Board of Directors Approved Minutes: December 8-10, 2000

Present: Patrick H. DeLeon, PhD, JD; Norine G. Johnson, PhD; Richard M. Suinn, PhD; Ronald F. Levant, EdD; Gerald P. Koocher, PhD; Raymond D. Fowler, PhD; Laura H. Barbanel, EdD; Charles L. Brewer, PhD; J. Bruce Overmier, PhD; Ruth Ullmann Paige, PhD; Nathan W. Perry, PhD; and George P. Taylor, PhD; incoming Board members Katherine Nordal, PhD and Philip G. Zimbardo, PhD

Absent: None.

I. Minutes of meeting

A.(1) The Board voted to approve the minutes of the August 2 & 5, 2000, Board of Directors meeting.

II. Elections, awards, membership and human resources

A.(2) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve amending Association Rule 110-7., Guidelines for the Conduct of President-Elect Nominations and Elections, as follows (underlined material to be added):

A. Eligibility, Published Statements, Campaign Restrictions

3. Call to membership of potential presidential nominees.  An announcement will be made in the December Monitor informing potential presidential nominees of the opportunity to speak at the February Council meeting and to submit a brief statement (50 words or less) that would accompany the President-Elect Nomination ballot.  The deadline for submission of the statement will be January 15.

(Note: Subsequent paragraphs of the Guidelines will be renumbered.)

B.(2A)  The Board voted to approve the following revisions to the provisions for honorary membership (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):  

Honorary membership is available for non-members [who are not psychologists or professionals in a related field and] who have displayed rare and unusual contributions to the field of psychology or to the Association.

Honorary member is to be considered an honorific designation.  [Honorary members would not have a member record in the Association’s computer record maintenance system.]  Honorary members are exempt from annual dues and fees [, directory listing,] and APA list mailings.  They shall not receive the benefits normally accorded to Members and Associate members, such as journal credits and voting privileges.

Honorary memberships shall be recommended by the Board to the Membership Committee on an ad hoc basis.  The Membership Committee will then submit a recommendation to the Board on each case as they arise, with the Board holding the final authority to grant honorary membership.

C.(2B)  The Board provided suggestions to President-elect Norine G. Johnson, PhD, for timing of candidates to speak at Council.  Dr. Johnson will determine the timing for the forum.

D.  In executive session, the Board took the following action on nominations/appointments:

1. Approved Karen Hanscom, PhD, as recipient of the 2001 APA Humanitarian Award.

2. Approved the appointment of Eric Y. Drogin, JD, PhD; Mark J. Watt, PhD, JD, and Elizabeth B. Steward, JD, PhD, to the Committee on Legal Issues for terms beginning 1/1/2001 and ending 12/31/03.

3. Approved appointments to continuing committees. Terms will begin 1/1/2001 and end 12/31/03, except where noted.  See Attachment A for list of appointments. The Board also approved a new policy for approving continuing committee appointments whereby the Board will be sent names for all the appointments and asked to let Ronald F. Levant, EdD, Coordinator of the Nominations Subcommittee, know if they have any questions or concerns. If no concerns are expressed, Dr. Levant may approve the appointments on behalf of the Board.  If a Board member has a concern regarding a particular appointment, he/she may request that the appointment be discussed by the Board at the next Board meeting. The new policy was established so that those who have been appointed may be informed as soon as possible after the appointments have been made by the parent boards.

4. Approved the appointment of Warren Street, PhD, to the History Oversight Committee for a term beginning 1/1/2001 and ending 12/31/03.

5. Approved the appointment of Richard A. Jenkins, PhD, to the Committee on Psychology and Aids for a term beginning 1/1/2001 and ending 12/31/03.

6. Approved the list of nominations for the US National Committee to the International Union of Psychological Science in the areas of Health Psychology, Personality Psychology, Educational Psychology and Cognitive Psychology: Perception and Attention; Cognitive Science.

7. Approved the appointment of Frank Collins, PhD, to the Committee on Accreditation for a term beginning 1/1/01 and ending 12/31/01.

E. In executive session, the Board discussed and was enthusiastic about the possibility of conducting the board and committee election electronically and asked that Norine G. Johnson, PhD, work with the caucus and coalition chairs for possible implementation in 2001

F. At its September meeting, the Board voted to allocate $4,000 from its 2000 contingency fund to cover the cost of a one-day meeting of the Task Force on Council Representation 2.

III. Ethics

A.(3) The Board approved Draft 4 of the revisions of the Ethics Code for publication as a draft for member comment in the Monitor.

B. In executive session, the Board took action on 11 Ethics cases.

C. In executive session, the Board accepted the report of the Ethics Committee on Ethics Adjudication Process Reforms and expressed appreciation for the responsiveness of the Ethics Committee with the understanding that the Ethics Committee will continue to explore the issue of other fora.

D. In executive session, the Board received information on Stipulated Resignations with Admission of Violation.

IV. Board of Directors

A.(4) The Board voted to allocate $35,000 from the President’s contingency fund to support three Presidential initiatives in 2001: Health, Expanding Opportunities in Science and Expanding Opportunities in Practice.

B.(5) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the addition of the word "health" to APA's Mission Statement, Article 1 of the APA Bylaws (underlined materials to be added): 

Article I :Objects

The objects of the American Psychological Association shall be to advance psychology as a
science and profession and as a means of promoting health and human welfare by the encouragement of psychology in all its branches in the broadest and most liberal manner; by the promotion of research in psychology and the improvement of research methods and conditions; by the improvement of the qualifications and usefulness of psychologists through high standards of  ethics, conduct, education, and achievement; by the establishment and maintenance of the highest standards of professional ethics and conduct of the members of the Association; by the increase and diffusion of psychological knowledge through meetings, professional contacts, reports, papers, discussions, and publications; thereby to advance scientific interests and inquiry, and the application of research findings to the promotion of health and the public welfare.  

C.(6) The Board was informed of a potential 2001 contingency fund request for the establishment of a working group to reconsider the APA policy that prohibits military advertising.

D.(7) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion: 

All Council motions, properly submitted under the rules of the Association, shall be brought to the floor of Council for vote within three years of submission.

E.(8) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following substitute motion as originated by the Board:

Council encourages CSFC to look at current procedures for moving new business items through the system and recommend a process for moving items through the system expeditiously.

F.(9) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

That the document listing the new business in progress items be distributed to Council members along with the agenda book, and that Council members be given a form to notify the president that they are requesting that one or more of the items be moved to the agenda for Council’s deliberation (prior to the formal adoption of the agenda by Council).

G.(10) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

Each Council meeting shall include at least one breakout session where members shall discuss current major issues facing the profession and the Association.

H.(10A) The Board voted to approve the following meeting dates in 2002;  February 13 & 14; April 19-21 (retreat); June 7-9; August 20 & 24; October 11-13 (retreat), December 13 –15.

I.(38) The Board received as information an update regarding the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students.

J.(39) The Board received as information an update on recent actions by the Committee on Legal Issues to establish and implement a pilot program for a Judicial Ambassadors Program as a mechanism for the dissemination of social science knowledge into the judicial system.

K.(40) The Board received information regarding the requests for withdrawal of new business items to be put on Council's February 2001 agenda.

L. In executive session, the Board took action on the following Psychology Defense Fund (PDF) cases:

#2000-5: On recommendation of EMG, the Board voted to grant $10,000 to Richard F. Brown,
PhD, to support a legal action against Magellan CBHS Holding, Inc.  (Note: The Board took action on this case on September 22, 2000.)

#2000-6: On recommendation of the Executive Management Group (EMG), the Board voted to grant $10,000 to Peter Solon, PhD, to help cover the cost of expenses he incurred in challenging a Medicare audit of his practice which resulted in a denial of over $59,000 of past billings for which he had already been paid.

#2000-7: On recommendation of the Executive Management Group (EMG), the Board voted to grant $10,000 to Alan Gruber, PhD, to support a legal action against Medicare for its denial of coverage for evaluation and management services provided by clinical psychologists, and for the denial of coverage of psychological services to patients with severe dementia and retardation.

#2000-8: On recommendation of the Executive Management Group (EMG), the Board voted to grant $10,000 Frank Masur, PhD, to assist him in a lawsuit against a psychiatrist in his area for tortious interference with a business relationship/contract.

M. In executive session, the Board discussed the 2000 Annual Insurance Trust Report which was presented by Bruce E. Bennett, PhD, and Dorothy W. Cantor, PsyD.

N. At its October 2000 meeting, the Board voted to allocate $600 from its 2000 contingency fund for the cost of a survey to be sent to APA members who have resigned within the first five years of their membership to determine reasons for their decision to leave the association, with the understanding that the Deputy CEO would juggle priorities in order that the Research Office could conduct the survey.

V. Divsions and state and provincial associations

A.(11) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the Division of Clinical Child Psychology, Division 53 of the American Psychological Association, as a permanent APA division.

B.(12) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the Division for the Society of Pediatric Psychology, Division 54 of the American Psychological Association, as a permanent APA division.

VI. Organization of the APA

A.(13) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion: 

That the Council of Representatives establish an Office of APA Ombudsman to facilitate direct communications with individual members who seek avenue by which their concerns can be addressed and to publicize the existence of this office in the APA Monitor and the American Psychologist.

B.(14) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

That the Association Rules 110-15.1 and 110-16.1 be amended to describe the composition of standing boards and committees and continuing committees of the association to require that:  “Except for members of the public selected to represent societal interests, all those elected to serve on standing boards and committees or continuing committee of the association shall be members of the association.  Resignation or expulsion from membership automatically terminates any term of service on such boards or committees.”
 
(Note: Amendments have been made to the Association Rules subsequent to the item’s submission.  The sections formerly numbered 110-14.1 and 100-15.1 (as stated in the new business item) are currently numbered 110-15.1 and 110-16.1.)

VII. Publications and communications

A.(15) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve Division 18’s proposal to publish a division journal.

VIII. Convention affairs

A.(16) The Board voted to approve San Francisco, CA, as the site for the 2007 convention.  The Board requested that BCA consider Boston and Atlanta as potential future convention sites.

B.(17)  The Board discussed preliminary information on plans to restructure the annual convention beginning in 2002 and approved the following dates for the Board and Council at the 2002 convention in Chicago, IL: August 20 & 24 (Board); August 21 & 25 (Council).

IX. Education affairs

A.(18)  The Board voted to recommend that Council approve funds in the amount of $110,000 to be setaside at year-end for funding in 2001 for the establishment of an annual Education Leadership Conference (ELC). The Board requested that staff include necessary funding in the 2002 Preliminary Budget for the ELC.

B.(19) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the proposed changes to the Approval of Sponsors of Continuing Education for Psychologists: Criteria and Procedures Manual (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):

Section II: Terms of approval

A. Responsibilities of the Approved Sponsor to APA

3. Sponsors must submit [Interim] Status Reports

APA-approved sponsors must submit [Interim] Status Reports of their CE activities after 1 year of approval notice.  Status Reports should cover[ing] such items as effectiveness of planning procedures, results of needs assessment and evaluations, any changes in administration or activities since initial application, copies of promotional or informational materials, and responses to issues raised in the most recent letter of approval.  “Requirements for [Interim] Status Reports” will be included in a start-up packet sent to newly-approved sponsors.  [Interim] Status Reports are due [midway through the approval cycle] from sponsors approved for 2- and 5-year [approvals] cycles after their first year of approved status.  Conditionally approved sponsors will not submit [Interim] Status Reports, because they will be reapplying at the end of 1 year.  Sponsors will be notified in advance of the due date.  Failure to submit [Interim] Status Reports will cause probation and may result in termination of approval.

C.(20) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

Moved to amend the Policies for Accreditation Governance of the American Psychological Association’s Committee on Accreditation to add “Section 6(e): The Committee on Accreditation shall require that all members of site visiting teams be members of the Association.

D.(21) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following main motion and the substitute motion which added the phrase “in his or her role as teacher or adminstrator” after “civil or criminal misconduct” to the end of line 3 of the main motion:

No psychologist whose license to practice psychology has been suspended or revoked by a state or provincial licensing authority; who has been disciplined by the APA Ethics Committee; or who has been adjudicated in state or federal court to have engaged in civil or criminal misconduct causing harm to a student or other person associated with a training program may be permitted to serve in any evaluative capacity associated with the APA accreditation process.  This bar to service shall include service on any board, committee, or task force of the Association that has authority for accreditation matters, service as a site visitor, or service as an accreditation trainer for the Association.

The Board accepted the request of the Board of Educational Affairs that the Committee on Accreditation, in consultation with legal counsel, develop information concerning mechanisms it has or could develop further to address this specific issue and requested that a report be provided to the Board.

E.(21A & 21B) The Board voted to approve the APA policy statement proposed by the Commission and recommended that Council approve the following motion:

That the Council of Representatives receives the report of the Commission and expresses gratitude to the Commission for its efforts; and that the Council of Representatives refer to the appropriate governance groups for their discussion and recommendations the following statement proposed as APA policy by the Commission:

The American Psychological Association recommends that psychologists be eligible to sit for licensure upon completion of the following education and training: 

1. A doctoral degree from an APA- or CPA-accredited program in psychology.1 Where accreditation in the program’s substantive area is not available, the program will be required to be designated as a doctoral program in psychology by the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards or the National Register of Health Providers in Psychology.

2. The equivalent of two years of organized, sequential, supervised professional experience, one year of which is an APA- or CPA-accredited predoctoral internship, or one that meets APPIC membership criteria, or, for school psychologists, a predoctoral internship based in a school setting which meets CDSPP Doctoral Level Internship Guidelines.2 The other year of experience also may be completed prior to receiving the doctoral degree. 

An aspect of this training is the ongoing assessment of competence in a breadth of professional areas.  Postdoctoral education and training is an important part of the continuing professional development and credentialing process for professional psychologists.

1. Individuals with doctoral degrees in psychology who wish to respecialize may complete the education and training requirements described in this document postdoctorally.

2. By 2010, all internships shall be APA- or CPA- accredited. Council requests that this statement also be referred to appropriate psychology organizations for their comment and recommendations; and

That the Council of Representatives refer the recommendations of the Commission (Section 2 of the Commission report) to those APA governance groups designated as responsible for the implementation of specific recommendations and to relevant external organizations for review and comment and possible development of detailed plans for actions that would be required in order to implement the Commission’s recommendations.  These action plans should include associated budgets to the extent possible; and
 
That the Council of Representatives request that the proposed APA policy and the Commission’s recommendations be considered in the context of the implementation issues and implications identified in Section 3 of the Commission’s report.

F.(41) The Board received as information the recently revised Committee on Accreditation Meeting Procedures.

G. In executive session, the Board discussed the item on the Continuing Professional Education Five-Year Plan.

X. Professional affairsS

A.(22) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the strategic plan as developed by Committee for the Advancement of Professional Practice of publishing information, developing conference programs, and facilitating meetings among parties of interest, for helping to provide a climate within which existing mechanisms for professional mobility can continue to develop.

B.(23) The Board discussed the item regarding the process of APA endorsement of external guidelines. The Board requested that the Board of Professional Affairs (BPA) consider the possibility that APA may be engaged in other guideline development that is not just a practice guideline issue and should, where appropriate, ask another board to play the role BPA has outlined.

C.(24) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the affiliation of the Guam Psychological Association with the American Psychological Association.

D.(25) The Board voted to approve the following revised description of the Board of Professional Affairs Distinguished Graduate Student Award in Professional Psychology:

The APAGS/BPA Distinguished Graduate Student Award is awarded on an annual basis by the Board of Professional Affairs (BPA) and the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students (APAGS) to a graduate student who has demonstrated outstanding practice and application of psychology.  A qualified candidate must demonstrate exemplary performance in working with an underserved population in an applied setting OR have developed an innovative method for delivering health services to an underserved population. Eligible candidates are encouraged to apply from all psychology sub-specialties (e.g. clinical, counseling, organization, school, health, etc) and can be self-nominated or nominated by a member of the American Psychological Association (APA).  However, all self-nominations must be endorsed by a member of APA (i.e. faculty, supervisor) who serves the function of a nominator.

Further, that the Board of Directors approve the plan for this award to be given jointly by the Board of Professional Affairs and the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students.

XI. Scientific affairs

A.(26) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following amendments to Association Rule 140-4.1 (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):

140-4 Committee on Animal Research and Testing

140-4.1 There shall be a Committee on Animal Research and Ethics whose responsibility it shall be to (a) safeguard responsible [animal experimentation] research with animals, other than humans, and [to] establish and maintain cooperative relations with [other] organizations sharing common interests, (b) disseminate in cooperation with other organizations accurate information about [animal experimentation] such research, (c) review the ethics of [animal experimentation] such research and recommend guidelines for [the] its ethical conduct [of research, and appropriate care of animals in research], and (d) disseminate, in cooperation with other organizations, guidelines for protecting the welfare of animals, other than humans, that are used in research, teaching, and practical applications, and to consult on the implementation of these guidelines.

The Committee shall consist of six members, two of whom shall be elected each year for a term of three years. The Committee shall report to Council through the Board of Scientific Affairs.

B.(42)  The Board received information regarding the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing.

XII. Public Interest

A.(27) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

Resolved:
Council of Representatives motions proposing that the American Psychological Association go on record on public interest and/or social policy positions be made in two sections:

1. On the main purpose and intent of the motion; and

2. On specific ways and means of implementation including which APA directorates, departments and committees shall assume the responsibilities.
Consideration of the second motion shall immediately follow the passage of the first OR in the best interest of the spirit of the first, be added to the upcoming C/R legislative agenda.

B.(28)  The Board voted to refer the item "Resolution on the Death Penalty" to the Committee on Legal Issues.  The Board requested that they reconsider the resolution, along with representatives from the Board for the Advancement of Psychology in the Public Interest, the Committee on Legal Issues and the Board of Professional Affairs, staff from these groups and the Associate Executive Director of the Public Communications Office, to strengthen the scientific data and remove inflammatory language.

C.(29) The Board voted to recommend that Council adopt the following resolution:

Resolution on assisted suicide   

Whereas the issue of assisted suicide is complex, involving areas of ethics, religion, medicine, psychology, sociology, economics, the law, public policy, and other fields; and
  
Whereas in the United States there is significant social stratification related to cultural, ethnic, economic, gender, and religious differences; and
  
Whereas these differences in our society are associated with an equally diverse range of views regarding assisted suicide; and
  
Whereas in the United States decisions about assisted suicide are made in the context of serious social inequities in access to resources such as basic medical care; and
  
Whereas autonomy is an important guiding principle in the law and in psychological and medical aspects of decision making, but in and of itself is insufficient to capture the full range of complex medical, familial, social, financial, psychological, cultural, spiritual, and legal issues involved in the practice of assisted suicide; and
  
Whereas there is increasing public support for assisted suicide, but this support is weakest among groups who express concerns about being pressured to die (i.e., older adults, people with less education, women, and ethnic minorities) (Blendon, Szalay, & Knox, 1992); and
  
Whereas reasonable, well informed people starting from different positions about costs and gains associated with assisted suicide disagree about the potential effects of legalizing the practice; and
 
Whereas people with different values and priorities can reach different conclusions about the advisability of assisted suicide; and
  
Whereas some evidence suggests that there are fluctuations in the will to live (Chochinov, Tataryn, Clinch, & Dudgeon, 1999) and in wishes regarding life sustaining treatments (Weisman, Haas, & Fowler, 1999); and

Whereas pain and clinical depression are frequently under-treated, which can lead to suffering that may result in requests for assisted suicide (Foley, 1995); and

Whereas evidence suggests that some people rescind their requests for assisted suicide when they receive more aggressive and comprehensive care (Ganzini et al., 2000); and
 
Whereas psychological, familial, social, and financial factors seem to be more important than physical factors in requests for assisted suicide (Breitbart, Rosenfeld, & Passik, 1996; Emanuel, Fairclough, Slutsman, & Emanuel, 2000; Sullivan, Hedberg, & Fleming, 2000); and

Whereas little empirical data exist to determine the effects of assisted suicide on survivors and on society (Cooke et al., 1998); and

Whereas the empirical database, legal developments, and policy discourse related to assisted suicide are evolving rapidly;

Therefore, be it resolved that the American Psychological Association take a position that neither endorses nor opposes assisted suicide at this time.
 
However,

Given that psychologists have many areas of competence, including assessment, counseling, teaching, consultation, research, and advocacy skills that could potentially enlighten the discourse about assisted suicide, end of life treatment, and support for dying persons and their significant others; and
  
Given that psychologists could be instrumental in helping health care providers to understand and cope with the concerns and needs of dying individuals and their families; and
  
Given that practicing psychologists may receive requests to be involved in the education of various groups regarding assisted suicide; and

Given that there is one state in which assisted suicide is legal and psychological or psychiatric assessment and consultation is required under certain circumstances; and
  
Given that practicing psychologists may be part of multidisciplinary end-of-life care teams including ones exploring requests for assisted suicide;
  
Let it be further resolved that the American Psychological Association will assist in preparing the profession to address the issue of assisted suicide by taking the following actions:
  
Advocate for quality end of life care for all individuals; and
 
Encourage and promote the development of research on assisted suicide; and
  
Monitor legal, policy, and research developments that may require or encourage psychologists to involve themselves in assisted suicide cases; and
  
Promote policies that reduce suffering that could lead to requests for assisted suicide; and
  
Promote psychologists' involvement in research on ethical dilemmas faced by clinicians and researchers dealing with issues related to assisted suicide; and

Promote psychologists’ participation in multidisciplinary teams and ethics committees involved with reviewing end-of-life requests; and
  
Encourage psychologists to obtain training in the area of ethics as it applies to end-of-life decisions and care; and

Encourage practicing psychologists to inform themselves about criminal and civil laws that have bearing on assisted suicide in the states in which they practice; and
  
Encourage practicing psychologists to recognize the powerful influence they may have with clients who are considering assisted suicide; and
  
Encourage psychologists to identify factors leading to assisted suicide requests (including clinical depression, levels of pain and suffering, adequacy of comfort care, and other internal and external variables) and to fully explore alternative interventions (including hospice/palliative care, and other end of life options such as voluntarily stopping eating and drinking) for clients considering assisted suicide; and

Encourage practicing psychologists to be aware of their own views about assisted suicide, including recognizing possible biases about entitlement to resources based on disability status, age, sex, sexual orientation, or ethnicity of the client requesting assisted suicide; and
  
Encourage psychologists to be especially sensitive to the social and cultural biases which may result in some groups and individuals being perceived by others, and/or being encouraged to perceive themselves, as more expendable and less deserving of continued life (e.g., people with disabilities, women, older adults, people of color, gay men, lesbians, bisexual people, transgendered individuals, and persons who are poor).

References

Blendon, R. J., Szalay, U. S., & Knox, R. A. (1992). Should physicians aid their patients in dying? The public perspective. Journal of the American Medical Association, 267, 2658-2662.

Breitbart, W., Rosenfeld, B. D., & Passik, S. D.  (1996).  Interest in physician-assisted suicide among ambulatory HIV infected patients.   American Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 238-242.

Chochinov, H. M., Tataryn, D., Clinch, J. J., & Dudgeon, D. (1999). Will to live in the terminally ill. Lancet, 354, 816-819.

Cooke, M., Gourlay, L., Collette, L., Boccellari, A., Chesney, M. A., & Folkman, S. (1998).  Informal care givers and the intention to hasten AIDS related death. Archives of Internal Medicine, 158, 69 75.

Emanuel, E. J., Fairclough, D. L., Slutsman, J., & Emanuel, L. L. (2000). Understanding economic and other burdens of terminal illness: The experience of patients and their caregivers. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132, 451-459.

Foley, K. M. (1995). Pain, physician-assisted suicide, and euthanasia. Pain Forum, 4, 163-178.

Ganzini, L., Nelson, H. D., Schmidt, T. A., Kraemer, D. F., Delorit, M. A., & Lee, M. A. (2000). Physicians' experiences with the Oregon Death with Dignity Act. New England Journal of Medicine, 342, 557-563.

Sullivan, A. D., Hedberg, K., & Fleming, D. W. (2000). Legalized physician-assisted suicide in Oregon-The second year. New England Journal of Medicine, 342, 598-604.

Weisman, J. S., Haas, J. S., & Fowler, F. J. (1999).  The stability of preferences for life
sustaining care among persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study.  Medical Decision Making, 19, 16-26. 

D.(30)  The Board voted to recommend that Council adopt the following resolution:

Resolution on End-of-Life Issues and Care for Adults 
 
Whereas the nature of dying and death has changed across the twentieth century, occurring primarily in an institutional setting rather than at home (Benoliel & Degner, 1995); and
 
Whereas death has become more frequently the result of chronic illness (Battin, 1996); and
 
Whereas medicine and technology have evolved to the point where the terminal period can be significantly prolonged (Field & Cassel, 1997); and

Whereas there are many more people living longer with terminal diagnoses and thus having more time to make end of life decisions; and
 
Whereas end of life decision making is complex, involving areas of ethics, religion, medicine, psychology, sociology, economics, the law, public policy, and other fields; and
 
Whereas the population of the United States is aging, resulting in larger numbers of people who may request psychological support in making end of life decisions; and
 
Whereas in the United States there is significant social stratification related to cultural, ethnic, economic, gender, and religious differences; and
 
Whereas this diversity in our society leads to an equally diverse range of views regarding end of life care and decisions; and

Whereas reasonable, well informed people starting from different values and priorities concerning what is valuable at the end of life can and do hold different positions regarding end of life care and decisions; and
   
Whereas autonomy is an important guiding principle in the law and in medical, ethical, and psychological aspects of decision making, but in and of itself is insufficient to capture the full
range of complex medical, familial, social, financial, psychological, cultural, spiritual, and legal issues involved in end of life decision making; and

Whereas there is increasing public support for control over end of life decisions but this support is weakest among groups who express concerns about being pressured to die (i.e., older adults, people with less education, women, and ethnic minorities) (Blendon, Szalay, & Knox, 1992); and

Whereas in the United States medical end of life decisions are made in a context of serious social inequities in access to resources such as basic medical care; and

Whereas some evidence suggests that there are fluctuations in the will to live (Chochinov, Tataryn, Clinch, & Dudgeon, 1999) and in wishes regarding life sustaining treatments (Weisman, Haas, & Fowler, 1999); and

Whereas pain and clinical depression are frequently under-treated, which can lead to suffering that may result in requests for, or assent to, medical interventions that affect the timing of death (Foley, 1995); and

Whereas more people are aware of the possible benefits to be gained by using psychological services to help them make end-of-life decisions; and
 
Whereas psychology has been largely invisible in the end of life arena; and
 
Whereas psychologists have many areas of competence, including assessment, counseling, teaching, consultation, research, and advocacy skills that could potentially contribute to the science of end-of-life care and to the treatment and support of dying persons and their significant others; and
 
Whereas psychological research on end of life issues is limited in comparison with the magnitude of the issue; and
 
Whereas there have been no systematic efforts to educate psychologists about end of life issues; and
 
Whereas psychologists in clinical practice have not typically been involved in end of life decisions to the degree that they could be; and
 
Whereas psychologists could assume a significant role in helping health care providers to understand and cope with the concerns and needs of dying individuals and their families; and
 
Whereas psychologists could be instrumental in supporting public education efforts to raise awareness of issues related to dying, death, grief, mourning, and loss;
 
Therefore, be it resolved that the American Psychological Association, an organization committed to promoting the psychological well being of individuals across the life span, should redress psychology's historical under commitment to end of life care by actively promoting and supporting psychology's involvement in end of life care.  In order to advance this involvement, be it further resolved that the American Psychological Association:
 
Promote and encourage research and training in the area of end-of-life issues within psychology programs at all levels; and
 
Encourage and promote the development of a research agenda on end of life issues; and

Support efforts to increase funding for research associated with end-of-life issues; and

Encourage psychologists to obtain training in the area of ethics as it applies to end-of-life decisions and care; and

Promote and facilitate psychologists' acquisition of competencies with respect to end of life issues, including mastery of the literature on dying and death and sensitivity to diversity dimensions that affect end of life experiences; and
 
Encourage practicing psychologists to be aware of their own views about the end of life, including recognizing possible biases about entitlement to resources based on disability status, age, sex, sexual orientation, or ethnicity of the client making end of life decisions; and
 
Encourage psychologists to be especially sensitive to the social and cultural biases which may result in some groups and individuals being perceived by others, and/or being encouraged to perceive themselves, as more expendable and less deserving of continued life (e.g., people with disabilities, women, older adults, people of color, gay men, lesbians, bisexual people, transgendered individuals, and persons who are poor); and 
 
Support interdisciplinary efforts to increase the competency of psychologists and other health care professionals in end of life issues; and
 
Promote quality end of life care including palliative care, access to hospice services, support for terminally ill people and family members, accurate assessment of depression and cognitive capabilities of dying persons, and assistance with end of life decision making; and
 
Advocate for access to, and reimbursement for, professional mental health services for seriously ill individuals and their families; and
 
Promote and support public policies that provide for the psychosocial services for dying individuals and their families; and
 
Support psychologists who wish to participate in ethics committees dealing with end of life issues; and
 
Support psychologists as they work cooperatively with caregivers, medical providers, and multidisciplinary teams to enhance understanding of the psychological aspects of dying and death and to improve quality of care for the dying; and

Endorse the following principles on end of life care as articulated in the Institute of Medicine Report entitled Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life (Field & Cassel, 1997):

Care for those approaching death is an integral and important part of health care; 
 
Care for those approaching death should involve and respect both patients and those close to  them;

Good care at the end of life depends on clinicians with strong interpersonal skills, clinical knowledge, technical proficiency, and respect for individuals, and it should be informed by scientific evidence, values, and personal and professional experience;

The health community has a special responsibility for educating itself and others about the identification, management, and discussion of the last phase of fatal medical problems;

More and better research [in the areas of biomedical, clinical, psychosocial, and health services] is needed to increase our understanding of clinical, cultural, organizational, and other practices or perspectives that can improve care for those approaching death;

Changing individual behavior is difficult, but changing a culture or an organization is potentially a greater challenge-and often is a precondition for individual change.

References

Battin, M. P. (1996). The death debate: Ethical issues in suicide (pp. 175 203). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 
 
Benoliel, J .Q. & Degner, L. F. (1995) Institutional dying: A convergence of cultural values, technology, and social organization. In H. Wass & R. A. Neimeyer (Eds.)  Dying: Facing the facts (pp. 117 141). Washington, DC: Taylor and Francis.

Blendon, R. J., Szalay, U. S., & Knox, R. A. (1992). Should physicians aid their patients in dying? The public perspective. Journal of the American Medical Association, 267, 2658-2662.

Chochinov, H. M., Tataryn, D., Clinch, J. J., & Dudgeon, D. (1999). Will to live in the terminally ill. Lancet, 354, 816-819.

Field, M. J., & Cassel, C. K. (Eds.). (1997). Approaching death: Improving care at the end of life. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Foley, K. M. (1995). Pain, physician-assisted suicide, and euthanasia. Pain Forum, 4,
63-178.

Weisman, J. S., Haas, J. S., & Fowler, F. J. (1999).  The stability of preferences for life
sustaining care among persons with AIDS in the Boston Health Study. Medical Decision Making, 19, 16-26.

E.  At its October meeting, the Board voted to allocate $4,000 from its 2000 contingency fund to support an initial meeting of an APA Working Group on Children's Mental Health.

XIII. Ethnic Minority Affairs

A.(31)  The Board voted to recommend that Council adopt the following resolution:

Resolution on Racial/Ethnic Profiling and
Other Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Law and Security Enforcement Activities

Whereas psychologists are ethically guided to "respect the fundamental rights, dignity, and worth of all people" (Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, American Psychological Association, 1992, Principle D, p. 3-4); and

Whereas "psychologists are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to the community and the society in which they work and live" (Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, American Psychological Association, 1992, Principle F, p. 4); and

Whereas the ways in which people react to racial/ethnic differences between themselves and others may reveal racial/ethnic biases; and that the responses to these biases can "operate without conscious intervention or awareness" (Jones, 1997a; Jones, 1997b; Mio & Awakuni, 2000; Ridley, 1995); and

Whereas some law and security enforcement officers may use stereotypical notions to determine alleged suspects of criminal behavior in a variety of circumstances including: traffic stops, border stops, "out of place" stops such as questioning of racial/ethnic minorities in predominantly White suburban areas and in other locations and venues where law and security officers might perceive ethnic minorities as being “out of place”, disturbances in education environments, and other situations where local, state, or federal law and security enforcement have independent decision making authority (American Civil Liberties Union, 1999; American Psychological Association, 2000; Bachman, 1996; Government Accounting Office, 2000; Harris, 1997; Irving, 1989); and

Whereas it has been reported that members of racial/ethnic minority groups are stopped by police more often than majority group members (American Civil Liberties Union, 1999; Government Accounting Office, 2000; Wordes, Bynum, & Corley, 1994); and

Whereas it has been reported that of people who are stopped, more African Americans and other racial/ethnic minorities report being treated unfairly as compared to White/European Americans (American Civil Liberties Union, 1999; American Psychological Association, 2000; Cervantes, Salgado de Snyder, & Padilla, 1989; Jackson & Volckens, 1998; Norris, 1992; Vrana & Rollock, 1996); and

Whereas reliable statistics regarding the prevalence of racial/ethnic profiling and other racial/ethnic disparities in law and security enforcement activities and research on related psychological effects on victims and communities of color are quite limited (American Psychological Association, 2000);

THEREFORE be it resolved that the American Psychological Association (APA) advocates for and encourages research efforts to investigate: (a) the role of racial/ethnic bias and stereotyping in traffic stops, other law enforcement activities, and security activities (e.g., airport and border security); (b) the prevalence of racial/ethnic profiling and racial/ethnic disparities in law enforcement and security activities; and (c) related effects on individuals, communities of color, and law and security enforcement officers and agencies.  Also, APA should promote programs to increase awareness of local, state, and federal government officials, as well as the public, about issues and concerns related to racial/ethnic profiling and other racial/ethnic disparities in law and security enforcement.  APA also should encourage the development of strong community-police relationships.  APA also should promote programs that help law/security enforcement agencies recognize and overcome racial/ethnic profiling and other racial/ethnic disparities in law and security enforcement.

References

American Civil Liberties Union.  (1999, May). Driving while Black: Racial profiling on our nation's highways. New York: Author.

American Psychological Association.  (1992).  Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.  Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychological Association.  (2000, August 4).  APA fact sheet: Psychology and law enforcement roundtable.  Washington, DC: Author.

Cervantes, R. C., Salgado de Snyder, V. N., & Padilla, A. M.  (1989).  Posttraumatic stress in immigrants from Central America and Mexico.  Hospital & Community Psychiatry, 40, 615-619.

Harris, D. A.  (1997).  "Driving while Black" and all other traffic offenses: The Supreme Court and pretextual traffic stops.  Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87, 544.

Irving, P. J.  (1989).  Minority group threat, crime, and policing: Social context and social control.  New York: Praeger.

Jackson, J. S., & Volckens, J.  (1998).  Community stressors and racism: Structural and individual perspectives on racial bias.  In X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Addressing community problems: Psychological research and interventions (pp. 19-51).  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jones, J.  (1997a, August 14).  Can America be colorblind?  Research finding suggest not; even well-intentioned people are influenced by racial bias.  News Release of: Can or should America be color-blind: Psychological research reveals fallacies in a color-blind response to racism?  [Brochure].  Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Jones, J.  (1997b).  Prejudice and racism (2nd ed.).  New York: McGraw-Hill.

Mio, J. S., & Awakuni, G. I.  (2000).  Resistance to multiculturalism: Issues and interventions.  Philadelphia: Brunner/Mazel.

Norris, F. H.  (1992).  Epidemiology of trauma: Frequency and impact of different potentially traumatic events on different demographic groups.  Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 409-418.

Ridley, C. R.  (1995).  Overcoming unintentional racism in counseling and therapy: A practitioner's guide to intentional intervention.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

U. S. Government Accounting Office.  (2000).  U.S. Customs Service: Better targeting of airline passengers for personal searches could produce better results.  Washington, DC: Author.

Vrana, S. R., & Rollock, D.  (1996).  The social context of emotion: Effects of ethnicity and authority/peer status on the emotional reports of African American college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 297-306.

Wordes, M., Bynum, T. S., & Corley, C.  (1994).  Locking up youth: The impact of race on detention decisions.  Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 31, 140-165.

B.  At its September meeting, the Board voted to allocate $4,000 from its 2000 contingency fund to support additional membership on the CEMRRAT2 Task Force Textbook Working Group.

XIV. International affairs

A.(32)  The Board approved the following changes to the Mission and Criteria for the APA International Humanitarian Award proposed by CIRP (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):

The International Humanitarian Award, established by the American Psychological Association (APA) recognizes extraordinary humanitarian services and activism by a [member or affiliate member of the Association], psychologist or a team of psychologists  working under the aegis of local,  national, and international humanitarian organizations that provide psycho-social and humanitarian services.

This award is designed to honor the contributions of psychologists who might otherwise not be recognized because the professional and/or volunteer work to be considered is conducted primarily in the field with underserved populations. 

Recipients are individual psychologists or teams of psychologists who, by their extraordinary service at a difficult time, improve the lives and contribute to the wellbeing of people in a large or small geographic area anywhere in the world. Criteria include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) the specific actions, including personal risk, they take to improve the community involved; (2) the demonstrated skills, knowledge, dedication, and persistence they bring to the work in the specific community in question; and (3) the social and political activism they display in (re)building the community in question, in empowering community members to act on their own behalf, and in enhancing the health, stability, and welfare of the community in general.
"Extraordinary humanitarian services" are defined as professional activities initiated by one or more psychologists working alone or in association with others to help alleviate severe stress and restore psychological wellbeing to a group of people in a variety of difficult circumstances including but not limited to the following: 1) survivors and/or victims' families following a significant event such as a natural or person-induced disaster, a national or international incident, a civil war, or a forced migration anywhere in the world; or 2) a community of any size in which long-term political, economic, social, and/or other circumstances have caused severe stress and psychological problems to a substantial portion of that community.

The International Humanitarian Award may be given once a year in any year, as part of the APA awards program, when there are suitable psychologist nominees available for the award.  The APA Committee on International Relations in Psychology (CIRP), through a subcommittee named by the chair, shall screen all applicants and make recommendations to the Board of Directors, which shall designate the awardee.

XV. Central Office 

No items.

XVI. Financial affairs

A.(33)  The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the Proposed 2001 Final Budget calling for a net bottom-line deficit of $311,500.  The Board also voted to recommend that Council approve the following end-of-year reserve setasides to the extent possible within the budget approved by Council: 1) Ad Council ($150,000), 2) retiree gap health insurance ($300,000) and 3) Education Leadership Initiative ($110,000).

B.(34) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:

Staff is directed to undertake a study of the feasibility of a sale/leaseback/ownership reversion plan for APA’s properties.  A cost/benefit analysis of such a plan shall be reported to the C/R no later than August 2000.  As part of such analysis, mechanisms by which APA’s assets to be made liquid can be suitably preserved and protected for growth.

C.(35) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following substitute motion originated by the Finance Committee:

That each Executive Director be directed to update its respective board on the status of the Directorate budget as well as the overall condition of the APA budget on a continuing basis to foster ongoing dialogue.  To facilitate this process, each group, during the spring and fall consolidated meetings, shall have a standing item on its agenda to review and discuss priorities, direction and values of its respective area.  It is the feeling of the Committee that this ongoing dialogue will enhance unified progress toward the agreed upon goals.

D.(36)  The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following substitute motion originated by the Finance Committee:

In order to enhance the effectiveness of APA’s Central Office operations and to maximize the effective use of APA’s resources, the Council of Representatives directs the CEO to:

1. Design, in cooperation with the Finance Committee and the Board’s Budget Subcommittee, a plan for a systematic evaluation of the efficiency of APA’s operations;
2. Identify best practices to deliver services and products in the most efficient manner;
3. Identify appropriate external consultation as needed;
4. Implement new structures and procedures as appropriate; and,
5.   Submit progress reports to the Board of Directors, the Finance Committee, the Policy and Planning Board and the Council of Representatives in a timely manner.

E.(37)  The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following change to Article VIII of the APA Bylaws (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):

“8. The Treasurer of the Association shall be a Member of the Association, elected by the immediately previous Council following nominations by the Board of Directors.  The Treasurer shall take office for a term of three [five] years, beginning at the end of the fiscal year during which his/her election is announced, and shall not succeed himself/herself in this office more than once….”

F.(43)  The Board received as information the Annual Review of the APA Employee Compensation Package.

G.  In executive session, the Board voted to approve Phases 1A an 1B of the Compensation, Recruitment and Retention Plan.  The Board agreed with the Finance Committee's recommendation to incorporate Phase 2 into the 2002 budget to the extent possible.  The Board postponed action on Phase 3 of the plan, requesting that they be provided with details on who will be impacted.  See Attachment B for details on the above actions.

H.  At its October meeting, the Board voted to approve the following improvements to the APA employee benefits package:

1.  The tuition assistance allowance for each employee will be increased from $1500 per year to $2000 per year starting in January 2001.

2.  The co-pay for all prescription drugs (generic) will be decreased from $10 to $5 per prescription for all employees starting January 1, 2001.

3.  The APA Holiday party will be reinstated starting in December 2001.

XVII. Communications concerning outside organizations

No items.