NEXT MEETING November 21, 2007:Noon 1:00

APTI Meeting

November 7, 2007

Noon – 1:00 PM

Present:

Maria Iosue

Linda Paige

Phillip McKenna

Sharon McKenna-MacIsaac

Fran Khana

Judy Dales

Caroline Mardon

Jim Duvall

NEXT MEETING – November 21, 2007:noon – 1:00

ACTIONS

1.Linda will be looking for more information about international bodies that could be involved in accreditation of psychotherapy training institutes.

2.Fran will take the initiative to lead a committee to consider the question of what could constitute ‘the controlled act’ of psychotherapy, in order to develop a position to put forward to the government/transitional council. Anyone interested in considering this topic should contact Fran.

MINUTES

Linda’s report on her panel presentation at the OACCP Meeting –

Linda - APTI in general got a great response. Naseema introduced Linda with a comment like the following – OACCP is fortunate to have APTI, and Coalition is fortunate to have APTI as a member!!! Panel included Catherine Yarrow, registrar with College of Psychologists. Linda may try to upload and send Yarrow’s Powerpoint, as well as Linda’s taping of the panel, if possible. Yarrow made it clear the College represents the public, whereas professional assn’s represent members and associations.

The panel was about regulation, Linda basically gave ‘APTI party-line’ – 3-legged stool – public (college), professional assns, and third is psychotherapy educators and trainers (we translate competencies into curriculum). APTI represents third leg and she mentioned about our curriculum; and that we want to invite others to contribute and the OCP. Everyone thought it all wonderful. When she sat down – Catherine leaned over and said, “you know what you’re talking about, don’t you? ‘accreditation and accreditation process.”

Sharon – can you spell out implications?

Jim – fantastic, will help to bring rigor to what we do, especially at this stage, will give it shape

Linda – probably, if your program is accredited, then your graduates have an easier time when they apply to the College. So it would be an advantage to graduates to have an accreditation process that we have some control over.It would be an accrediting body, our own accrediting body

Phillip – the college would have the power to accredit.

Linda – No, the college doesn’t have the power, they would lay out what a student has to go through to be a member, but a separate body would accredit– the college of psychologists does not accredit . Even if this is encouraged by govt, it needs to be an arms-length body.

Jim – just went through with children’s mental health Ontariowhere an accredting body was too close and when it is too close, it doesn’t’ hold. Hincks is accredited by COA, in the states. Family Services Ontario is also going to purchase the accreditation process from COA.

Linda – Catherine Yarrow herself is involved in several accrediting bodies that are broad, international bodies. She has always been very open and willing to help, was great in HPRAC process.

Caroline M – is this a similar process that others like massage or chiropractic went through?

Linda – I believe there is an external accrediting body for chiropractic –there has to be a very clear delineation between the assns that represent the interests of the profession and the accrediting body that holds the standards for the discipline vs the practitioners.

Philip – what about examining boards?

Linida – that may be within the college to have certain processes for people to go through, and as well there could be a separate process for the accreditation part

Linda – it will be up to the college to decide the processes for separate individuals

Maria – is there an already existing accrediting body for psychotherapy or is this a new entity that needs to be created.

L – I have heard a world council of psychotherapy and an international organization of some kind on psychotherapy – otherwise don’t think there is – there may be world international bodies that we could draw on. That would be a big plus for us, to present what is already out there, and not have to reinvent

Jim – and now also with the need for cultural awareness issues which has required some huge retooling with regards to aboriginal worldview– this would become part of the accrediting process and that is positive

Philip – Am a little worried that we are thinking of these accrediting bodies as benign – really with psychodynamic we are on the boundaries and are now getting crunched into health profession, are these international bodies going to be as open/receptive as HPRAC has been. We are in the process where we have a lot to protect and are entering an environment that is not benign to us. Need to stay very ware that people de-nature us and grind us into

Linda – I share your hesitation in many ways and I am approaching it much like the whole question of regulation – if it’s going to be foisted on us I would rather have some control, that is why I prefer the international bodies - they have a much more broad view, to protect, especially psychodynamic approaches

Jim – brought up a situation where affiliating with universities to get accreditation has been very mixed bag as they want to dictate, goes both ways.

Linda –not much to be done for action steps except to contact international communities

Philip – can’t go in naively

Linda – yes keep it in mind and keep our ears open, and bring it back and report it in

Judy – would this take place after the college has been set up?

Linda – there would at least be something that has to be defined as what is required, that is what we train to

Report on the meeting with the government on October 31

Attended: Jim and Sharon for APTI, for CAPT – Philip and Susan Lucas?, for Coalition - Naseema, Penny, Judith Ramirez

Philip – was there for CAPT and CAPT-APTI took up front row table

Sharon – sent all written info on the wiki, was forwarded by Tim Blakely

Phlip – meeting was in 3 parts, 40 other people from homeopathy, acupuncture, kineseology, naturopathy ; policy and program group shepherding all this, saw all the staff handling, lawyer deferred to from time to time – has obviously been present for all of the process. She spoke quite authoritatively, Christine Henderson (not MOH staff).

Tim is manager of policy programs committee – two-part talk : 1) overall RHPA Powerpoint to explain aspects that will govern all colleges 2) TCs and registrars in new councils & process going

A presentation by Mary Lou Gignac in the middle of these two parts. She is president(?) of the overall regulatory body to which all the colleges belong. It is a huge resource to them. She is very bright, has been registrar of dieticians, and knows what it is like and talked about that. The message over and over was that the colleges exist for the public interest, and not as bodies for helping forward professionals to make money, etc.

This body shares info and supports inter-college collaboration, helps with advice and suggestions.

Culture of a college – it can easily get into a kind of antagonistic mode to the profession and insist on policing – this doesn’t work. Ones that work are ones that keep good contact with people in the field, educate and support them and seek their input. Message loud and clear from her that our input from the field and from professional organizations really necessary and welcomed and treated with respect. We were all treated with great respect, it was a very good feeling, they really worked hard to do it. People have to go thru a sea change of attitude, not representing profession but public.

Tim provided some very clarifying points:

-Why we ended up with controlled act: went with RHPA – what had been in place was strict scopes of practice. Went for vaguer more overlapping and not seeking to be exclusive, added title protection and put the teeth into controlled act. The overlapping – people who handle the body, like naturopaths, massage, etc. so no one profession can say I am the only one of these professions can do this specific little job.

-Used the example, there may be some people who do some of what a physiotherapist does and don’t call selves “physiotherapist”, that is fine, they are not regulated; and so this is also true – somebody might put up sign ‘kineseology services’ that is all right. The actual scope of practice is not so exclusive, is not meant to be a tight definition to keep people out. This is why counselors don’t need to worry, if they do things on emotional disturbance and don’t calls selves psychotherapists that is fine. The notion of controlled act was to get at really really hard possible stuff that no one can do at all unless in the college. There is a general harm clause that includes psychological harm (brought into bodily harm that they say includes psych harm) –there is a general restriction of dong some things if they cause harm or may cause harm. For example, advise someone they should never take medication could be considered interfering and causing harm to the person. The ordinary day to day work of psychotherapy in itself could hardly be said to cause danger of harm in the ordinary ..kind of relives us from some anxiety that actually no matter what happens we will be able to do our work and just be careful. That’s at least very good news.

-Would not allow taping of the information session, it was inquired – they said felt it might hamper frank and open discussion

-Judy, Jim – feels it dispelled myths and rumors and, Sharon and Phil felt the same; especially the sense that you could contact the government. Tim was standing there commenting on the wiki stuff, and you always had sense could inquire

-Jim - prior to meeting had called Tim and he called back the very next day and then communicated by email, was really surprising to get such a response

-Judy’s q – why a controlled act? Phil – what new directions said can’t have a controlled act, is nonsense, no one act; so tried to revive idea of strict scope of practice, and the govt people couldn’t tolerate this because all the new acts need to be consonant with RHPA philosophy, the teeth go into a controlled act. I asked two questions about it, and I think I embarrassed them both times, they couldn’t give a really good answer

-Linda – sounds like everything is gong to hinge on the word ‘serious’

-Phil – coalition hasn’t solved problem of how courts will come down, but that doesn’t help at level of practitioner of what can and can’t do. I asked ‘does the new college of have the right within its work, the TC within its work, to interpret, the meaning of the controlled act, what it really means?’ and that’s where the lawyer got uppity and said ‘this statute cannot be changed”. All the others are very clear. Tim said the college will have to operationalize the meaning, and of course ‘there will be cooperation of the colleges that have the controlled act’ and he sort of blushed. In a bit of a bind. And I asked it another way later ‘so the TC can issue the certificates of registration of members, can they determine already who gets the controlled act. If it hasn’t been made clear yet, could they do it without reference’? – Tim answered – well I don’t think there will be any certificates until college is set up, hemmed and hawed.

-Sharon – we are into grey areas. Eventually he said something ‘ the psychotherapy act will only be promulgated when the college is set up’ at that point the controlled act will be described and promulgated. Now it has passed but is not fully proclaimed. Obviously a fuzzy point

-Fran – question of controlled act, did APTI form a group to talk about this?

-Sharon – we prepared nothing that we put into print

-Fran - we don’t have a group working on this, maybe this is an idea, if we had a task force

-Linda – a good idea, would you volunteer?

-Fran – I would be part of it

-Linda – if you would be point person, others interested can let u know can set up page on wiki, if you at least gather people

-Sharon – one – the pages from Mary Lou in box bottom of page 4 , regulatory business – 10 pillars. She has been involved in it , and lots of international cooperation – you have to constantly keep in mind – province to province movement of practitioners; they have worked out reciprocity agreements –seemed to be she was a very important person to contact and very personable and earthy and really likes the zone she is in. Box on bottom of page 6, and last page – she said ‘what resources does this federation offer you as a college and people moving to a college’ 1) connection to colleges that have hard learned lessons to share; re: OCP she would be great to talk to, would be very good to have a talk with her about the anomaly about controlled act given to other colleges before the college that names it is even in existence, even talking to her frankly about problems particularly psychology, I think you could frankly talk with her; even invited perhaps to meetings you have about planning the conventions, I think we should think of her.

-Linda – it would be helpful to have the input of the other colleges