Article archive / February 1, 2011
Originally published: . Volume 2, No. 6. Source pages: 1, 5.
In a continuing controversy that began with the passage of Act 251 in June 2009, Dr. Alicia Pellegrin attended the January 15th meeting of the LPA Executive Council to ask how a list of names on a special petition came to be in the possession of Dr. Jim Quillin only hours after it had been submitted to the LPA Council.
Pellegrin told the Times, “I went there to ask some important and specific questions,” regarding exactly how Quillin acquired the list of names. Dr. Quillin is not an LPA member but is a key figure in the development and passage of Act 251, a bill developed by LAMP in conjunction with the state Medical Board.
The leaked names were some of those polled by Dr. Susan Dardard last fall (see PT, 2, 3), and who supported a resolution for the independent regulation of psychology. Dardard presented this information and a compromise resolution to the LPA Council on October 22nd, 2010, but it was voted down. The resolution that was voted down read, “… LPA shall support the autonomous practice and regulation of the profession of psychology.”
LPA President Dr. Kelly Ray later wrote to members explaining her belief that the resolution was “…to build the foundation to take an offensive position against 251, against medical psychologists, and against the medical board.”
After the Council rejected the resolution in October, Dardard asked about 50 of those she had polled if they would agree to sign a petition to call a special meeting to discuss the resolution. She submitted this request to the Council members by email on October 29th at about 4:30 pm. At about 6:30 pm one of the petitioners received an email asking him about his signature, and the list was attached. (See PT, 2,4)
Dr. Pellegrin, an LPA member and president of Grassroots of Psychology in Louisiana, posted to Grassroots listserv after the leak became public in December. Pellegrin wrote, “This raises concerns on many levels. While Grassroots did nothing to encourage this breach, we apologize to the petitioners who rightly believed that the LPA Council members would respect their privacy. I will be placing my name on the next EC agenda to ask for a full and thorough explanation. I will report to the signers and to Grassroots regarding this unfortunate situation.”
In a recent interview with the Times, Dr. Pellegrin said she attended the council meeting in January and asked who had forwarded the names and why. Dr. Jessica Brown, LPA Secretary and Legislative Chair explained that she had not forwarded the list to Dr. Quillin, but she had asked for a “third party” to help her investigate the names on the petition. Brown was not willing to disclose the identity of this third person.
Pellegrin also told the Times that she asked why a third party was needed and Brown said that she was under time pressures and required assistance.
Pellegrin said that she also asked why Brown had not requested help from the LPA Executive Director, and that Brown indicated that because of the new bylaws she felt it was her responsibility to handle all the issues of a special meeting.
Also Pellegrin asked why the validity of the names on the petition was questioned and noted that Brown said that she felt it was necessary to take another step to find out if people knew what they were agreeing to sign.
In December President Ray had told the petitioner who had been questioned by Dr. Quillin, that the reason the list was given to a third party was because there were names that were “unknown to us.” (See PT, 2,4.) Ray had noted that a council member had contacted “others” to inquire about these “unknown” persons. Ray did not explain why the executive director had not been enlisted for help or why the petitioners had not been contacted directly.
Dr. Brown apologized for the error on her part and offered to be sanctioned. However, the council did not sanction Brown, according to Dr. Pellegrin.
“Several times during the meeting,” Dr. Pellegrin said to the Times, “Dr. Ray stated that she was not willing to discuss or rehash the issues. I don’t know what she thought I was coming there for, if not to discuss the issues.”
Like a number of other medical psychologists, Dr. Ray is a member of LA Academy of Medical Psychologists – Political Action Committee, the group responsible for Act 251.
According to sources, organizers tabled the petition for an LPA special meeting for a number of reasons.
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.