Introduction
AS
PREPARED by Albert Deutsch, The Story of GAP is factually
correct, to the best of the knowledge of several of us who have
participated since the creation of this unusual organization of
psychiatrists. The author is very well qualified for this
assignment. He is an eminent writer, particularly in the
fields of psychiatry and social work. From the beginning
of GAP he has had many, many contacts with it as a non-member,
and hence undoubtedly has been able to watch its development objectively,
although there may be those who will be critical of his warm commendation.
This may be explained by the fact that GAP, in a very specific
way, fitted into Mr. Deutsch's crusading efforts on behalf of
the improvement of mental health so that he has written with a
special warmth of interest and understanding. Other than
furnishing him as much information as they could, the officers
and members of the organization played no part in the writing
of this Story.
Although
Mr. Deutsch has touched briefly on the background of GAP and
its origin, a word of amplification may be in order. During
World War II more than two and a half million soldiers, sailors,
and airmen were either rejected or discharged from the military
service because of emotional problems. Those of us most
intimately connected with the examination and treatment of these
men and women were greatly harassed and distressed. We
had neither the manpower nor the knowledge to do the job that
should have been done. Understandably, we looked in every
possible direction for help.
Our first
appeal for guidance and assistance was directed to our one-hundred-year-old
professional organization, the American Psychiatric Association.
Three of us, representing the chiefs of the psychiatric service
of the armed forces and government services, appeared before
the Council of the APA in 1944. Although the members of
the Council were concerned and sympathetic, its large, loosely
organized group of psychiatrists who were members of a scientific
body, meeting annually to report the results of research and
to exchange ideas relative to clinical matters, had neither
the organizational structure nor the manpower to be helpful
to us.
The frustration
we experienced in attempting to practice psychiatry in the armed
forces certainly was the major precipitating factor in the organization
of GAP. Fortunately, many of our colleagues who had remained
in civilian life were equally aware of the responsibilities
that confronted us--and the opportunities.
The organization
of GAP was not a revolution. With the deepest sincerity
the founding group was seeking a way in which American psychiatry
could give more forceful leadership, both medically and socially.
Although the name may sound presumptuous, it was chosen because
of the sense of great urgency that psychiatry should advance,
and the belief that by hard work, and teamwork, we could help
it do so. Those early years of GAP were marked by the
feeling on the part of its membership that much needed to be
done, and quickly. We believed that when we were faced
with a problem, if we could sit down together and take time
to exchange views, we could determine what we knew and did not
know about the matter and could plot the course of the search
for the knowledge that we lacked. Through group study
we endeavored to collect and assimilate what was known about
psychiatry and mental health so that it would be available when
needed. Perhaps the word which best expressed this attitude
was missionary.
GAP was
not conceived as a political organization. As a matter
of fact, an original aim was that it might be fused with the
American Psychiatric Association after the proposed pattern
of applying psychiatric knowledge to non-medical as well as
medical programs had become established. This pattern
included a multi-disciplinary approach--and also the circulation
of the end-results of deliberations to those who might find
them of use. Although this aim was never realized, one
of its significant consequences was the major re-organization
of the American Psychiatric Association.
In 1949,
immediately following our GAP meeting in Asbury Park, the members
of the standing committees of the APA met for the first time
as a group, to spend two days thinking about their committee
assignments. This is now the standard operating procedure
of the American Psychiatric Association, a procedure which has
continued and has been extending during the succeeding nine
years.,
As Mr. Deutsch
related, during the third, fourth, and perhaps even the fifth
year, there was a great deal of soul-searching in GAP as to
whether or not it should disband. Those of us who were
intimately connected with and very actively participating in
the American Psychiatric Association came to the conclusion
that it could and should go on. We felt that it performed
a function which perhaps could never be carried out by the larger,
older organization. It could continue to meet a minimum
of six days in two sessions a year, whereas, because of finances
and other limitations, the APA committees could, at best, meet
only a day or two, once each year. The GAP committees
are strictly study groups that have no administrative responsibilities
or functions. Also, these committees are made up of people
who are particularly interested in the area of study; they are
limited to a small number. Such selectivity is not possible
with the 10,000 membership of the APA.
In a very
literal sense, GAP has helped the parent organization in very
specific and tangible ways. GAP members are all members
and active participants of the American Psychiatric Association.
The early
sense of urgency has been replaced by a quality of solidarity.
If every GAP was a striking force to remold the
American Psychiatric Association, it is now. Instead it
is a group of thoughtful, earnest, capable individuals who are
concerned with their responsibility to advance psychiatry by
the conclusions emerging from the deliberations of its committees.
Psychiatry,
as a medical specialty, is young. GAP has unlimited opportunities
in the future!
William
C. Menninger, M.D.
|
