. But one thing is clear. Now is the time for us to move beyond politics as usual, to get beyond our incessant and unproductive navel-gazing, to take a few straightforward and reasonable steps that lead out of the old quagmires and towards the greater freedom and vitality that our organization, and our community, need and desire.
With your help, we can do this together, thoughtfully and without rancor. Please join me for the best future of our organization (feel free to contact me wrprocci@sbcglobal.net or visit my webpage at www.wrprocci.org or http://warrenprocci.blogspot.com ). Thank you.
Warren R. Procci
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Monday, September 24, 2007
Research, Diversity, and Local Control
Dear Colleagues,
There are many things on which all candidates for office and a substantial majority of our membership agree. Research, and in particular research on the efficacy of psychoanalytic treatment, is essential to our vitality as a field and even to our survival in the current healthcare climate.
As your Treasurer for the past five years I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of our research programs. Within the past few weeks I’ve supported, in the Executive and Finance Committees, the very research program which Lynne Moritz, our current President, championed in the recent issue of TAP. During the recent Annual Meeting of our Association in Denver I presented for the consideration of our Board of Directors (Executive Council) a summary of our research funding over the last five years. I emphasized that while we’ve done well supporting research, especially in view of our limited resources, we need to do more. Make no mistake: meaningful, pragmatic research is a high priority of my candidacy.
What may be more important for those of you casting your vote in the coming election is to get a better understanding of the differences among the candidates, especially in areas of ongoing controversy.
I have long been supportive of some form of certification, especially if we can move to a process which is national and independent. However, my position on certification’s role in TA decisions is a distinguishing feature of my candidacy. Yes the certification process and associated research requires appropriate financial support. But whether our current certification process should be a prerequisite for TA appointment should be left to the discretion of each local institute.
The uniqueness of our institutes, the quality of our faculties, and the wonderful diversity of our candidates requires greater flexibility and less centralized control in this very meaningful process.
I welcome further discussion on this issue, both to assist the evolution of my own beliefs and to hear what you have to say on these matters. Feel free to call (626-793-7957) or write me (wrprocci@sbcglobal.net) any time. And, if you can find a moment, please check out my website (www.wrprocci.org or http://warrenprocci.blogspot.com)
With my best personal regards,
Warren R. Procci, Candidate for President-Elect, APsaA
There are many things on which all candidates for office and a substantial majority of our membership agree. Research, and in particular research on the efficacy of psychoanalytic treatment, is essential to our vitality as a field and even to our survival in the current healthcare climate.
As your Treasurer for the past five years I’ve been a consistent and strong supporter of our research programs. Within the past few weeks I’ve supported, in the Executive and Finance Committees, the very research program which Lynne Moritz, our current President, championed in the recent issue of TAP. During the recent Annual Meeting of our Association in Denver I presented for the consideration of our Board of Directors (Executive Council) a summary of our research funding over the last five years. I emphasized that while we’ve done well supporting research, especially in view of our limited resources, we need to do more. Make no mistake: meaningful, pragmatic research is a high priority of my candidacy.
What may be more important for those of you casting your vote in the coming election is to get a better understanding of the differences among the candidates, especially in areas of ongoing controversy.
I have long been supportive of some form of certification, especially if we can move to a process which is national and independent. However, my position on certification’s role in TA decisions is a distinguishing feature of my candidacy. Yes the certification process and associated research requires appropriate financial support. But whether our current certification process should be a prerequisite for TA appointment should be left to the discretion of each local institute.
The uniqueness of our institutes, the quality of our faculties, and the wonderful diversity of our candidates requires greater flexibility and less centralized control in this very meaningful process.
I welcome further discussion on this issue, both to assist the evolution of my own beliefs and to hear what you have to say on these matters. Feel free to call (626-793-7957) or write me (wrprocci@sbcglobal.net) any time. And, if you can find a moment, please check out my website (www.wrprocci.org or http://warrenprocci.blogspot.com)
With my best personal regards,
Warren R. Procci, Candidate for President-Elect, APsaA
Friday, September 21, 2007
The Elephant in the Room-Certification
Dear Colleagues,
A fellow candidate for office has noted the appearance of “the elephant in the room”, notably certification, on our election list. As a Candidate for President-Elect my ideas are undoubtedly of interest to some of you so let’s have a conversation on this subject.
In truth I don’t believe that certification itself is the major issue. I believe there are two more fundamental matters that are at the basis of our organization’s dissension, a development which has alienated many of our members and must be addressed and solved. First is the exclusionary link between certification and TA status and second is the conflict between central regulation of many of our activities versus greater local autonomy. Quite frankly, I don’t believe that we can effectively address our myriad other needs such as outreach, practice development etc. until we get this briar patch out of the way. I want to bring us out of our stasis and I also want to recapture the attention and energies of our alienated, disenfranchised members.
My position on this is quite clear and it has been consistent for a number of years. I have also frequently posted my positions on these lists We simply need to find more and flexible pathways to TA status and we also need to move towards greater degrees of local autonomy within our institutes as opposed to the imposition of rules and regulations by a national body.
These issues are affecting us deeply, not only by producing organizational dissent but also by contributing in a major way to the turning off of many members to our national organization. I also agree with the supposition that these limitations on local autonomy are directly contributing to difficulties in candidate recruitment with resultant decline in organization morale as well as, ultimately, erosion in our membership and our financial base.
One possible solution which I strongly support is to vest control over the role of certification on TA decisions within our institutes. We can accomplish this with local option. While not a panacea, it would in my view significantly lessen tensions to the point where all of us could work together far more effectively. With local option in place some institutes would have an immediate increase in the number of new TAs and candidates.
Some cautions have recently been raised about this approach but I don’t see the substance behind the cautions. I’m not aware that it would in any way jeopardize our IPA standing. The Regional Agreement has become outdated since the IPA long ago agreed to accept non APsaA training programs.
Additionally IPA criteria for TAs are quite flexible and IPA has no such thing as certification let alone an exclusionary link to TA status. Indeed I believe local option could make our functioning more similar to that of IPA. While it t is true that decision making would move into local institutes it is also true that many are already yearning for this opportunity rather than fearing it.
It is also worth remembering that a robust 57% of our members supported this approach two years ago. I would however agree that we shouldn’t push for putting this before our membership unless we are reasonably well assured that it could pass with a 2/3 vote. I will strongly support this approach if I am elected.
While I have your attention I’d like to let you know about two additions to my webpage (www.wrprocci.org or http://warrenprocci.blogspot.com). The first, for these of you who might have some interest in my personal history, is a biographical statement. The second is an explicit statement of just what exactly will be my areas of priority if elected. Prominent among them are the two issues mentioned above. I will, of course, discuss these priorities in greater detail over the next several weeks. As always please feel free to contact me directly (wrprocci@sbcglobal.net or 626-793-7957)
Warren R. Procci, Candidate for President-Elect of APsaA
A fellow candidate for office has noted the appearance of “the elephant in the room”, notably certification, on our election list. As a Candidate for President-Elect my ideas are undoubtedly of interest to some of you so let’s have a conversation on this subject.
In truth I don’t believe that certification itself is the major issue. I believe there are two more fundamental matters that are at the basis of our organization’s dissension, a development which has alienated many of our members and must be addressed and solved. First is the exclusionary link between certification and TA status and second is the conflict between central regulation of many of our activities versus greater local autonomy. Quite frankly, I don’t believe that we can effectively address our myriad other needs such as outreach, practice development etc. until we get this briar patch out of the way. I want to bring us out of our stasis and I also want to recapture the attention and energies of our alienated, disenfranchised members.
My position on this is quite clear and it has been consistent for a number of years. I have also frequently posted my positions on these lists We simply need to find more and flexible pathways to TA status and we also need to move towards greater degrees of local autonomy within our institutes as opposed to the imposition of rules and regulations by a national body.
These issues are affecting us deeply, not only by producing organizational dissent but also by contributing in a major way to the turning off of many members to our national organization. I also agree with the supposition that these limitations on local autonomy are directly contributing to difficulties in candidate recruitment with resultant decline in organization morale as well as, ultimately, erosion in our membership and our financial base.
One possible solution which I strongly support is to vest control over the role of certification on TA decisions within our institutes. We can accomplish this with local option. While not a panacea, it would in my view significantly lessen tensions to the point where all of us could work together far more effectively. With local option in place some institutes would have an immediate increase in the number of new TAs and candidates.
Some cautions have recently been raised about this approach but I don’t see the substance behind the cautions. I’m not aware that it would in any way jeopardize our IPA standing. The Regional Agreement has become outdated since the IPA long ago agreed to accept non APsaA training programs.
Additionally IPA criteria for TAs are quite flexible and IPA has no such thing as certification let alone an exclusionary link to TA status. Indeed I believe local option could make our functioning more similar to that of IPA. While it t is true that decision making would move into local institutes it is also true that many are already yearning for this opportunity rather than fearing it.
It is also worth remembering that a robust 57% of our members supported this approach two years ago. I would however agree that we shouldn’t push for putting this before our membership unless we are reasonably well assured that it could pass with a 2/3 vote. I will strongly support this approach if I am elected.
While I have your attention I’d like to let you know about two additions to my webpage (www.wrprocci.org or http://warrenprocci.blogspot.com). The first, for these of you who might have some interest in my personal history, is a biographical statement. The second is an explicit statement of just what exactly will be my areas of priority if elected. Prominent among them are the two issues mentioned above. I will, of course, discuss these priorities in greater detail over the next several weeks. As always please feel free to contact me directly (wrprocci@sbcglobal.net or 626-793-7957)
Warren R. Procci, Candidate for President-Elect of APsaA
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Dear Fellow Members of APsaA,
The American Psychoanalytic Association is a remarkable institution, with a rich, complex history and a powerful presence in contemporary psychoanalysis. It also has the potential for a very positive and creative future. Yet many of you are put-off or even fed-up with our organization's divisiveness, politics as usual, incessant navel-gazing, and at times its unwitting elitism. We are, indeed, a pre-eminent organization, but we are in real need of both the strong leadership and thoughtful humility, that will continue to make our pre-eminence deserved.
We need leaders not just familiar with our organizational and governance structures, or even just dedicated to our unique and important educational agendas, but leaders who are and can be attentive to the diverse needs of our membership, who have the vision for a productively democratic future, and who are not caught up in grinding the same old axes that have hindered our growth and creativity for too long.
Many of our leaders, and those who aspire to leadership, are thoughtful, skilled, and very well-intentioned folks, some with long resumes and stellar credentials. But while governance experience and educational dedication are essential, they are not sufficient to the tasks ahead. Our future leaders also need to be able to generate ideas and proposals with the best interests of all our membership in mind, and similarly must have the capacity to listen, evolve, and create so that not only will our membership feel enfranchised in its own organization but so that our connections with the outside world becomes increasingly generous and robust. This has not happened with the sufficient speed or sensitivity that our fine organization deserves.
I am very earnest in telling you that my candidacy offers us all a chance to build on what we all know is great and generative about our organization. At the same time my candidacy is not subordinate to the old energy-depleting battles, the old unreasoned hierarchies, or the ways in which politics as usual has so often handcuffed our organization and its members.
Mine is not a radical campaign or agenda, nor certainly not a reactionary one. You'll have to look elsewhere for that. My long history of governance experience within our organization and my lifetime of dedication to educational values, gives me all the necessary bona fides for assuming a presidential role. But it is in my capacity to move towards the future with reasonable ideas, with attendance to the important concerns of all our members, and with a real interest in a dynamic future for our organization, that makes my candidacy so important at this stage in our history.
Please take a moment to click onto any of the links above. There you will find more specifics about my qualifications, interests, ideas, as well as opportunities to let me know about your interests and concerns. I will read and respond to every communication, as I am proposing that we all join in partnership for the best future of our organization.
Warm regards, Warren Procci (candidate for Presidency of the American Psychoanalytic Association)
The American Psychoanalytic Association is a remarkable institution, with a rich, complex history and a powerful presence in contemporary psychoanalysis. It also has the potential for a very positive and creative future. Yet many of you are put-off or even fed-up with our organization's divisiveness, politics as usual, incessant navel-gazing, and at times its unwitting elitism. We are, indeed, a pre-eminent organization, but we are in real need of both the strong leadership and thoughtful humility, that will continue to make our pre-eminence deserved.
We need leaders not just familiar with our organizational and governance structures, or even just dedicated to our unique and important educational agendas, but leaders who are and can be attentive to the diverse needs of our membership, who have the vision for a productively democratic future, and who are not caught up in grinding the same old axes that have hindered our growth and creativity for too long.
Many of our leaders, and those who aspire to leadership, are thoughtful, skilled, and very well-intentioned folks, some with long resumes and stellar credentials. But while governance experience and educational dedication are essential, they are not sufficient to the tasks ahead. Our future leaders also need to be able to generate ideas and proposals with the best interests of all our membership in mind, and similarly must have the capacity to listen, evolve, and create so that not only will our membership feel enfranchised in its own organization but so that our connections with the outside world becomes increasingly generous and robust. This has not happened with the sufficient speed or sensitivity that our fine organization deserves.
I am very earnest in telling you that my candidacy offers us all a chance to build on what we all know is great and generative about our organization. At the same time my candidacy is not subordinate to the old energy-depleting battles, the old unreasoned hierarchies, or the ways in which politics as usual has so often handcuffed our organization and its members.
Mine is not a radical campaign or agenda, nor certainly not a reactionary one. You'll have to look elsewhere for that. My long history of governance experience within our organization and my lifetime of dedication to educational values, gives me all the necessary bona fides for assuming a presidential role. But it is in my capacity to move towards the future with reasonable ideas, with attendance to the important concerns of all our members, and with a real interest in a dynamic future for our organization, that makes my candidacy so important at this stage in our history.
Please take a moment to click onto any of the links above. There you will find more specifics about my qualifications, interests, ideas, as well as opportunities to let me know about your interests and concerns. I will read and respond to every communication, as I am proposing that we all join in partnership for the best future of our organization.
Warm regards, Warren Procci (candidate for Presidency of the American Psychoanalytic Association)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
