A motion was passed at the Special General Meeting (SGM) on the 10 May 2016 mandating the DCP Executive committee to:
- review and take account of Division members’ views concerning the quality of representation of clinical psychologists' services through the Society to Government, commissioners, employers, the education and training communities, the media, service users and the public at large;
- review the systems through which the services of other comparable professions are represented, commissioning any research necessary to acquire the requisite information;
- identify ways and means of improving the representation, visibility and recognition of the value of clinical psychologists' services;
- bring forward recommendations to a special meeting of members within 12 months of the Special General Meeting.
A SGM took place on 5 July 2017 in York to report back to Members. The presentations and final summary were live-streamed. The presentations can be accessed here. 90 DCP members attended and around 70 Members accessed the live stream.
The SGM programme was opened by DCP Chair Esther Cohen-Tovée who set the context and DCP Child Area Lead Julia Faulconbridge who reported back on the survey of DCP members carried out in accordance with the SGM mandate above. Esther briefly recapped the options for a Professional Body function within the BPS which had been presented earlier in the day by members of the BPS Structural Review Group. BPS Vice-President Peter Kinderman presented his views on the possibility of a new organisation for Clinical Psychologists being established in partnership with the BPS. Reg Morris, former GTiCP co-chair, presented the history which has led to the view that the time is right for the formation of an independent professional body for Clinical Psychologists.
Those present then participated in some group work using a “world café” approach, generating pros and cons of the options for a professional body function for clinical psychologists within the BPS as described by the Structural Review group, and the pros and cons of a new external professional body. Views on whether the professional body should be specifically for clinical psychologists or applied psychologists more broadly were also elicited. The feedback from the group work will be analysed and a report will follow. Brief feedback was given at the SGM, and the opinion of those present was sought. The overwhelming majority of those present indicated they would like an external professional body for clinical psychologists, with 1 indication for a professional body function within the BPS and 6 abstentions.
The DCP Representative Assembly and DCP Committee have discussed the appropriate next steps, and have agreed that the first step should be wider engagement with our Membership re the options for the future, with a particular focus on those who are early in career to ensure their views and ideas are heard.
Dr Esther Cohen-Tovée