Mary was a sound sleeper until she broke up with her boyfriend and subsequently moved into a new apartment.  She felt stressed and depressed. Her sleep began to suffer. Sometimes it took her forty-five minutes or more to fall asleep and she was often awake up to two hours a night.  Mary was concerned about the effects of insomnia on her work performance and she began to worry about losing her job.  
 
Two months after her breakup and move Mary continued to complain of insomnia.  In an effort to get more sleep, she began go to bed earlier and stay in bed longer, work on her laptop in bed to fill the time, “try to will herself to sleep”, fall asleep on her couch instead of her bed, and take OTC antihistamines.  Her sleep only seemed to get worse and her anxiety about getting a good night’s sleep increased. Even when tired, she found that she was wide-awake as soon as she walked in her bedroom and got in bed. She complained that insomnia was causing daytime fatigue, attention and concentration problems, and irritability. Mary’s insomnia seemed to have "taken on a life of its own.”
 
Mary’s symptoms and her attempts to improve her sleep are typical for someone with psychophysiological insomnia. This article will describe its etiology and its most effective treatment.[more...]

Mary was a sound sleeper until she broke up with her boyfriend and subsequently moved into a new apartment.  She felt stressed and depressed. Her sleep began to suffer. Sometimes it took her forty-five minutes or more to fall asleep and she was often awake up to two hours a night.  Mary was concerned about the effects of insomnia on her work performance and she began to worry about losing her job.  
 
Two months after her breakup and move Mary continued to complain of insomnia.  In an effort to get more sleep, she began go to bed earlier and stay in bed longer, work on her laptop in bed to fill the time, “try to will herself to sleep”, fall asleep on her couch instead of her bed, and take OTC antihistamines.  Her sleep only seemed to get worse and her anxiety about getting a good night’s sleep increased. Even when tired, she found that she was wide-awake as soon as she walked in her bedroom and got in bed. She complained that insomnia was causing daytime fatigue, attention and concentration problems, and irritability. Mary’s insomnia seemed to have "taken on a life of its own.”
 
Mary’s symptoms and her attempts to improve her sleep are typical for someone with psychophysiological insomnia. This article will describe its etiology and its most effective treatment.

The DSM-IV-TR outlines several criteria for the diagnosis of insomnia. The most predominant is difficulty initiating or maintaining sleep, or suffering from non-restorative sleep, for at least one month. The sleep disturbance (or associated daytime fatigue) also must cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. Finally, it must not occur exclusively in the context of another mental or sleep disorder and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., drug abuse, medication) or a general medical condition.
In addition to the criteria defined above, insomnia is characterized as taking thirty or more minutes to fall asleep (sleep onset insomnia) and/or thirty or more minutes of wakefulness after sleep onset (sleep maintenance insomnia). Although there is no yardstick for frequency of symptoms, most researchers agree that the symptoms must occur three or more times per week for a month or more.

The criteria for insomnia do not specify how little sleep must be obtained to fall outside the normal range. This is because age, prior sleep, and individual sleep requirements complicate what is considered to be pathological. For instance, some studies have shown that there are no performance deficits or complaints of emotional distress for people who sleep five and a half hours per night over a prolonged period of time. And although sleep requirements vary, multiple studies have found that people who sleep seven hours per night live longer than those who sleep nine.

Approximately ten percent of the population suffers from chronic insomnia. It is the most prevalent of all sleep disorders, and is probably the most frequent patient complaint behind pain and headaches.

The Behavioral Model of Insomnia (Spielman et. al., 1987) best explains the basis of chronic insomnia. The first element is a predisposition that may include biological (e.g., hyperactivity), psychological (e.g., tendency to worry), and social (e.g., mismatched sleep schedule with partner) factors. The second includes precipitating issues such as acute stress reactions associated with specific events (e.g., divorce or job loss). The third element is the perpetuating factors that maintain insomnia. These include the maladaptive thoughts and behaviors (e.g., going to bed earlier or getting up later) that people adopt in an effort to get more sleep but that actually cause the insomnia to “take on a life of its own.”

Sleeping pills are the most common treatment for insomnia. Due in part to extensive advertising by the pharmaceutical companies, the number of prescriptions for sleeping medication has significantly increased over the past decade. The American public spends $4.5 billion on sleeping medications. There were 55 million prescriptions for sleeping pills written in 2009 alone.

Sleeping pills are not the solution to insomnia and actually can cause more problems than they resolve. They stop working over time, are only moderately effective, have numerous negative side effects, and strengthen one’s belief that insomnia can only be cured with chemicals. Because they don’t treat its underlying cause, insomnia rebounds and resumes to its previous state once the medications are discontinued.

The preferred treatment for insomnia - recommended by the American Medical Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, and the American Psychological Association – is Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I). It works because it treats the underlying causes, that is, the perpetuating factors, of insomnia. CBT-I has been found to be more effective, in the long run, than any sleep medication.

CBT-I is a multifaceted approach that includes stimulus control therapy (SCT), sleep restriction therapy (SRT), sleep-hygiene, cognitive therapy, and relaxation training. Although SCT is often considered to be a first line intervention for the behavioral treatment of insomnia, most clinical practices include SCT and SRT accompanied by sleep hygiene practices. Treatment is data driven, that is, baseline and ongoing measures are used to assess its effectiveness and determine treatment strategy.

SCT limits the amount of time one may stay in the bed while awake as well as the types of behaviors that are allowed in the bedroom. It is designed to re-associate the bed, bedroom, and bedtime with shorter sleep latency and more restorative sleep. Examples of SCT include leaving the bedroom if awake more that fifteen minutes and using the bedroom only for sleep and sex.

Sleep restriction therapy (SRT) is designed to match sleep opportunity to sleep ability. This means establishing a specific time to bed and a morning wake time that is equal to total actual sleep time. During this phase of treatment people get less sleep but their sleep is more consolidated. Time in bed is incrementally extended each week as sleep efficiency (time asleep/time in bed) improves to approximately ninety percent.

Sleep hygiene refers to good sleep habits such as getting up at the same time each day, keeping the bedroom dark and quiet, daily exercise, using the bedroom only for sleep and sex, going to bed only when drowsy, etc. Although helpful, sleep hygiene as a mono-therapy is not effective for resolving insomnia.

Relaxation training is useful for patients who associate the inability to relax with their sleep difficulties. Relaxation therapy may include progressive muscle relaxation, diaphragmatic breathing, autogenic training, and imagery training. Patients are trained in the method that is easiest for them to learn and practice.

Cognitive therapy is effective for patients who ruminate over the potential effects of their insomnia. This form of therapy is based on the fact that many people have negative thoughts and erroneous beliefs about insomnia and its effects. Cognitive restructuring is a technique that is used to help counteract inaccurate thoughts about sleep with actual facts based on the latest research (e.g., people generally underestimate the amount of sleep they get, sleep requirements vary from person to person, etc.).

CBT-I treatment usually lasts approximately eight sessions in order to sleep well and to continue to sleep well. Seventy five percent of patients significantly improve as a result of treatment. Around ninety percent either stop or significantly reduce their use of benzodiazepines. In contrast to sleeping medications, the effectiveness of CBT-I lasts and in many cases improves over time.

Dr. Barth is a psychologist in private practice in Berkeley where he specializes in the treatment of insomnia, anxiety and addictions. For more information, please see his website www.DrRichardBarth.com or contact him at 510.332.1572.


hide this article

Oregon human resources vice president Georgia Lehman* built a successful corporate career on a business persona she describes as "business-savvy, structured, and disciplined.” Georgia was always looking for an organization that shared her values, but often found herself the lone voice advocating fairness and ethical conduct in the workplace.

“My role was conscience-keeper,” Georgia says. “ 'We need to be friendlier to employees, treat customers and the environment well.' Then I was fired from a vice president position for whistle-blowing. The CEO was about to give a $30,000 bonus to his sister-in-law, who had worked there only three months.”

An organic produce company welcomed Georgia with joy. Its founders, hippie activist alternative farmers, were inspired to protect the earth and to offer “good, clean, honest, healthy food to people." Georgia was delighted to work for a noble cause with folks who mirrored her “rebellious, smart, alternative, arrogant side.” She later made a SoulCollage® card depicting this side of her personality: an obviously intelligent girl showing her fully-tattooed arms; behind her are Day-Glo mushrooms and abundant organic crops.[more...]

Oregon human resources vice president Georgia Lehman* built a successful corporate career on a business persona she describes as "business-savvy, structured, and disciplined.” Georgia was always looking for an organization that shared her values, but often found herself the lone voice advocating fairness and ethical conduct in the workplace.

“My role was conscience-keeper,” Georgia says. “ 'We need to be friendlier to employees, treat customers and the environment well.' Then I was fired from a vice president position for whistle-blowing. The CEO was about to give a $30,000 bonus to his sister-in-law, who had worked there only three months.”

An organic produce company welcomed Georgia with joy. Its founders, hippie activist alternative farmers, were inspired to protect the earth and to offer “good, clean, honest, healthy food to people." Georgia was delighted to work for a noble cause with folks who mirrored her “rebellious, smart, alternative, arrogant side.” She later made a SoulCollage® card depicting this side of her personality: an obviously intelligent girl showing her fully-tattooed arms; behind her are Day-Glo mushrooms and abundant organic crops.

However, after a tumultuous first year, Georgia began to wonder, "Where do I fit here? What is my contribution?” She saw that her corporate management methods weren’t working. Employees resisted her suggestions, and she felt disrespected.

To gain insight into her situation, Georgia turned to the SoulCollage® process. She gathered from recycled magazines, brochures and calendars “images that felt relevant to me and to the company.” She made ten 8” x 5” cards, realizing that each of the beings and situations shown in these collages represented aspects of her and of “the soul of the organization.” For a year, she would journal about work situations and then pick a card from her deck. She let the composite image on each card introduce itself to her (the "I Am One Who…" process—examples below). Then she let the card tell her “I am here to remind (or encourage) you …", or “I bring you the gift of…” Over time, this practice gave her new perspectives on her work dilemmas, transforming her relationship to her Human Resources role and to the company.

Georgia received another job offer and had to decide whether to start over. “I saw I could make a conscious choice. Through the process with my cards, I stopped feeling that I had to control the journey of my current employer. I saw how my soul relates”—to this particular corporate culture—“and what I can influence. The respect issue felt small relative to the bigger life story that this workplace offered me." The process led her to "acceptance and surrender.” She chose to stay.

It was a wild ride. Contrary to Georgia’s former roles, “I was working with people far more radical than I—they played misogynistic rap in the warehouse!” “Get off your high horse,” her Cowboy card advised her. “Stand back and watch for a while.”

Growing fast, the company struggled “to retain its back-to-nature philosophy while building an infrastructure for economic sustainability. They were literally at war with corporate farming. I’d suggest things and they’d say, ‘She’s trying to take us corporate!’ I had to learn patience and explain, ‘I’m not trying to sell you out to Corporate Piggy. I’m trying to help you grow stable so you can bring organic produce to more people.’”

Collective and Personal Shadows Echo Each Other

Listening to Georgia's story, I was struck by the resonance between these larger shadows and her personal issues. The similarities run the other way, too: shameful secrets we see as personal and try to hide—or actions that we notice in others but not in ourselves—turn out to be less-mature, imbalanced versions of universal tendencies inherent in being human.

Corporate Piggy was the first organizational (i.e., collective) shadow Georgia recognized. Thinking of greedy executives she had known, she made a card showing a half-man, half-pig stuffing his drooling maw with dollar bills with a bulldozer shovel for a hand, “disregarding ethics and morals.” Georgia’s personal Piggy involved her rebellious refusal to apply her usual “driven discipline” to food: “mindlessly eating the sixteenth thing, not savoring the first three.”

Her Devouring Confusion card—a glassy-eyed bat with a huge fruit in its mouth, a heart crammed with nuts and thousands of dollar bills fluttering away on the wind—shows her personal theme and the chaos at her company. The new CEO “was trying to change twenty things at once. Even he recognized it wasn’t sustainable.” Georgia, as “mirror and witness,” helped him put into practice this card’s advice: “Stop, prioritize, let some things go.”

Both Georgia and the company struggled with nurturing and dominating aspects of another archetype, the Mother. “When you become aware of archetypal patterns,” she saw, “you can choose not to act them out and to be your true self. I learned not to ‘get mad at naughty children’ at work, just to share options adult-to-adult.”

“At this company, you must earn respect. I learned through SoulCollage® that I could show up with my whole being, and they trusted me more.” Georgia loved an image of several meerkats standing on their hind legs, alert, showing their soft underbellies. “They're paying attention!” She recalled The Four-Fold Way: Walking the Paths of the Warrior, Teacher, Healer and Visionary by Angeles Arrien, PhD, paraphrasing its guidance to "Show up; Pay attention; Speak the truth; Let go of the outcome.” Her Meerkats Pay Attention card combined images of agrarian and industrial farming practices. Were these warring factions beginning to integrate?

“Around that time, I had shut down at work. Then my boss said, ’I want you to speak up in meetings.’ He hadn’t asked that before. I wondered, ‘Why now, just when I’m thinking about the Fourfold Way?’ I derived more faith in the SoulCollage® process from seeing my life changing in synchrony with it. I realized this is powerful work; it’s not just pictures on cardboard or one reading. It builds along the way.”

Resolving Shadow Conflicts

Georgia describes the changes she made as “learning to be in the flow and express my observations, opinions, and intuitions." She began to "contribute more and, paradoxically, feel less attached to the outcome.” Georgia sees her Meerkats Pay Attention card as an antidote to the Devouring Confusion shadow. Another card, The Key, shows constructive potential rather than imbalanced shadow war: I Am One Who sticks my tongue out at traditional corporations, but is willing to talk it out, to find the key to a new way: structure plus the company's culture and mission.

Her card Diamonds reveals the essential value within herself and the company: I Am One Who lets the primitive ones be as they are; I shine through with my gifts. Be authentic and offer who you are fully to the world.

Because of her courage to do the hard work of looking at herself so that she could see others more clearly—and because of her heartfelt desire to do right by her company—Georgia was able to use the SoulCollage® process to learn from her inner wisdom.

Georgia, a trained SoulCollage® Facilitator, now offers SoulCollage® at her company, as part of a health and wellness program. "It's called SHINE: Spirit, Health, Intention, Nutrition, Energy. The emphasis is on Spirit—that’s where SoulCollage® comes in.”

Georgia's story reminds me of how the One and the Many reflect and increase one another’s light. One woman's steps toward wholeness among many aspects of her own being helped a whole organization to evolve and thrive. In turn, through the synergy of their growth, the company saved many farmers' fields from chemical death and nourished many more customers with its wholesome food.

* [Author’s note: Not her real name. Georgia is a Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR®).]

Katherine L. Ziegler, PhD, a psychologist, certified coach, and SoulCollage® Facilitator, practices psychotherapy in Oakland, CA and offers SoulCollage® workshops to individuals, groups, and organizations. She is a long-time student of the Diamond Approach® (www.ridhwan.org). Visit her website at www.selfawarelife.com.

hide this article

Recently, during a required course at the Wright Institute called Sociocultural Issues, we were asked to read “On Becoming a GEMM Therapist: Work Harder, Be Smarter, and Never Discuss Race” by Kenneth Hardy (2008). Within the text, Hardy outlines fifteen ‘helpful’ guidelines for therapists in training who are people of color. Hardy states that because of psychology’s long-standing tradition of being populated by mostly Whites, students of color must aim to “be twice as good and work twice as hard to be accepted” (p. 462). He reasons that despite many training programs newfound commitment to being “liberal, self-proclaimed culturally competent, [and] culturally inclusive” (p. 462), these institutions are still so deeply embedded in a system that promotes homogeneity that they cannot help but ‘white-wash’ any student that goes against the predominant cultural norm. Hardy suggests that students of color should strive towards becoming good, effective, mainstream, minority therapists (GEMM) in order to pacify the requirements of these training institutions. While these schools may outwardly promote ideals of social justice and cultural competence, many students of color may regularly find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to deny their own culturally-informed position in order to work within the boundaries of the predominantly White institutions. This may appear in the form of racial microaggressions, having to educate their White peers and supervisors on a non-White perspective, or a pervasive sense of isolation as a minority student.[more...]

Recently, during a required course at the Wright Institute called Sociocultural Issues, we were asked to read “On Becoming a GEMM Therapist: Work Harder, Be Smarter, and Never Discuss Race” by Kenneth Hardy (2008). Within the text, Hardy outlines fifteen ‘helpful’ guidelines for therapists in training who are people of color. Hardy states that because of psychology’s long-standing tradition of being populated by mostly Whites, students of color must aim to “be twice as good and work twice as hard to be accepted” (p. 462). He reasons that despite many training programs newfound commitment to being “liberal, self-proclaimed culturally competent, [and] culturally inclusive” (p. 462), these institutions are still so deeply embedded in a system that promotes homogeneity that they cannot help but ‘white-wash’ any student that goes against the predominant cultural norm. Hardy suggests that students of color should strive towards becoming good, effective, mainstream, minority therapists (GEMM) in order to pacify the requirements of these training institutions. While these schools may outwardly promote ideals of social justice and cultural competence, many students of color may regularly find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to deny their own culturally-informed position in order to work within the boundaries of the predominantly White institutions. This may appear in the form of racial microaggressions, having to educate their White peers and supervisors on a non-White perspective, or a pervasive sense of isolation as a minority student.

The following are some of the steps that Hardy outlines in order to become a Good, Effective, Mainstream Minority therapist, and therefore survive your training as a student of color:
1) Never discuss race. You may then reveal that you have unresolved racial hang-ups of your own.
2) Accept that the field is color blind, even if most clients of color are referred to you instead of your white classmates. Clearly your supervisor sees you as all just human beings, rather than any particular race or ethnicity.
3) Smile! “No matter how many racial slights or microaggressions you have to endure, stay pleasant” (p. 465). Otherwise, you are likely to be viewed by supervisors as the unnecessarily angry person of color.
7) Embrace the sameness-difference dilemma by learning to “live with the implicit contradictory messages of our field that encourage differences but rewards sameness” (p. 465).
13) Work harder, be smarter, and focus on abolishing your racial hang-ups. This will be the only way to distinguish yourself as a competent clinician of color in relation to your White peers.
15) Develop comfort with being judged by others’ standards, particularly when you are deemed too hostile, too passive, too sensitive, or too emotional. White supervisors may see you as being more qualified to work with minority clients, but feel comfortable in critiquing how you do so in relation to the White standard.

Upon first reading these guidelines, I immediately assumed that Hardy was simply being tongue-in-cheek. As a strong advocate of increasing a systemic social justice viewpoint within the field, Hardy seems the last person to advocate for trainees to simply stay silent during incidents of racial insensitivity during their education. However, he addresses this outright: “Although I presented these tips in a sardonic manner with a tinge of levity, they are not funny… and none of this is a joke” (p.468). Hardy is presenting the idea that in order for students of color to be able to change this double-standard that still exists for students of color within the field of psychology, they must first survive their training in order to achieve positions of power. In order to survive, they must assimilate to the White standard. He suggests that if every incident of a racial microaggression was indeed brought up by a person of color to their supervisors or peers, they would quickly be labeled as someone with racial hang-ups of their own and slowly be ostracized and subversively penalized. During the class discussion of this article, students were strongly divided on whether Hardy was legitimately proposing these strategies for students of color, or merely trying to bring attention to the double standard and urging students to do just the opposite of his guidelines. The very tone of his article seemed to emulate the problem itself—this is a serious systemic issue, but should we trainees just ignore it in order to individually survive?

Sadly, it would seem that this is an issue that each student of color (and by extension, each sexual minority/physically disabled/lower socioeconomic class/etc. student) will have to grapple with on their own. The question of how much to bring up issues of inequality can bring up very intense, idiosyncratic reactions depending on the particular individual. As an added pressure, we must also remember our status as a vulnerable trainee and consider the very real consequences that being labeled “too sensitive” or “too aggressive” can have on our future careers. Is this even an issue that students of color might feel comfortable discussing with their supervisors, given how they may potentially be evaluated negatively as a result? Or, at the very least, possibly make their supervisor uncomfortable in having to deal with the sensitive topic of race and thereby inviting distance and caution in that extremely important relationship.

I think I can safely state that most minority students (whether through race, ethnicity, ability status, sexual orientation, etc.) have had at least one experience in their training when they’ve had to weigh the consequences of speaking out over some injustice or staying silent out of concern for their status as a trainee. I can easily think of several times during my training experience when a gay slur was said by a client, or a supervisor made me wince due to an uninformed slight. My initial reaction to reading Dr. Hardy’s words of advice for situations like these was to believe he was obviously joking, as someone shouldn’t and couldn’t be expected to keep all those painful moments locked away. Sadly, however, I did just that. I stayed silent during each incident, not wanting to rock the boat. I deem them each unintentional, or simply ignorant and not the focus of why I was there. I want to say to minority students to fight back against these words, to of course raise the issue each time you’re faced with social injustices, big or small. But I can’t. I feel like I’ve seen just a bit too much of how deeply embedded our field is with social politics and the grand strokes of how a trainee is evaluated. Truth is, I don’t want to be labeled the Sensitive Trainee. Or the Guy-With-The-Sexual-Identity-Issues. Or someone my supervisors possibly dread meeting with, despite their protestations that these are serious issues they too are concerned with. Instead, I’ll keep my mouth (mostly) shut until I’m the supervisor, and then make sure the cycle stops in whatever way I can. I’ll take the hits now, because I must, knowing what the payoff will be.

This issue seems enormously significant to the future of the field of psychology, especially as it continues to promote its ideals of social justice and multiculturalism but maintain practices that continue the denial of their existence in our training. I’m sure many graduate students will disagree with my stance, and I quite honestly hope that they do. Those souls more brave than I might inspire a bit more courage from those around them. I think the conversation in this area has only just begun for our field, and we as rising clinicians need to ensure that it continues.

References:
Hardy, K.V. (2008). On becoming a GEMM therapist: Work harder, be smarter, and never discuss race. In M. McGoldric & K. V. Hardy (Eds.), Revisioning family therapy: Race, culture, and gender in clinical practice (pp. 461-468). New York, NY.

hide this article

It is with great pride that I share with you, members of ACPA, the outstanding achievements of your chapter in 2011. When our Board convened at the beginning of 2011, having met our goals for the previous year by increasing our membership base and securing the chapter financially, we turned our attention to the underlying mission of ACPA, reaching out to psychologists in Alameda County, supporting our members, and supporting CPA. With that in mind, we established our goals for the coming year: increase membership with a focus on early career and graduate student members, enhance professional practice and professional well-being for our members by providing opportunities to network and socialize, as well as affordable access to engaging continuing education across areas of interest to psychologists, and lastly, to support CPA. I am pleased to report that the board was successful in meeting these goals and more due to their energy, enthusiasm and dedication. During 2011, ACPA accomplished the following:[more...]

It is with great pride that I share with you, members of ACPA, the outstanding achievements of your chapter in 2011. When our Board convened at the beginning of 2011, having met our goals for the previous year by increasing our membership base and securing the chapter financially, we turned our attention to the underlying mission of ACPA, reaching out to psychologists in Alameda County, supporting our members, and supporting CPA. With that in mind, we established our goals for the coming year: increase membership with a focus on early career and graduate student members, enhance professional practice and professional well-being for our members by providing opportunities to network and socialize, as well as affordable access to engaging continuing education across areas of interest to psychologists, and lastly, to support CPA. I am pleased to report that the board was successful in meeting these goals and more due to their energy, enthusiasm and dedication. During 2011, ACPA accomplished the following:

1. ACPA’s membership grew in 2011 to 226 members, in spite of the recession. This is an historic high for our chapter. This success is due to the work of our membership committee, Dr. Larry Yabroff and Dr. Debbara Monroe, who made many phone calls to members, personally welcoming them to the organization. In 2011 we began a membership drive to attract early career psychologists, in part, by offering a graduated dues schedule over a three year period, as well as offering more opportunities for early career psychologists to come together and network. We are also pleased to report that our percentage of dual ACPA/CPA memberships has increased significantly and now approaches 50%.

2. ACPA members enjoyed two social events at the home of then President Elect, Dr. Madeline Feingold, the annual BBQ in June and Holiday Party in December. In keeping with the trend of the year, our members attended the Holiday Party in record numbers.

3. The Early Career Psychologists Committee (ECPC), chaired by Dr. Jessica Michaelson, worked to provide increasing professional development support to all early career members. The ECPC developed a Facebook page to keep people informed on topics relevant to practicing in our county and current clinical research. Toward our goal of increasing networking and social opportunities for members, ECPC started “Shrink Drinks.” Members meet monthly for appetizers paid for by ACPA and no host drinks. This has been a popular event within the community and it is clear, this event has attracted many of our new members.

4. Many of our new members are graduate students, once again in record numbers. Our graduate student memberships have substantially and steadily increased in the last two years through the inspiring energy of our Graduate Student Representatives, Lee Vance (Graduate Student Representative in 2010) and Dusty Reagin, Graduate Student Representative for 2011. ACPA has been so fortunate to have them serve on our board. They have set a new standard for this important role. Due to their amazing work and the interest of graduate students, ACPA voted to create a new ad hoc committee, Graduate Student Affairs, in order to accommodate the graduate students interested in serving on the board. The role of this new ad hoc committee will be to reach out to graduate students in Alameda County, promote leadership and awareness of the issues that concern psychologists, involve them in board functions and projects, and in turn, ACPA is committed to supporting the needs of graduate students with panel discussions focused on topics of interest to graduate students, funds for promoting student involvement in CPA and Leadership and Advocacy Day.

5. At the suggestion of Dr. Rob Perl, our CPA Board Representative, this year ACPA voted unanimously to divert some of our surplus funds to CPA in recognition of CPA’s financial need and the critical importance of CPA to Alameda County psychologists and psychologists in the state. In 2011, ACPA contributed $1,000 for general support, $1,000 for convention support, and $500 to support the CPAGS Diversity Conference. Additionally, the Board approved the budget for 2012 which continues to provide this funding.

6. An important goal of ACPA’s 2011 President, Dr. April Fernando, was to find ways to make ACPA be more visible and involved in Alameda County and the provision of mental health services. In keeping with this, she included ACPA, along with West Coast Children's Clinic, in the beginning stages of a bid for a contract to provide mental health prevention and early intervention around key issues including: LGBTIQ populations, Transition Age youth, first break and seriously mentally ill populations. This is a project that will be funded by the Mental Health Services Act (or Prop 63). The goal of this project is to provide technical assistance and build capacity within the county to deliver culturally responsive trauma-informed care. It is with tremendous excitement that I announce that West Coast Children’s Clinic was awarded this project! Stay tuned in the coming months as Dr. Fernando reaches out to the ACPA community in regards to this project.

7. ACPA has been fortunate to have Dr. Michael Donner as the Ethics Chair of ACPA’s Ethics and Professional Affairs committee. In this last year, Dr. Donner provided almost 30 consultations to members of ACPA on issues relevant to ethics and professional practice. While Dr. Donner is stepping down from his position as Ethics Chair, he leaves us in the good and competent hands of Dr. Karen Franklin so that our members will continue to have access to free ethics consultations.

8. The Disaster Response Network (DRN) Committee, chaired by Dr. Rut Gubkin, during Hurricane Irene, worked closely with the American Red Cross and CPA/DRN and provided ongoing updates to ACPA members. Members were also invited to participate in the Great California ShakeOut, a statewide drill that took place on October 20th, 2011. Two emergency contact lists with local resources for the cities of Albany and Berkeley were compiled and distributed to our members. In our pursuit to have ACPA participate in local disaster relief efforts, we continue our communication with the Albany Fire Department and ACPA DRN has now been invited to attend the Alameda County Managers Team meeting.

9. The ACPA Diversity committee, chaired by Dr. Rut Gubkin, continued to work to raise the awareness of the importance of issues regarding diversity. In concert with the Board’s goal to involve and include graduate students in the activities of the ACPA Board, Dr. Gubkin reached out to graduate students at The Wright Institute. As a result, the Diversity Committee now has a student to serve as a liaison. This committee also reached out to our neighbor chapters toward the goal of working collaboratively on future projects.


10. ACPA recognizes that the website and listserv are a key component to the chapter’s success in recent years. Members enjoy discussions, exchange information on important issues, and request referrals on an active, collegial, and informative listserv. Additionally, in a continued effort to support our members whose private practices are listed on our website in the Directory of Psychologists, ACPA’s website made some behind the scenes changes in order to enhance the website’s visibility on the web.

11. ACPA has been so fortunate to have on our Board, Dr. Gilbert Newman, who served as President many years ago and more recently as Governmental Affairs Representative. In his term on the Board, he forged a wonderful alliance between The Wright Institute and ACPA and worked tirelessly to raise the awareness of the importance of CPA to the profession of psychology. He is stepping down from the Board, but he leaves ACPA more educated about the critical importance of political advocacy and action and the role of CPA to psychologists.

12. Under the direction of ACPA’s 2011 Treasurer of the last three years, Maxine Berzok, Ph.D., ACPA is fiscally stronger than ever. ACPA has assets totally over $42,000. In the coming weeks a financial statement of income and expenses will be made available to the membership.

13. Lastly, I think that the greatest testimony to the success of ACPA in this last year is that every Board position and committee chair is filled for the coming year. As 2011 came a close the Board faced vacancies for President Elect, Membership, Treasurer, Secretary, CLASP, Graduate Student Representative and the long held positions of GAC Representative, held by Dr. Newman, and Ethics Chair, held by Dr. Donner. The current 2012 Board is a larger, more diverse, and younger with students and early career psychologists better represented than ever.




hide this article