Report on the Meeting
of the APA Council of Representatives (COR), February 2010
Emanuel Donchin, University of South Florida,
donchin@mail.usf.edu
Randy
Engel, Georgia Institute of Technology, randall.engle@psych.gatech.edu
The COR
convened February 19-21, 2010 at the Grand Hyatt, in Washington, DC. Division 3
was again represented by two members, as Randy Engle joined Manny Donchin at
the COR table. As you may recall, our Division lost its second representative
during 2009. In the last apportionment, however, members of Division 6 have
allocated their vote to Division 3, thus allowing us to gain a second seat at
the COR.
This meeting
of the COR dealt with a number of rather weighty issues, some of much concern
to members of our Division. One issue of
immediate concern to many of our members is the manner in which the
dual-membership discount was resolved. Here the news is both good and bad. The good news is that, even though the Board
of Directors moved that all dual membership discounts be abolished, the COR
voted to continue the discount. Specifically
the COR created a $25 dues credit for full members of APA who are also members
of the Association for Psychological Science; the Society of Neuroscience; any
organizations that are part of the Federation for the Advancement of Behavioral
and Brain Sciences; and members of the state, provincial and territorial
psychological associations and the four national ethnic-minority psychological
associations. This dues credit will
begin with the 2012 dues cycle.
The bad news,
of course, is that for members of APS and the Federation organizations, the $25
discount will replace their current 25 percent dual membership discount. In the horse trading that was required in
order to maintain the dual discount, and to add both APS and the SFN to the
list of associations whose members benefit from the discount, the size of the
discount fell victim. It is noteworthy
that the APA’s Central Office reported that of the 30,000 or so current APA
members who could claim the discount, only some 5000 have actually done so.
Another
financial matter that is of concern to members of Division 3, as well as to the
other Divisions that join us in the Caucus of Academic, Scientific and
Professional Divisions (CASAP), has been the fate of the annual contribution of
$40,000 that the APA has been making to the Archives of the History of
Psychology (AHAP), maintained at the University of Akron. As we reported last year, this allocation fell
victim to the budget cuts of 2009. However, the budgetary situation is somewhat
improved. We offered, therefore, an
amendment to the budget that restored the annual allocation for AHAP. The APA’s Treasurer, and the Board, accepted
this as a friendly amendment to the budget proposal and the allocation has thus
been restored.
We won’t
provide here a detailed report on the APA budget, as adopted for 2010, other
than to note that the deep deficits of last year have been averted in the
current budget, which actually shows a surplus. The drastic budget cuts of the past year, and
various other economizing steps, have created a more comfortable, if not a
plush, budgetary situation. One note
that is worth emphasizing is that the APA journals, and in particular the
electronic and Library, subscriptions contribute a very substantial portion of
the APA revenues. Thus the academic
community, of which Division 3 is very much a part, is making a very major
contribution to the well being of the Association. This is a point that your representatives
never tire of making.
Another
matter to which the COR attended, in this and in its most recent meeting, is
the newly adopted Strategic Plan of the APA. Within the framework of The Plan the COR
adopted a statement about the APA “Values”. The values statement is quite brief as you
will see below. It has, nevertheless,
engaged a very active task force (of which one of us, ED, was a member) in
quite extensive discussions, which continued to the floor of the COR. Ultimately, the following language was
adopted…
The American Psychological Association
commits to its vision through a mission based upon the following values:
Continual Pursuit of
Excellence
Knowledge and its
Application Based Upon Me
Outstanding Service to its
Members and to Society
Social Justice, Diversity
and Inclusion
Ethical Action in All that
We Do
We are pleased that the statement affirms the role
of the “Methods of Science” in the acquisition of knowledge. This seemed stronger and more definite than
merely affirming an interest in “Science based” knowledge. Science, after all, is defined by its methods
and it is important, we think, for the APA to affirm its commitment to the
Scientific Method. It may shock some of
you that some, at the COR, asserted that this language is “exclusionary”
because, to them, the phrase “evidence based” is not synonymous with
“Scientifically tested”.
A considerable segment of the COR discussion was
focused on issues of ethics. At the core
of the discussion is the clear contradiction between the ethical principles
that bind the members of the APA to abjure torture in any form and that clearly
disallows any member of the APA to participate, or to support, any torture. On the other side are the assertions of the
authority of the Law, which under the previous administration deemed torture to
be a proper, and legal, tool in interrogations.
There was a strong feeling among the membership that the Ethical
Principles do not make it sufficiently clear that no matter what “the Law
allows, or mandates”, Psychologists can not violate their ethical principles. The following paragraphs are quoted from the
summary prepared by Rhea Farberman.
“…In response, APA's council directed the Ethics Committee to
draft language to make clear that the code offers no defense to human rights
violations. After gathering member and public comment, the committee proposed,
and the council overwhelmingly approved, the following amendments:
“…If psychologists' ethical
responsibilities conflict with law, regulations, or other governing legal
authority, psychologists make known their commitment to this Ethics Code and
take steps to resolve the conflict in a responsible manner. If the
conflict is irresolvable via such means, psychologists may adhere to the
requirements of the law, regulations, or other governing authority in
keeping with basic principles of human rights.
From Ethical
Standard 1.02:
1.02
Conflicts Between Ethics and Law, Regulations, or Other Governing Legal
Authority
If
psychologists' ethical responsibilities conflict with law, regulations, or
other governing legal authority, psychologists clarify the nature of the
conflict, make known their commitment to the Ethics Code and take reasonable
steps to resolve the conflict consistent with the General Principles and
Ethical Standards of the Ethics Code. If the conflict is irresolvable
via such means, psychologists may adhere to the requirements of the law,
regulations, or other governing legal authority. Under no circumstances
may this standard be used to justify or defend violating human rights.
From Ethical
Standard 1.03:
1.03
Conflicts Between Ethics and Organizational Demands
If the demands of an organization with
which psychologists are affiliated or for whom they are working are in
conflict with this Ethics Code, psychologists clarify the nature of the
conflict, make known their commitment to the Ethics Code, and to the extent
feasible, resolve the conflict in a way that permits adherence to the Ethics
Code. take reasonable steps to resolve the conflict consistent with the
General Principles and Ethical Standards of the Ethics Code. Under no circumstances may this standard be
used to justify or defend violating human rights.
These
amendments are an emphatic statement that the Ethics Code does not offer a
defense of following the law or organizational demand to a charge of violating
an individual's human rights.
Another
item that occupied the COR was a proposed revision of the “Model Licensing Act”
(MLA) that the APA develops with the hope that the various State Licensing Laws
will adopt. The proposed model created
unhappiness among School Psychologists, who were successful in amending the
proposed text. Another controversy,
which is of interest to the academic community, is the implication in the new
language that may lead to the Licensing of I/O psychologists. The matter is quite controversial within the
I/O community, with members of the SIOP delegation in COR strongly objecting to
this trend. However, there were I/O
psychologists on the Task Force that drafted the MLA who advocate licensure for
I/O. In the end the original language
was adopted. The issue, however, is far
from closed. To the extent that
Licensure of I/O will require the creation of an accreditation process of I/O
programs, it is very likely that the academic departments will strongly resist
the process. At least, your two
representatives, both long time chairs, find it difficult to believe that the
academic departments will accept such a process.
Finally,
let us report, that the COR voted that its August meeting will not be held at
the Manchester Hyatt in San Diego, the original site of the APA 2010
convention. It has just been announced
that the COR will meet in August at the San Diego Mariott.
To quote Rhea Farberman again::
“…In response
to a donation to the Proposition 8 campaign by the owner of the Manchester
Grand Hyatt, Doug Manchester, a number of APA divisions and members voiced
concerns about APA’s use of the hotel during its annual meeting.
"Today's decision allows council to make
an important statement that it stands in solidarity with the lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender community and its allies in protest of Mr.
Manchester's political views," said APA President Dr. Carol D. Goodheart.
"Members of our council will now not be faced with having to choose
between their responsibilities as members of council and their wish to express
their opposition to Mr. Manchester’s action by not
entering his hotel."
Early last year, APA learned that
"It
is important that we be respectful of the decisions of individuals; those who
choose to stay at the Hyatt and those who do not," said Goodheart.
In addition,
APA plans to use the meeting to highlight the association's policy statement in
support of same-sex marriage and the science that supports that position….”
Stay tuned for our August installment…