APTI Meeting
Oct 24, 2007
Noon – 1 PM
Minutes taken by Moira Canes
Present:
Linda Page,
Jim Duval
Judy Dales
Sharon McIsaac-McKenna
Phillip McKenna
Marvin Shank
Helen Brammer
Caroline Mardon
Frances Khanna
Summary of Action Plans:
- Linda agreed to put the list of members (which are in alphabetical order) on each page of the Wiki so that we have some uniformity to the data.
- Sharon will call Tim Blakely before the meeting to find out whether we can tape record the session, and whether the ministry will be issuing a report of the meeting.
- Sharon/Jim will report back after the meeting and place all the info regarding the meeting on the Wiki. This may include a digital recording of the session if we are allowed to record it.
- It was agreed that after the information meeting with the ministry we will submit a slate of representatives for the Transitional Council (TC). This slate would only include psychotherapists not general public reps.
- Jim and/or Sharon will try to find out from Tim Blakely:
a)Who is on the selection committee for the TC? Is there a team dealing exclusively with the psychotherapy file?
b)Who will be responsible for defining the two terms ‘psychotherapist’ and ‘registered mental health practitioner’?
c) Who will be responsible for defining the meaning of the controlled act of psychotherapy?
- Jim and/or Sharon will approach Tim Blakely privately and mention that we are proposing a series of task forces that are developing curriculum. They will also emphasize the spirit of collaboration that exists in APTI, and invite others to join us.
- Linda will speak to Naseema to find out who the Coalition reps are for the ministry info meeting. Jim and Sharon will arrange an informal meeting afterwards between CAPT, APTI and Coalition reps.
- All members are encouraged to mention APTI in their advertising, literature or conversation and say that we endorse the proposed APTI curriculum.
- All members are asked to help generate a list of psychology educators to gather evidence of support for our convention. Send name, email address, tel.#, and a line about who they are. Once we have 10 – 20 people, Linda will launch a letter campaign inviting them to sign a template.
Minutes of Discussion:
Judy: Congratulations to APTI for being invited by Dr. Tepper, Assistant Deputy Minister, to attend the information session.
Jim and Sharon will attend the meeting.
Sharon: We wanted to be recognized as major players and now this is real with a capital R. I’m grateful to Linda and Jim and all who have started up the initiative to hold a convention. It makes it very practical. We have a working process that’s planned.
Linda: It’s the logical next step. The heart of the matter will be for APTI to start writing the curriculum. On that point, how is it going?
Marvin: I got into it. I don’t see others’ contributions.
Linda: The way I did the Wiki is I took each statement from the curriculum and I put it on the Wiki. Each page is like a word processing document. You can put as many things as you want. You go in, click on the invitation and then it will take you to the page with each point. Click on Edit and then you can type whatever you want in as much detail as we want. We must identify our contributions. For example, I’m from Adler and this is how we deal with this topic. Our learning objectives should be included if we have them – how that is covered and our process of reflection or feedback, so we can say this is not a passive workshop, but we ask people to respond to the material in this way. E.g. an essay, a reflection, or (heaven forbid) an exam. The reason I’m saying this is people look for this evaluated activity. Not necessarily for traditional evaluation, but for some kind of evaluation.
Marvin: I’m looking at the website now and there are no contributions up yet.
Linda: Yes we’re a bit slow.
Phillip: This sets it in a nice order. It would be good if each institute had a numeral so they’d be in the same order.
Sharon: An anagram might be easier.
Phillip: I’m suggesting that if 10 people put up a response on pg. 1 then the responses on page 3 would be in the same order. Even if we write up names, we should put them in the same order as on our letterhead. Can we do this?
Linda: We can order them any way we want.
Caroline: Can the list of members get listed on each page as it is on the letterhead?
Linda: We can cut and paste. I can do that. We’ll already have the heading under which we list each contribution.
Jim: Will this discussion move onto the meeting scheduled for next week?
Linda: Yes. I was going to suggest we do that now.
Caroline: So we can work out the points for the reps to bring forward.
Sharon: What’s our mandate? How many people will be there?
Caroline: There will be 30 people – 2 reps each from the list of invitees of the 4 disciplines – Homeopathy, Kinesiology, Naturopathy, and Psychotherapy. After the government lays out the information there will be a feeding frenzy of questions for a limited time. Then there’ll be breakout meeting. Specific questions will be based on that.
Linda: I went several years ago to a similar information session regarding accreditation of post secondary education. The emphasis was on process, not on the substance of different schools. I suspect the same will be true, but we could go in with what we would like if this were an ideal meeting.
Judy: How will the TC be set up?
Sharon: Paragraph 3 of the letter reads: It’s an information session for stakeholders at which ministry staff will provide a broad overview of a range of topics, including the Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991 (RHPA) and its policy intent, professional interest versus public interest, transitional Councils and their role, role of the Registrar and the regulation development process. Following the ministry presentation there will be an opportunity for a question and answer session.
Helen joins the meeting.
Caroline: In the legislation it describes how many people will be in the College, but the number for the TC is not clear. How do we get on the T.C.?
Frances: In June we asked this question. We had a slate and were advised not to present it. We were confused because the Coalition was putting together a slate.
Sharon: We should revisit this.
Judy: We were told it was too soon. It would get lost in filing.
Moira: We were told that an invitation would go up on the govt. website.
Phillip: Yes, this is a public process. There will be people in the Ministry of Health who will be selecting. We need to send our recommendations to the committee. An attempt to express our wish to have representation on the council is permissible, and this may have influence on the people setting up the council. They want a wide diversity, people with board experience, people who can transcend their self-interest for the sake of public interest. College Councils are made up of people from the profession (the majority) and people from other professions such as lawyers, business people, journalists etc. (the minority).
Caroline: Since there are two categories, we should recommend people from non-psychological professions too. Get people who would be sympathetic to our cause.
Phillip: Helen, didn’t you say that you could probably refer professional people who could be members of the council?
Helen: No one has emerged yet. I’ll see if I could find someone to come forward. The Jungian Foundation has been in existence for over 30 years and has public meetings, so we may be able to identify someone.
Sharon: Could APTI present its slate now? Because they are in the process of setting it up. We had four names. Is it timely now?
Helen: I agree; we should formally bring people forward.
Judy: It is timely. We may have to do this more than once.
Sharon: After the meeting we can decide what names.
Jim: I agree. From a sheer optics point of view, we’re following the process. We only have to wait until Oct. 31… It would not be for us to recommend the people we think of as public members. They should go in under their own initiative.
Linda: We must get people who are informed. Jim and Sharon can you report on the October 31 meeting, and then we’ll follow up with a letter?
Sharon: We’ll put it on the Wiki.
Jim: I’ll meet with Sharon. Should we mention the possibility of the conference if there’s space?
Caroline: I think we should hold it back. We could do it in a private follow-up meeting.
Linda: We can say we’re proposing a series of task forces that are developing a curriculum.
Sharon: I’m glad the process is mounted. It would be relevant to say what Linda just said.
Linda: The thing that’s important to emphasize is that APTI has worked in the spirit of collaboration and we invite others to work with us in this same spirit.
Jim: The sheer existence of APTI provides leadership. Our type of cooperation is what they’re looking for.
Linda: We can just give them a teaser, but hold back the details on plans for a Convention.
Phillip: I’d like to know if there’s a team in the Ministry of Health dealing exclusively with the Psychotherapy file. Are there 4 teams? Who do we need to talk to before the TC is formed and after it’s formed? The Minister has huge control on what needs to be done. There are 2 powers here - the power of the TC, and the group in the Ministry who will influence the Council. We need to find out the geography of the Ministry on this file. Strategically, who is most important. We could ask Tim Blakely. He may be able to tell us.
Helen: I agree.
Sharon: I’m aware of Jim and I mediating information to you usefully. Could we ask Tim Blakely to send us a report?
Sharon: Perhaps they’ll hand out a fact sheet. Could we ask for it before the meeting? Tim is very friendly. He’s very accessible. It’s a practical question.
Helen: Good idea. Then you could relax.
Sharon: In the letter he says: Should you have any questions regarding the Oct 31 information session please contact Tim Blakely or Jacklyn Campbell.
Moira: Call before the meeting.
Sharon: Yes we’ll do that.
Linda: You could call Brian and ask if there are any questions that we should ask.
Jim: Because the controlled act is in RHPA does this take the definition out of the TC for psychotherapists? Does it have to be defined by HPRAC? It’s in RHPA. Who’s going to define it? We don’t want them to do it. This is a big question.
Sharon: This is a question for Tim Blakely.
Frances: The question in June about the two terms for psychotherapists – the implications aren’t clear. Registered Mental Health Practitioners (RMHP) aren’t mentioned in the letter for stakeholders for psychotherapy.
Jim: RMHP is not in the title. Not in the controlled act. Only psychotherapy is mentioned.
Sharon: The vagueness is underlined. Does T.C. have the right to define meaning?
Helen: I suggest you address these questions to Tim later.
Marvin: In the Act the term psychotherapist is in the label of the Act. RMHP term comes later.
Linda: From this discussion, Jim and Sharon, do you have an idea of your mission?
Jim: I have to get be careful not to get distracted by details. I need to go in with my ears and mind open, so I can hear what they’re saying. Can you take a digital recorder?
Sharon: I can ask if we can take it with us.
Linda: Then we can put it up on the Wiki.
People expressed that this was a great idea.
Linda: One more question: Firstly we’d like to welcome the Living Institute to APTI. The question has come up around how to describe their connection to APTI in their advertising.
After some discussion it was agreed to say we endorse the proposed APTI curriculum.
Linda: We need to encourage people to mention APTI so we build our public profile.
As an APTI rep, I’m representing APTI at the OACCP conference on Saturday. I’ll talk about what APTI has done and what it means to be a professional. I’ll state our position about continuing education and entry into practice. I’ll also mention the convention proposal.
Marvin: I’ll be interested to hear how it is received.
Linda: This is their annual conference. Catherine Yarrow is the registrar of the College of Psychologists. I have a great deal of respect for her.
Helen: Could that be a stepping-stone to how our convention will develop?
Linda: She has to be very careful about her position. I’d ask her privately how she could support us. We could gather letters of endorsement. GPPA (General Practice Psychology Association, OAPA, OACCPP. We need to gather evidence of support. So if anyone meets someone from a psychotherapy-related association, get their business card, send me their information, and we can email them a template for a letter of endorsement.
Frances: We need to look for names of well-regarded names educators in psychotherapy.
Sharon: Should we get GPs and Psychiatrists?
Linda: Yes. All of the above. Generate a list. Everyone should think about this – nurses, physicians etc.
Sharon: Email Linda names and their roles - 10 – 20 names – and then we’ll send a template.
Caroline: Name, address, emails and a line about what they do.
Judy signed off.
Next meeting is scheduled for Nov 7 at 12 noon.
Jim: What about all of us meeting after the Ministry meeting for a coffee – Caroline, CAPT reps, APTI reps and Coalition reps.
Linda: When I see Naseema, I’ll ask who the reps are and I’ll give Naseema your names.