MINUTES General Assembly 2012 Edinburgh
General Assembly 2012 Edinburgh
Venue: Summerhall, 1 Summerhall, Edinburgh, EH9 1PL
October 20th 10.00 - 18.00 & 21st 10.00 - 16.00
Saturday - Arrive 9.00 am for Registration, Convene at 10.00 am
Present: Hungary (Full Prof) A.Incze & K. Vermes, Russia (Full Prof) I.Biryukova & J. Morozova, Switzerland (Associate) N. Frey, UK (Full Prof) S.Mawer & C.Butté, Germany (Full Prof) I.Fiedler, Poland (Full Prof) I.Guzek, Italy (Full Prof) V.Puxeddu & A.Lagomaggiore, The Netherlands (Full Prof) J.Kil & C.Wintels Fivian, Latvia (Full Basic - became Full Prof in meeting) I.Majore Dusele, France (Full Basoc) T.Seailles, Czech Republic (Full Basic) R.Syrovatkova, Sweden (Full Basic) J.Heuvels,
Observers: D.McKenzie (Canada), S.Cunningham (Scotland/UK), M.Tomse (Slovenia/Croatia/UK), P.Best (European Network)
Late Arrivals: Greece (Full Prof) M.Artemi & D.Graneta, Spain (Full Prof) N.San Pedro & S.Rodriguez
Apologies:Denmark (Full Basic) H.Winther, Ukraine (Full Basic) O.Romanchuk,
NOTE: Full Professional Members have 2 Votes, Full Basic Members have 1 Vote, Associate Members & Observers have 0 Votes
1. Welcome & Opening of 2012 GA by Susan Scarth President.
The President welcomes the Assembly and new Delegates, new Member Delegates and
Observers to the third General Assembly. The introduction focused on remembering
procedures, agenda topics and acknowledging the new logo. Assembly was informed how
The Board came to make their ‘executive decision’ due to previously agreed logo was
discovered to be used by another organisation.
2. Acknowledgement of appropriate invitation.
It was noted that timing of information regarding workshops was late and information might
have been circulated sooner. Timing for GA information was fine.
3. Ensure quorum of meeting (1/3rd of all Members must be Members)
The President established that attendance at the meeting met the required quorum.
Absent: Ukraine and Denmark
4. Calling the Chair of the meeting.
President agreed to chair the General Assembly. Nina Alcalay, Treasurer, agreed to call
people to speak.
5. Calling the Keeper of Minutes.
Antonella Monteleone, Secretary, will keep minutes with Céline Butté (UK) assisting.
6. Acknowledging the Auditing Committee.
At 2011 GA Shirley Mawer (UK) and Hanna Heldikova (Czech Republic Observer) were identified for this role.
7. Presentation of agenda topics for 2012 GA.
All received the Agenda
8. Agreeing order of topics for discussion. All agree
9. Approval of 2011 GA Minutes
VOTING: Unanimous approval 18/18
10. Matters arising from the 2011 Minutes
10.1. It would be helpful for new Delegates to receive Minutes by email (Sweden and Germany) once EADMT Board have been notified of their names and contact details
10.2. Minutes should be re-sent just before the GA with notes of all important reminders and agenda items to be discussed
10.3. Clarity information regarding location and frequency of meetings is requested
10.4. The names of the Auditing Committee to be noted in GA minutes. The Auditing Committee to be named on the website for transparency.
10.5. Secretary requested that Delegates and Deputy Delegates ensure correct email addresses are communicated to EADMT Board, notably the Secretary, when changes are made.
10.6 Membership issues
a) Ukraine was not able to renew EADMT membership without support from the Membership Support Fund (MSF). This support has been provided.
b) The Board is aware that there are other European countries not yet represented. As the purpose of EADMT is to be inclusive Delegates/Members were encouraged to communicate with other countries in their network and spread the welcome of EADMT.
• Tone Seailles (France) informs the GA that Norway, Finland, Estonia and Lithuania are in the process of creating National Associations. Indra Majore Dusjele (Latvia) is in communication with these countries
• Susan Scarth (President) is in contact with Belgium DMTs
• Portugal is in contact with Spain
• Slovakia is communicating with Czech Republic
• Croatia has formed an Association in 2012
• Romania are in development stage
c) The Board and the GA welcomed Sweden as Full Basic Member and Jessica Heuvels as Delegate
d) The Board apologised to Julie Kil, The Netherlands Delegate for the omission of their Membership from the website list. This has been rectified.
10.7 Roles of Working Groups (WG)
a) Communications: Facebook and Twitter will be managed by the Communication Working Group headed by Julia Morozova.
• The GA discussed issue of communication and how we network and promote EADMT. Radana Syriovatkova (Czech Republic) spoke of need to raise awareness of EADMT across Europe. A poster to promote EADMT is needed and should be shared with all EADMT Delegates for their use at conferences etc.
• In response to the Athens Unesco Conference on dance in November 2012 it was felt important to have a presence. DMTs Helen Payne, Vicky Karkou and Antonella Adorisio will participate at Conference. Despina Graneta (Greece) requested a quick decision and action. Maja Tomse (Observer) offered to produce a poster in 3 weeks.
• Jessica Heuvels (Switzerland) volunteered to join Communication WG.
b) The Board suggested the Research WG to manage the Conference project.
Following discussions at March 2012 Board Meeting, Athens the workload of this project was evident. Decision awaits further discussion
• Imke Fiedler asked if next GA date is set as it clashes with 2013 ADTA Conference in New York. It was clarified that the date is not yet set. Decision awaits further discussion.
Greece and Spain have arrived
PROPOSAL: General poster to be produced by mid November, Maja Tomse’s offer of help to be accepted.
10.8 Role of Delegates & Deputy Delegates
Chair of GA (Susan Scarth President) clarified the role of Delegates as representatives EADMT to Europe.
• GA agree, following encouragement from Penny Best (Observer/past Chair of European Network) that Delegates and Deputies have the responsibility to represent EADMT in events.
• It was suggested that Member representatives inform the Board and feed back to them following attendance at events. This would ensure vital and important communication.
• Nahia San Pedro (Spain) questioned this procedure and GA agreed that a report would be sent to The Board by email for posting on the website.
• Celine asked that ‘reporters’ add date, names of attendees and number of pages when reporting. Board to follow this up with protocol.
11. The Board’s Report
Susan re-read Board’s letter to Members from March Board Meeting, Athens. She commented on the difficulties encountered to convene three meetings (Skype) and the strategies put in place to overcome them. She shared her opinion that direct-contact meetings are preferable, as they can be very productive and especially useful at this stage of the EADMT development. However, the Board is aware that this effective working practice can overwhelm Members when information is disseminated, following each Board meeting. In 2011/12 the Board met in Edinburgh (President and Secretary only) and in Athens (all). The Board extended their thanks to the Greek Association for the warm and generous welcome in Athens. The Athens meeting considered voting procedures and cross border collaboration, the latter regarding the intention of developing active participation between Member Associations.
On behalf of the Board, Susan offered thanks to Kristine Vende for her work as she resigned from the Board this year.
Susan reported on actions completed: i) new domain for web site, ii) new logo, iii) list serve development. Actions yet to be completed include: iv) restructuring the web site, v) identifying web developer to assist, vi) improving info about current European training programmes. GA thanked Kristine and the members of the communications working group for their work.
12. The Treasurer’s Report
Nina Alcalay, Treasurer, announced her resignation from The Board while presenting the accounts and budget for 2012/13. Céline Butté (UK) questioned why the bank account costs are so high. There is some discussion about the benefits of a Euro account versus a Sterling one. Susan Scarth (Chair/President) explained the issues faced when setting up the account and why it is now in a UK Bank. Imke Fiedler (Germany) asked why the account was changed from Germany to UK. Susan informed GA that previous account was under Susanne Bender’s name as a private account. It had not been possible to find a German Bank willing to take on this type of account.
GA thanked Nina for all her work as Treasurer for EADMT.
Céline Butté (UK) thanked The Board for organising the Friday workshops and applauded this as a means to raise funds. The GA agreed to hold a Workshop Day prior to every GA in future. The organisation of this rests with the hosting National Association of that year.
Vincenzo Puxeddu (Italy) asked GA Members to consider promoting EADMT at every annual national association meeting.
Sarah Rodriguez (Spain) requested GA Members to consider all opportunities to raise money for EADMT.
PROPOSAL: Acceptance of Financial Report
VOTING: Unanimous 22/22.
13. Report of the Auditing Committee: GA received and accepted
12.00 pm - 1.30 pm Lunch
14. Discussion arising from the Board’s reports None
15. Exoneration of the Board (Approval of the Board’s activities by GA)
VOTING: Unanimous 22/22
16. Presentation of new Member applications with Board’s recommendations
Board stated that since Inaugural GA 2010, Sweden was accepted at GA 2011.
16.1. Latvia’s application for Full Professional Membership: the Board discussed and formally evaluated the application and reported that Latvia met the current criteria. The Board therefore presented Latvia to the GA.
Proposal: Latvia to be accepted as Full Professional Member
VOTING:21/22 votes (Latvia abstained)
16.2 As a result of Latvia’s Membership application Susan (Chair/President) shared the Board’s experience of this process and the issues that arose.
i) The lack of clarity in the Criteria. These criteria were designed to be as loose as possible when EADMT was inaugurated in order that the Association was inclusive. Susan wondered if they should be revised.
ii) The Board requested a new Membership Committee to be created to ensure transparency and to consider current Membership Criteria.
iii) The diversity of training programmes in a country. How many exist in each country? Latvia has only one programme.
iv) Do all national associations accredit DMT programmes ?
v) Language of the supporting documentation. EADMT currently does not require full translation of supporting documents. However, now that applications have reduced the Board proposes all supporting documents are in English.
Further points raised:
• Imke Fiedler (Germany) required clarification on Membership application procedures.
• The Board wondered if the size of the Professional Association is important. Latvia stated that they have 5 registered and 20 certified DMTs.
• Penny Best (Observer) commented that the significance of number is important because of the time it takes, if you are a pioneer country, to increase number of registered professionals.
• Could an Accreditation of Membership Committee be created?
16.3 Further points raised in open discussion
• Christine Wintels (The Netherlands) suggested that current members should also translate their supporting documents.
• Imke Fiedler (Germany) - maybe a check list would facilitate the application process
• Nina Alcalay (Greece) referred GA to Training Standards WG who have completed a new questionnaire
• Indra Majore Dusele (Latvia) commented that registration and certification procedures for each professional association is worth translating.
• Izabela Guzek (Poland) questioned when a Member’s Rules of Procedure are developing and changing who should inform the Board? At present this is not regulated.
• Penny Best (Observer) offered that re-application or information regarding changes in documentation were not considered at the setting up of the EADMT.
• The GA shared the opinion that a peer review was required.
Following this discussion GA agree to appoint a Membership Accreditation committee. This group to work mainly through internet (to reduce costs) and will present a renewal structure e.g. for peer review every 5 years, and an updating procedure for all Membership.
Proposal: To create a Membership WG, which may become a sub-committee in due course. VOTING: Accepted unanimously - 23/23 (Latvia now has 2 Votes)
Chair calls on volunteers for new WG
Volunteers accepted: Imke Fiedler (Germany) and Indra Majore Dusele (Latvia)
17. The Board proposal for re-election of out-going Board Members
The EADMT Board proposed a revision of the following Articles regarding re-election of out
going Board Members.
Current Article 17 of the Rules of Procedures reads as follows:
17 Voting procedures for the Board
17.1 Only Delegates of Full Members can be elected to the Board.
17.2 The Board Member can be re-elected for two terms. In order to be re-elected the Board Member must be nominated Delegate as regulated in 8.8 in these Rules of Procedures.
17.3 For electing the Board each Delegate has one or two voting papers depending on ｧ 4.1 of the Statutes. Each Delegate chooses three candidates per voting paper.
17.4 The candidates who receive the most votes will be on the Board.
Proposed revision is as follows:
17 Voting procedures for the Board
17.1 Existing Board Members can be re-elected for a second and third term.
17.2 Existing Board Members do not need to adopt the role of Delegate of their Member Association for the purposes of re-election.
17.3 In addition, Delegates of Full Members are eligible for election to the Board.
17.4 For electing the Board each Delegate has one or two voting papers depending on ｧ 4.1 of the Statutes. Each Delegate chooses three candidates per voting paper.
17.5 The candidates who receive the most votes will be on the Board.
18. Changes to Rules of Procedure
18.1 VOTING: 21/23 1 abstension for approval of revised 17.1
18.2 VOTING: 21/23 1 abstension for revised 17.2
Furthermore, as a result of mistakes in the Rules of Procedure it should be noted that in 17.2
should read ‘..as regulated in 11.8’ and not ‘as regulated in 8.8’.
18.3 The EADMT Board propose a change of wording to Article 11.8 as follows:
11.8 6 months prior to the General Assembly where the Board is to be re-elected the Members confirm their Delegate and Deputy Delegate.
11.8 6 months prior to the General Assembly the Members confirm their Delegate and Deputy Delegate.
VOTING: 22/23 1 abstention for approval of changes to 11.8
3.30 pm - 4.00 pm Tea + Cake
19. Conference 2014: confirming the date and the team
• Vincenzo Puxeddu (Italy) suggested we need to separate GA from Conference.
• Conference could raise funds (like Ecarte or Italian Annual Conference)
• Julia Morozova (Russia) reminds GA that Research WG has undertaken much
discussion about the conference in 2011 GA.
• It is agreed that Research WG will continue considering the organization of the conference (title, goals and objectives)
Proposal: Conference date to be 15th - 19th April 2015
VOTING:19/23 4 abstensions
NOTE: See later decision following Research WG, Sunday report
20. Agree date and place for next GA
Imke Fiedler (Germany) and Radana Syrovatkova (Czech Republic) suggests GA is held on
same date each year, and that it does not clash with ADTA Conference, US. Members
discussed value of an annual GA at this point in EADMT development. Further consideration
was given to holding a mini-conference in 2014.
Proposal 1: GA in 2013
VOTING: 23/23 voted for a GA in 2013
ii) Poland offered to host GA 2013
iii) Latvia offered to host GA 2016
iv) Russia offered to host GA another year - but not 2014
Proposal 2: GA in Poland 2013, Warsaw, 5-6th October
VOTING: 20/23 2 against and 1 abstention
Proposal 3: GA in Poland 19 - 20th October
VOTING: 4/23 12 against and 7 abstentions
Proposal 4: GA in Latvia 2016
No Vote took place
The GA thanks and accepts all three offers.
Final Decision: GA 2013 Warsaw - 5th & 6th October
21. Presentation of candidates for new Board
GA are presented with Susan Scarth, Antonella Monteleone - both willing to continue their
work on the Board. Celine Butte and Julia Morozova also put themselves forward.
22. Voting of new Board
Results of election:
Céline Butté 20 VOTES
Julia Morozova 11 VOTES
Antonella Monteleone 16 VOTES
Susan Scarth 22 VOTES
Proposal: To accept all 4 members on the Board.
The Chair formerly recognised the roles that Nina Alcalay and Kristine Vende have played and accepts their resignations.
23. Thanks to outgoing Board
24. Working Groups: what & who?
Membership WG - (New) Imke Fiedler (Germany), Indra Majore Dusele (Latvia)
Research WG - Antonella Monteleone (Chair), Julie Kil (The Netherlands), Adrienne Incze (Hungary), Despina Graneta (Greece), Julia Morozova (Russia)
Training Standards WG - Céline Butté (Chair), Nina Alcalay (Greece), Katalin Vermes (Hungary), Zuzanna Pedzich (Poland), Irina Biryukova (Russia), Christina Wintels (The Netherlands), Radana Syriovatkova (Czech Republic), Natascha Frey (Switzerland), Izabela Guzek (Poland), Imke Fiedler (Germany)
Communications/Website WG - Julia Morozova (Chair), Kristine Vende (Latvia), Nahia San Pedro (Spain), Céline Butté (Past UK Delegate), Jessica Heuvels (Swedens)
State Recognition WG - Susan Scarth (Chair), Shirley Mawer (UK), Vincenzo Puxeddu (Italy), Maria Artemi (Greece), Sarah Rodriguez (Spain), Anna Lagomaggiore (Italy), Tone Seailles (France)
25. Cross-border collaboration between Full Professional Members
25.1 The Chair clarifies that EADMT Board’s proposal was for only Full Professional Members of EADMT and their registered professionals for private practice.
25.2 Board addressed this theme because 1 or 2 DMTs each month were asking to know how to register if travelling and seeking work in another country.
25.3 Chair also states that EADMT Full Professional Membership criteria requires personal therapy in training standards.
25.4 Chair clarifies that EADMT has no power to order National Associations to accept any proposal but can encourage National Associations to consider them. What EADMT asks is that EADMT issues are regularly part of national board discussions.
See discussion as follows:
• Whose responsibility is it for confirmation of the professional qualifications of the guest
practitioner: the National Association in which the professional is registered , EADMT or the
National Association of the ‘guest’ Country?
• Is there a difference between generic support of a European exchange and the process of
developing rules and procedures for training standards and accreditation?
• Is this connected to developing a procedure for an Alternative Route for the accrediting
process in each country?
• Italy has accepted the EADMT suggestion of cross border collaboration and has resolved to
create a committee to devise and process an Alternative Route for Member practitioners
• Tone Seailles (France) suggested that a visiting DMT can become an Associate member of the hosting Association.
• Russia discussed the issue within their national board and has agreed to constitute a cross border committee and raised some questions about 2 possible levels of membership.
• Imke Fiedler (Germany) - professional membership criteria in Germany does not accept DMT for professional registration without personal therapy, whether from ADTA or from EADMT. Germany National Association requests each applicant to add confirmation paper that personal therapy has been undertaken.
• Vincenzo Puxeddu (Italy) stated that the national association is responsible for their therapists. The national association is responsible for the process and the practitioner needs to follow the rules of the host country.
• Indra Majore Dusele (Latvia)stated that if a client complains about the practice of a practitioner it makes sense that the national association takes responsibility for the Ethical Standards of that practitioner.
• Nahia san Pedro (Spain) stated that the Spanish Board accepts any practitioner coming from a Full Professional EADMT Member. The visiting practioner will pay the Spanish Association full membership fee. They have identified a cross border liaison person.
• Julie Kil (Netherlands) is part of a bigger Association of Arts Therapists. Applications are considered individually, but only for private practice.
• Adrienne Incze (Hungary) asked for clarification about the responsibility issues. DMP/T means different things in different country. It would be helpful to know each others training systems. In Hungary the are three routes to become a DMT. It will take time to get to know each European Member training standards.
• Contribution from Radana Syrovatkova (Czech Rep), Shirley Mawer (UK) and Penny Best (Observer) asked the Assembly to discuss different criteria within Europe - ie for private practice and professional registration levels eg Basic Professional, Senior, Supervisor, Teacher, Private Practitioner etc. It was noted that this matter requires more consideration and a developing dialogue between European Members.
• Jessica Heuvels (Sweden) asked what if you are registered in two countries on different registration levels eg Basic Registration in one and Senior in another, which should be accepted by the EADMT hosting Member?
• Imke Fiedler (Germany) shared her thoughts that we need not make distinctions between someone who operates in private practice and one in a public organization, instead we should differentiate between level of professional registration of each DMT.
• Many delegates participate in the debate that illustrates the importance of considering the relationship between EADMT community and the local public organization and institution with it's rules and regulations that are linked to cultural differences.
• Maria Artemi (Greece) agreed with accepting Board proposal to support cross-border collaboration and at the same time it is important to strengthen the link with other national organizations especially in the Art Therapies.
• Latvia discussed Board proposal and agreed but could not answer because they were not yet Full Professional Member
• Poland did not discuss the proposal yet. But in their country there is not an exclusive private practice route so the proposal would be at odds with their current structure.
Question remains whether the Board proposes supporting or agreeing for Full Members to cross collaborate.
• Jessica Heuvels (Sweden) requested that EADMT Members consider to start this collaborative process with a requirement to establish a reference person in each country who can offer support between Member Associations. Poland agreed with this suggestion. The National decision from each country needs to be officially known by all Members.
• Italy does not recognise a difference between registration as a private or public practitioner. However, as there is a current parliamentary process concerning the recognition of all professional associations Italian criteria for national registration may change.
We finished by reminding ourselves of the EADMT Mission Statement
6 pm Finish for day (new Board to meet 6.15 - 6.45 pm)
Sunday 21 st October
26. Welcome & summary of Saturday
The Chair acknowledged that Saturday’s discussions were respectful and more clarity is
achieved when Delegates speak from the perspective of their national boards. The cross
border discussion has moved the thinking on. There is a real desire to be collaborative but
there is a lot of work yet to do with national boards. EADMT aims to reach a place that
bridges Europe to the National Associations.
Additional Agenda Item: European standards and requirements need to be considered in the
STATE RECOGNITION WG. Radana Syrovatkova (Czech Republic) will join this group for
Despina Graneta (Greece) will join COMMUNICATION WG and RESEARCH WG
Imke Fiedler, Indra Majore Dusele and Penny Best will join MEMBERSHIP WG
27. New Board informs GA of their official roles and responsibilities
Susan Scarth - President
Antonella Monteleone - Secretary
Céline Butté - Treasurer
Julia Morozova - Communication
NOTE: Nina Alkalai has resigned as Treasurer and therefore is no longer a Signatory on the EADMT Bank Account. The Cooperative Bank will be informed that Céline Butté is the new Treasurer as of 20/10/12 and will therefore become a new signatory.
Welcome of new delegates:
RUSSIA - Irina Biryukova Delegate and Marina Bebik Deputy
UK - Shirley Mawer Delegate, Katy Dymoke Deputy
LATVIA - Indra Majore Dusele Delegate, Kristine Vende Deputy
GREECE - Maria Artemi Delegate, Despina Graneta Deputy, Nina Alcalai Observer
GERMANY - Imke Fiedler Delegate, Barbara Birner Deputy
28. Report from the Training Standards WG
Nina Alcalai (Observer/ex-Chair of WG) needs to leave early so requested that she report at
this time. She summarised the training group discussions so far.
The first TRAINING WG included Nina Alcalai, Katalin Vermes (Hungary), Christina Wintels Fivian (The Netherlands), Radana Syrovatkova (Czech Republic), Susanne Bender (Germany).
• In 2008 a questionnaire was distributed to find out differences and similarities of training
programmes in Europe. After the establishment of the EADMT, a more detailed questionnaire was created and distributed in Europe to Member countries.
• In 2011 in Prague it was decided that the questionnaire will be sent to the national
associations rather than to the training programmes. This was to find out about the
professional standards. The goal was to form a clearer picture and to create a guide for
new members and to give guidance for countries planning new training programmes.
• Each Member delegate in the WG worked on a specific section of the questionnaire.
Each returned their work and Nina selected the material for a final questionnaire that was designed as a new proposed questionnaire including 90% of the material sent to her.
• This questionnaire is ready now to go to each National Association. It is much more
detailed and includes a definitions section.
• Because Nina Alcalai is stepping down she is handing the work over to the group for
revision or ratification. The new leader of the group will need to take this on and decide
how it will be distributed.
• The new questionare is presented to the G.A.
Questions and open discussion
Penny Best suggests what is required is not what each programme does but to identify the
and acknowledge national standards across Europe.
Chair suggests - having European standards as well as National Association’s standards in
a very detailed form is going to provide strength for each country.
The aim of the questionnaire is to be clarified to each country the questionnaire is sent to.
For the previous questionnaire, Zuzanna Pedzich (Poland) was required to telephone each
country to ascertain how the form was understood.
The discussion acknowledged the importance of collecting updated data to form a detailed
picture of current training standards across Europe. The data collected could encourage the
National Associations to think and develop more detailed standards.
Nina Alcalai will assume role as Observer/Participant for this WG and continue to help the
process of gathering, collating and analysing the data.
Penny Best thinks this picture could be a great stimulus in time, but suggests EADMT should
be careful about what goes into the public domain so it does not get fixed as we are still
growing and changing.
Chair - It is important to take charge of how information is presented to each Association ie
write a covering letter, offer Skype communication or a phone call, and emphasise that this is
at an early developmental stage.
Speaking from the position of a WG leader Antonella Monteleone (Secretary) wanted to share
her experience with organisation and commitment of the WG. ie membership changes makes
sustaining the work difficult. Perhaps we could ask Delegates and Deputies to take this issue
to their National Associations. We could also open the WGs to other DMTs with specific
competencies who are able to be committed to the work.
GA acknowledge new WG leaders:
Communications WG : Julia Morozova
Professional Identity WG : Susan Scarth
Training Standards WG: Céline Butté
Research WG: Antonella Monteleone
29. Working Groups - 12.00 pm - 1.00 pm
Report from Research WG
Dates of Conference need to be reconsidered. The WG evaluation was EADMT must take smaller steps: they propose first event for EADMT/DMTs as a preparation for a second & bigger event.
WG offers new proposals for planning and organisation of future meetings: i) to achieve the goal of strengthening communication inside EDMT community, ii) to develop external connections and communication with related fields.
Proposals for new Conference and GA dates:
A: Retain 2013: 5-6 October GA - Poland
B: Proposal 1: 2014: Small conference + GA for one day
Date 26-28th September.
Latvia to host
Friday-Saturday for conference and Sunday for GA
C: 2015 GA only - date to be agreed
D: Proposal 2: 2016: Bigger conference presenting European Standards of DMT to wider world
Italy proposes to host it, possibly Milan. Anna Lagomaggiore (Italy) Deputy Delegate will discuss with Italian Association and inform EADMT Board of their decision.
Hungary: deeply agrees with the proposals but first weekend of October does not work as clashes with their national psychoanalytic GA. Could one of the two dates change?
Penny Best suggests that developmentally it would be good to mention 2016 as well as 2014 in all communications.
Number of voter: 23
First proposal (2014 event): VOTING - 23/23
Second proposal (2016 event): VOTING - 23/23
30. Membership WG
GA acknowledged Penny’s pioneering work on this topic.
• The WG will consider new applications and increase numbers and levels of applications.
• Peer review system was welcomed. There is a need for three Members who will change for each review.
• Another proposal is to create a basic one page form/questionnaire for the renewal of membership. This could include information that guarantees the maintenance of the quality of Association standards.
• Indra Majore Dusele (Latvia) and Imke Fiedler (Germany) will work on these proposals
• A further proposal for a Membership Recognition Committee (MRC) to be presented at next GA
• The renewal and auditing would be peer reviewed and not part of the responsibilities held by the MRC. The peer reviews would feedback to the MRC.
• The working language will be English.
31. Communications WG
The WG goals are:
- development of network and presenting media
- designing a standard poster before 1st November 2012
Much time was spent in communication with the Research WG discussing the Conference issue. The rest of the Communications WG work needs to be further discussed.
A Delegate left and the Voting
Proposal 1: Maja Tomse’s husband will design EADMT poster for free
Proposal 2: Communications WG to decide on the design and content
• Antonella Monteleone (Secretary) will send the standard logo to Julia Morozova (Communications).
• GA discussed managing costs and clarified importance of funding marketing activities.
• The final version of EADMT poster will be sent as Pdf to all Members to print for general use.
• Greece is asked to meet cost of printing or claim back reimbursement from EADMT
32 . State recognition WG
It is clear there are only two countries who are recognised by their State: Latvia and The Netherlands.
• WG had 8 responses received, 6 were outstanding.
• Latvia’s experience is key. WG must liaise with Latvia.
Questions during discussion covered:
• DMT professional identity
• Strengthening DMT
• Defining terminology
The group needs more time to discuss these issues as so large and raises many emotions. A history from each country was heard and Susan will provide brief report.
4 pm Close of GA 2012
The Board 2010 - 2012
Susan Scarth President Antonella Monteleone Secretary
Nina Alcalay Treasurer Kristine Vende Communications
2012 - 2013
Susan Scarth President
Antonella Monteleone Secretary
Celine Butte Treasurer
Julia Morozova Communications