Members of the BABCP are considering how (and whether) to vote for a new president and board members.
Does it matter?
Well, the UKCP shot itself in the foot by encouraging the government to transfer its only useful functions to a quango. This should serve as a warning that when the people running an organization are sufficiently foolish, they can effectively destroy the organization.
So yes, it does matter.
One of the candidates for president is a practising accredited CBT therapist.
The other, an academic, gives no indication of ever having practised CBT. But she seems to be the establishment candidate, claiming support from many of the people who have run the BABCP in the past.
Both candidates think that the BABCP should be ‘inclusive’. For the practising therapist this seems to mean including all the kinds of people who practice CBT. For the establishment candidate, this seems to mean including all kinds of other people who (like herself) do not practice CBT.
My preference would be to vote for the practising therapist.
In the election for the board there are only five candidates for four seats, and all five candidates are accredited. So the question is whom to exclude.
Two of the candidates describe themselves primarily as psychologists, while the other three describe themselves primarily as CBT therapists.
Of the two psychologists, again one is clearly an establishment candidate while the other stresses management experience in the NHS.
My preference would be to exclude the establishment candidate, because I have been unimpressed with the BABCP establishment in recent years, even though it’s very hard to imagine an NHS manager performing any better.
The ballot closes at midday on 15th July, and presumably the results will be announced at the AGM the next day.
I suspect turnout will be low, with a majority of members deciding not to vote for anyone at all. For the BABCP, alas, ‘sufficiently foolish’ seems quite likely too.