THE COLLEGE OF PSYCHOANALYSTS - UK Are You Fit to Practise? From Ethical Framework to Model of Good Behaviour A one-day conference organised in association with The Academy of Psychoanalysis Saturday 6th June 2009, 10am – 5pm Room MAL BO4 Birkbeck, University of London
Malet Street, Bloomsbury, London WC1E 7HX Contributors include: Jacques China, Mary Clark-Glass (HPC), Darian Leader, Phil Mollon, Nikolas Rose, Paul Verhaeghe The Health Professions Council is moving to regulate the talking therapies in the UK. If this goes ahead, practitioners will be subject to its ‘fitness to practise’ policy and procedures. The HPC explains: ‘Fitness to practise involves more than just competence in a registrant’s chosen profession. When we say that registrants are fit to practise, we also mean that they have the health and character, as well as the necessary skills and knowledge, to do their job safely and effectively. We also mean that we trust our registrants to act legally. Our main responsibility is to protect the public... The type of complaints we can consider are about whether a registrant’s fitness to practise is ‘impaired’ (affected) by: their misconduct; their lack of competence; a conviction or caution for a criminal offence (or a finding of guilt by a court martial); their physical or mental health; and a determination (a decision reached) by another regulator responsible for healthcare. We can also consider allegations about whether an entry to the register has been made fraudulently or incorrectly. There is no time limit on considering complaints.’ (http://www.hpc-uk.org/complaints/making/nothappy/) This conference provides an opportunity to explore the effects of demands for a shift from an ethical framework for the professions to a functional framework of behaviour regulation. This shift has meant that practitioners should no longer be trained, supported and trusted to work ethically, but must be held to account for a specific promise of ‘good behaviour’, demonstrating their adherence to uncritically defined notions of 'good character’. Where ethical positions seek to guide them to develop a relationship with their patients/clients appropriate to the specific and individual work undertaken, the new proliferation of codes of conduct assert how they should behave, what they should or should not do in any situation and even what they should or should not feel. What may be lost to professions by the equation of ‘ethical practice’ with a prescription for ‘good behaviour’? Can an authentic professional relationship be guaranteed or even encouraged by enforcing adherence to a definition of ‘good character’ or ‘fitness to practise’ that claims to be underpinned by an objective universality? Would subscribing to this model commit professionals to a practise that is fundamentally ill-equipped to respond to the unknown, the contingent and the unpredictable — in other words, to human life itself? REGISTRATION (Lunch & refreshments provided. A full programme will be made available ahead of the conference.) Before 15st April: £60 (non-members); £50 (members); £20 (trainees). After 15st April: £70 (non-members); £60 (members); £30 (trainees). Please send cheques (payable to ‘The College of Psychoanalysts - UK’) to: The College of Psychoanalysts - UK, BCM Box 2629, London WC1N 3XX. ENQUIRIES: simonarevelli@btinternet.com and Joseph@suart.com | 
