Family Psychology

Susan McDaniel

Mission: The Division of Family Psychology provides a home for psychologists interested in families in their many forms. Clinical, research, educational, and public policy perspectives are presented in the wide range of divisional activities. The Division has achieved specialty status with the American board of Professional Psychology (ABPP) and developed the Journal of Family Psychology. The Division works with the Practice Directorate to ensure inclusion of psychologists in healthcare reimbursement plans. As the only APA Division focusing primarily on families, the Division of Family Psychology strives to educate the professional community regarding the many advantages of a family systems perspective.

To put it bluntly, the main purpose of Division 43 is to advocate for systems and family approaches within APA. Why is this important? APA is a large and powerful organization with 159,000 members. When we are successful in advocating for family approaches, it means that the full weight of this organization can be used to advocate for issues of importance to families and family therapy. Also, the more successful we are in influencing the larger organization, the more psychology students will learn about families, family therapy, and family research (through the APA Education Directorate); the more family research will be included in the initiatives of the APA Science Directorate; and the more families will be included in the lobbying and policy debates that are part of the APA Public Interest Directorate.

Membership: We are a freckle on the back of APA in terms of numbers. We are relatively young; the Division was founded in 1985. Membership is about 2,000. About 5,000 subscribe to Journal of Family Psychology, I think the second largest subscription-based journal in the organization. It is now an APA (rather than Division) journal. While we are small in numbers, in the past 5 years I think we have become a very important Practice Division-the others are Clinical, Counseling, Child, Psychotherapy, Psychoanalysis, Neuropsychology, etc. (Remember that many psychologists are scientists and educators, not practitioners.) We are having more of an impact, and our members hold more important positions in the larger APA.

Current issues: The biggest issue in the Division right now is whether we'll be able to achieve specialty status within APA. There is tremendous debate within the organization about whether it is wise to grant specialty status beyond the original five (Clinical, Child, Counseling, School, and I forget the other one) because it can set up the general psychologist in practice to have difficulty getting reimbursed or otherwise being recognized for doing, for example, family therapy. However, Neuropsychology, Clinical Health Psychology, and, I believe, Psychoanalysis have recently been granted specialty status. This means that schools can grant degrees in these specialties, and accreditation occurs specific to these specialties. It is important for family psychology to achieve this, if possible, so that programs are encouraged to develop graduate programs organized around family, rather than just say, general clinical psychology. It will help with reimbursement issues in some states. And, it would help to increase the importance of family psychology within psychology and within APA. More psychologists, even those in other specialties, would be likely to get some family psychology training. This is important since most practicing psychologists, with or without training, do see couples and some see families. We submitted one application two years ago, and it was returned for revision. We are about to submit another application, probably by the end of the year. This one looks very strong to me, but the politics of APA are as volatile and mysterious as those of the Congress are. There are many ways it could be blocked. We'll just have to wait and see.

Other current projects in the Division:

1. I head an Interdivisional Primary Care Psychology Curriculum committee, which has been very interesting as the other members are leaders from Health Psychology, Pediatric Psychology, Independent Practice, and Education. It has been an effort to blend systems approaches to health with the other (much more widespread and influential) approaches to health psychology. I hope we'll have a product by next summer.
2. There is another active Task Force working on issues having to do with Rural Families.
3. There is some energy around Family Research-promoting it at the large Annual meeting, and having a practice-research exchange at the Mid-winter meeting.

Relationship with AFTA: APA is a guild; AFTA is not. That is the most important difference. Many AFTA members are also members of Division 43; however, in AFTA we are not limited, constrained, or burdened by the need to protect a discipline. I think AFTA should position itself as the premier interdisciplinary organization for family therapy, an academy of ideas and exchange about systems theory, relationships, and family therapy. There may be policy and public interest issues in which AFTA and Division 43 could partner. I have never heard anything negative about AFTA in a Division 43 meeting; I think the relations are good and the missions different but complementary.