________________________________________________________________ VOLUME 2, ISSUE 5 THE INTERPSYCH NEWSLETTER JUNE, 1995 ________________________________________________________________ *SPECIAL SECTION* SECTION A: APA ELECTION (1/2) ********* * INDEX * ********* 1. INTRODUCTION 2. JAMES BARRON LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM DR. L. LIPSITT 3. ROBERT BROWN CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS (INVITED BY IPN NEWS EDITOR DR. LURIA AT THE LAST NYSPA CONVENTION) 4. KURT SALZINGER CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT 5. RICHARD SUINN CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT E-MAIL AND TECHNOLOGY COLLECTIVE LETTER OF SUPPORT ================================================================ 1. Introduction ================================================================ As a service to the IPN readership, we have prepared a special section on the American Psychological Association's (APA) ongoing presidential election. On 11 May 1995, the IPN invited both candidates and supporters to send in their campaigning messages for a special section via sscpnet. Previously, on 4 May, all coordinators of InterPsych's forums had been informed of the procedure. We did this initially in response to growing public concern regarding electioneering on e-mail forums -- to provide space for this very justified and important topic, but to leave discussion on lists undisturbed and to preserve Internet bandwidth. All candidates that we were able to reach had also been invited to share their thoughts on electronic communication and InterPsych. We imposed no restrictions on format or content of contributions. All submissions below are ordered alphabetically by the candidates' last name. They have been left unaltered, except most basic editing (removing mail headers, introductory sentences, changing tabs to spaces, and occasional line wraps). NOTE THAT THE INTERPSYCH NEWSLETTER IS NOT AN ORGAN OF THE APA, NOR DOES IT MAINTAIN FORMAL LINKS TO ANY OF THE NOMINATED CANDIDATES. The ballots have already been mailed out -- this material may be useful for those still undecided. Do not consider the material outdated, if reference is made to "May" (which is because the statements had been solicited in May), because the deadline is still ahead. If you would like to send in additional statements -- as a supporter or observer, please send your comments to the IPN Mailbox (udipn@badlands.nodak.edu). We are also appreciative of comments regarding the use of the IPN for this purpose now and similar purposes in the future. Depending on volume, we will follow up in the upcoming IPN issue in a second APA Campaign section or the letters section. [SK] ================================================================ 2. James Barron Letter of support from Dr. L. Lipsitt ================================================================ Because so many APA presidential candidates have had the advantage of airing their voices on the networks, and in consideration of the fact that candidate James W. Barron is not yet on the nets, I would like to express my support of Jim for his accomplishments as a psychologist and in his service to APA. My ballot arrived yesterday, with the candidates' statements and the listing of their credentials. If voters will read of Jim Barron's views and hopes for APA and for Psychology in the Monitor this month and in the ballot statements, I need not repeat his merits. After talking with him, and talking with many psychologists who know him well and whose opinions I respect, I am convinced Jim Barron is our best choice this year for the presidency of APA. I especially commend the volume, co-edited by Jim and published by APA, on the interface between psychoanalysis and psychology. Jim Barron comes to us with a productive history of involvement in APA division activities, lots of committee work, exceptional service on behalf of the Massachusetts Psychological Association, and a spirit of independence from the old-boys network. He is an organizational consultant as well as a highly qualified clinical psychologist; his skills will be directed toward improving the administration of APA and bringing academic and practitioner psychology into better focus with one another. Jim Barron is, by his writings and teaching, a "connectionist" between the practice and science wings of APA. He is an intelligent, literate person with solid respect for the entire spectrum of worthy psychological pursuits. While well identified with clinical psychology, especially through his Presidency of the Division on Psychoanalysis, he is far from naive about the concerns of scientists in APA today. He will be a genuine advocate for both science and practice, which he believes must become symbiotic in APA once again. Jim Barron knows all about the contentious situation between some current leaders of APA and myself (which, by the way, promises to be settled this week). As a principled man he is willing to have me speak on his behalf. (I would not do so otherwise.) In last year's election, won by Dorothy Cantor, Psy.D., Jim ran third, after me. He is a strong candidate; you will not be throwing away your vote. While Jim and I vary in some of our positions, more in intensity and nuance than direction, I admire his integrity, his ability to articulate his position on matters of substance, and his willingness to confront the critical issues that APA faces today. Jim has a remarkable ability to talk knowingly to legislators about important matters facing psychologists, and to address the diverse ways in which all of Psychology can contribute its knowledge and skills to help understand and address social problems. Jim is not part of the central office of APA, he is not on the Board of Directors, and he is a person free to act on integrity and substance as president of APA. James W. Barron's credentials are readily available to you in the Monitor this month and in the documents accompanying the ballot. Please look at his history and his opinions, then vote and, as I will, put Jim Barron in the #1 slot. Yours for an ever-improving APA, and a safe haven for all psychologists of quality, Lew Lipsitt ================================================================ 3a. ROBERT BROWN CANDIDATE'S STATEMENT ================================================================ As some of you know, I am another person aspiring to be president of APA. Some of you are sick of presidential "infomercials", but others of you may want to know the positions and concerns of potential candidates before nominating and voting for them. My statement follows, addressing my conception of the role of the APA president, a current version of my priorities for APA and a listing of my qualifications. ROLE OF THE PRESIDENT OF APA. Since APA is a large, complex organization with almost a $60,000,000 budget, a staff of almost 400, a mosaic of governance boards and committees and dozens of ongoing programs, and since the term of president is only one year, it is clear that a president is probably more a steward of the association than a leader who stimulates radical change. The stewardship and leadership roles demand different talents. The stewardship role requires an in-depth understanding of the various parts of the association and how they fit together, and an appreciation of the monumental amount of work that staff and governance volunteers spend on association affairs. It means helping individuals and groups develop their own ideas and fit them into ongoing operations, and making sure that we keep doing the business of organized psychology well. It means working with the CEO to mediate between staff and governance, and different governance groups having overlapping interests, making sure that governance time is well spent and that staff are free of undue governance restraint to do their jobs. As a leader, a president needs to have a broad range of knowledge of psychology, since he/she will serve as an APA spokesperson to the public and to professional/governmental groups. Through the use of limited funds and the influence of the office, he/she can also initiate one or two projects and shape the course of others. The voter's choice, as I see it, is to decide who they believe will best fill these roles. I will provide information about my priorities and qualifications that may help you judge my appropriateness for the office. GOALS AND PRIORITIES. My overarching goals are to (1) keep APA as the single strongest voice for all psychologists and (2) to make sure that we as a profession are competitive in state and national health care reform at the regulatory and legislative levels. In order to accomplish the first, we have to not only assure practitioners that we are defending and promoting their right to practice within the scope of their competencies, but also to make sure that other APA constitutiencies see that they are getting the same degree of attention as the practitioners. We need to do a better job at showing basic/bench scientists that we are spending their funds wisely, e.g. promoting the image of scientific psychology, advocating for research and education funding, providing fora for meaningful intellectual exchange, etc. For example, on a conference call last night I talked with Jeff McFarland, head of the Public Policy Office at APA, stressing the importance of full APA involvement in the current crisis in NSF funding for social and behavioral research. We need to enhance the image of scientist- practitioners within the association, making sure that they have a "home" and a voice that is not lost between basic science and practice. The capability to deliver services based on empirical studies is unique to us as practitioners, and we cannot lose that empirical base or the researchers who provide it. As an example of this, as a member of the APA Board of Directors, I put together a meeting last fall, generously hosted by Marty Seligman, including Marty, Marv Zuckerman, Sue Mineka, Bob Resnick, Don Bersoff, Ray Fowler, Ellen Garrison and me to deal specifically with the issue of the disaffection of scientist-practitioners. As I have said before, scientist-practitioners sit at APA's ideological center; they are in a number ways the glue that holds us together. The APA Board discussed the recommendations of that group in some detail at its retreat meeting in March; I will be following up on that discussion in the next several months. One of the concrete suggestions to come out of that meeting was a proposal to have in the APA central office an Office of Scientific Review, aimed at producing white papers, publicizing empirically validated treatments, etc. We discovered that the Board of Professional Affairs had developed a similar proposal a few years ago, but abandoned it due to the expense and the political delicateness of having an office that would seem to issue pronouncements on appropriate assessment and treatment. Of course, this issue is now being addressed on a number of fronts. I am still dedicated to increasing the role of scientist- practitioners in APA governance and central office; I will continue to work on that this summer and fall and, if I am elected, for the next several years. With respect to the second goal, there are myriad issues relevant to practice. One is that we must keep our advocacy efforts on the hill and in the states strong, so that we remain vital players in health care delivery. With the recent budget initiatives in Congress, especially proposed cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, attention is once more focused on funding for services at the national level. We also need to advocate for adequate controls over managed care entities to make sure that empirical research and human concerns, and not only economic considerations, drive health care decisions. At the same time, we need to continue to develop strategies to work within and to improve the current system. We need to enhance our relationship with state psychological associations and to aid them in gaining strength and influence, since many decisions about mental health issues will be made in state legislatures. Ironically, the focus on aiding state associations, sometimes a source of conflict because of the states' concentration on practice issues, may turn out to be a boon to academics and scientists. If the current mood of Congress leads to "delegating" education, research and social program funding to the states, the current state advocacy networks will be critical in maintaining funding for a wide variety of programs. Finally, we need to continue our efforts to help psychologists in the private and public sectors to diversify their practices so as not to depend solely on funding for only mental health programs. It is clear that in spite of the visibility of health care reform, educational reform is sweeping the country and that, unfortunately, we have only recently begun to get involved. I have put together a special package for Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, under the editorship of Ronda Tally and Ric Short, on the role of psychological science and practice in education reform. I hope it will be helpful in alerting the professional community about the urgency of our involvement in this effort. At the same time we are dealing with these survival issues, there are other concerns that we need to integrate into our efforts. The recruitment and retention of minority students, the granting of full access to psychological services and to educational/vocational opportunities to the public and psychologists with disabilities (e.g., meeting the legal and moral imperatives of the ADA), prevention and remediation of educational problems, the design of prevention programs and the like are crosscutting concerns that need attention if we are to serve our increasingly diverse clientele. Most of these goals and subgoals are already being addressed by one or more governance and staff groups within APA, some more effectively than others. So the statements above do not reflect new initiatives but a promise to support and expand, where financially possible, existing efforts. I am not yet sure what my initiatives would be; they would have to fit into ongoing APA concerns and be specific enough to be accomplished in a short period of time. I would like to center a substantial amount of time at the APA convention on understanding, preventing and resolving conflict at different levels (e.g., intrapsychic, interpersonal, inter- and intra- group), devoting time to research and interventions within each level and to discussions about how the levels can inform one another. I would like to sponsor a series of Task Forces dealing with the role of APA in enhancing psychological science and practice, focusing in turn on different association constitutiences (e.g., education, science, scientific-practice, practice, public interest) and setting priorities to aid them in reaching their goals while being fair to all constitutiences. QUALIFICATIONS FOR PRESIDENT. I am a clinical psychologist who has been fully involved in psychological science, education and practice for 32 years. I was on the full-time faculty for 10 years at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School at Dallas and have been in the Department of Psychology at the University of Maryland, College Park since 1972. The Maryland clinical/community program consists of about one third minority students, and our orientation is toward training students to work with diverse populations using a variety of levels of intervention (individual, community, etc). My clinical and scholarly interests center on interpersonal relationships, most specifically on prevention and remediation of distress in couples. My treatment model is a communication/problem solving approach that has strong empirical support. I have also maintained an independent practice over these years, am a Diplomate in Clinical (ABPP), am licensed and listed in the National Register. In combination with teaching an ethics and professional issues course, my practice and many of the activities described below have kept me informed and immersed in issues vital to practice (e.g., managed care, health care reform, continuing education). I have been highly involved in organized psychology at the local, state and national levels. I have been President of the Maryland Psychological Association at the state level, and at APA have been a two-time representative to APA Council from Maryland, Co- chair of the Finance Committee, Chair of the Policy and Planning Board, and President of Division 31. I am currently on the APA Board of Directors, where I serve or have served as liaison to the Board for the Advancement of Psychology in the Public Interest and its various committees (committees on women, disability, minorities, children/youth/family, AIDs, and gay/lesbian issues), the Ethics Committee, the Board of Educational Affairs and, currently, CAPP. I currently chair the Public Policy Advisory Committee and continue to be involved in long- range planning for the association. The short form of this is that I know my way around APA and the states, understand the process of doing APA business, have extensive experience with all major sectors of psychology, have devoted much of my professional career to dealing with conflict resolution, and have a balanced perspective that I think can serve the association well. I would very much appreciate your listing me as your first choice on the presidential ballot, if you are committed to someone else, to rank me as highly as you can. Thank you. Bob Brown ================================================================ 3b. ROBERT A. BROWN ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS ================================================================ Advances in electronic communications can truly revolutionize the process of information exchange in our field. One example relates to the political process in APA. The Council of Representatives often takes stands on social issues, using their best guess of the soundness of data supporting the position and the wishes of the psychologists they represent. For a number of years, we have wondered whether it would be possible to have a "rapid response system" so that APA could quickly sample the wishes and expertise of the association members - we are getting close to having that capability. We should, within the next few years, be able to send a position statement to 4-5,000 psychologists representative of the diversity of the association and get their votes (nobody can read 5,000 opinions) on the issue. That does not mean that APA would always have to follow the vote, but we certainly would need an explanation if it did not! Another example involves state level issues. While those of us in the academy have ready (and free) access to fora using the internet, professional psychologists are just beginning to come on-line in numbers. It should be possible, in the next few years, to hook up people in the states who are working on particular issues (e.g., prescription privileges, levels of licensure, small market health care reform, etc) directly with folks in other states. All this now tends to be funneled through APA; they do a heroic job, but it cannot substitute for groups of people talking directly to each other about common problems. There are also many issues that are being raised by the use of the internet for information exchange. One immediate example is the APA presidential campaign. For example, does mass electronic mailing violate the current election guidelines? My reading of the guidelines says that it probably does, others obviously feel differently. It is simply not clear at this point, and it needs to be clarified before the election next year. Another example is the issue of discussion of clinical cases - what can be discussed? How much detail can be given? Is this the same as professional consultation? What is the responsibility (and liability) of a person who gives advice to another professional on how to deal with a particular issue? What assurances of confidentiality are needed, if any in fact are possible? Clearly, a professional's rapid access to expert opinion on a particular case, with minimal cost, is something that can only benefit the public if we do no harm in the process. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. Bob