Criterion 1 – appendix b docx Criterion 1 appendix – a Criterion I appendix c Criterion I appendix d Criterion IX appendix Criterion VI appendix Criterion VIII appendix Criterion X appendix Criterion XI – appendix b Criterion XI appendix a Criterion XII Appendix Petition – Final

Please read the following, as it pertains to your practice, and to the field of Group Psychology.  The petition is posted above.

Group Psychology is the only one of 15 ABPP Specialties that is neither considered a Proficiency, nor a Specialty by CRSPPP, or the APA. This may have many implications down the road, such as reduced insurance reimbursement, or refusal to pay should insurance companies further downgrade their coverage. Based upon this alone, should we be applying to become a Specialty within ABPP, we would be denied.

A small working group called the Group Specialty Council, initiated by Nina Brown with APA, Division 49 (Group Psychology and Group Psychotherapy), along with Sally Barlow (ABGP), and Eleanor Counselman representing AGPA have worked to obtain specialty status for Group Psychology by submitting an application to CRSPPP. This is important because it would demonstrate that Group Psychology has specific skills that require specialized training.

This 205 page document has recently been submitted, and is now under review. We have attempted this process three previous times, and we have been denied three times- without explanation. This application is much more robust, is proposed and supported by three groups, and has much more supportive documentation. It represents the strongest argument that we have been able to muster so far. We now need your help.

The next step is that the application is posted for two months of public comment. This is where we ask your help.

It is a chance for people who want Group to be approved as a separate Specialty, i.e. one that has a specialty-specific skill set and training needs, to say so. The comments are not so much about the petition but about the need for group as a Specialty, and we would especially appreciate comments from each of you that support that need.

Talking points that you could include could be:
1) you could note the wide variety of populations for which there is evidence of group therapy effectiveness,
2) the need for groups in order to provide quicker access to mental health care,
3) or comment on the particular skills required for group therapy leadership.
4) the need to be recognized as a Specialty to encourage specialized training
5) how Group Psychology is a Specialty distinct from other forms of intervention
6) the specific advantages and contributions of Group

We are told that the committee that makes specialty decisions does pay attention to these comments. Anyone can post; you do not need to be a member of APA or even a psychologist. Thus, you might consider forwarding this email to supportive colleagues who might also be willing to submit supportive comments.

Your action in support of this petition can, and will, have a direct effect upon Group being designated as a Specialty…..or not.

Given that we have tried three times, and that this is the most robust argument that we can muster, if this does not work, we may have nothing else that we can do.
Your participation will have a significant impact.

The end date for public comment submission is 3/16/2015.

We thank you for your help.

To access the petition and leave a comment, please go to:

http://apaoutside.apa.org/EducCSS/public.

You will see on this page a notice that you will need to sign in, and set an email address and password. Once you click accept, you will be sent to a page with the various petitions open for public comment. Please select the Group Petition, follow the prompts, and submit your online comments.

Thank you,

Joel C. Frost, Ed.D., ABPP, President, American Board of Group Psychology

Sally Barlow, Ph.D., ABPP, Past-President, American Board of Group Psychology

Feel free to post your comments below.

5-Minute Lessons #1

Within 300 seconds or less I invite the reader to learn something new, or re-learn something old, about group psychotherapy.

PROBLEM

In a recent group, the newest member (approximately 3 months) suddenly decided to re-locate to anther state. Her decision was finalized while she was on a 4-week absence from group to her newly chosen city. As she had been expected to return to group after only one week away, the group became anxious and suspicious that her absence indicated her intention to leave group. In a regularly scheduled individual session with this patient, she asked me to inform the group she would be moving out of town, but intended to return to say goodbye in person. I informed the group about both of her intentions.

The group reacted with a mixture of disappointment that she was leaving before they got to know her, and annoyance they had made any emotional investment in the relationship at all. They vehemently protested her intention to return in person. Many valid arguments were presented to bolster the case for the waste of time it would be to see her again. While there was underlying disappointment with me that I had chosen such a temporary member (her decision to re-locate was news to me as well!) the group clearly had a much easier time being angry with this patient than with me.

My re-locating patient, on the other hand, was excited about sharing her decision with the group. She considered this decision to made from a position of growth and only imagined that the group would share in her delight. She intended to tell the group what an instrumental part they had played in assisting her in accomplishing a crucial developmental milestone.   I had a problem, should I allow her to come back and “disrupt” the group? If she did return it is likely she would be blindsided by anger and resentments. This would hardly be the celebration of a developmental milestone she had envisioned for herself.

INTERVENTION

I encouraged the discussion of her return. A good deaI of frustration was expressed which extended to previous members that had left and a slew of other gripes. I inquired as to my contribution to these problems.  Apparently, I had significant culpability for many of them. While I was not specifically asked to make a decision regarding the return of the re-locating patient, the discussion was heated and exciting. The group eventually moved on to other emotionally relevant issues.

Theoretically, I could make a case for any number of decisions regarding the return of the re-locating member. In the end I chose to honor the group contract regarding termination. However, I was concerned the re-locating patient was walking into an emotional ambush. I decided to tell her about the groups reactions prior to her return.

RESULT

The patient made an informed decision and returned to the group. After some initial resistance to directly approach the issue, members of the group talked about what they had discussed about her during her absence.  Being emotionally prepared, the re-locating patient was very understanding of the feelings of the group members. Hostility was thus diffused and the re-locating patient was now seen as courageous for returning. The group heard directly from her the meaning and constructive value they had had for her. A group situation that was hurtling towards an emotional disaster became an unexpectedly moving experience.

REFLECTIONS

I am pleased with the decisions I made to allow the group to express their upset with me and hold to the contract. Likewise I am pleased I told this patient in advance what she would be walking into. I believe I relied less on a theory to guide me and more on the basis of what seemed most kind and thoughtful. What would be the point of being theoretically correct but risking a disruption that could not be repaired? In hindsight, I believe all would have been better served if I had openly told the group I was considering discussing with the re-locating patient the group’s reactions to her leaving prior to her attending the group. However, when I left the final group session before her return, I had no idea I would do anything different that I usually do. I just left that session with an uneasy feeling that demanded attention, and fortunately, received it.

Gil Spielberg, Ph.d, ABPP

Los angeles,Ca.

Oct. 3, 2014

Hi Everyone,

Welcome to the ABGP blog. This space will be used to post announcements of conference, current findings and theoretical papers related to group. We also will have group dilemmas posts where senior clinicians will provide their take on the common problems in group treatment.

Regards,

Andy Eig, PHD, ABPP