1999-2001
Susan
Thesenga introduced the idea of forming an association of Pathwork Helpers in
her President’s Letter, published in the Spring 1999 issue of Spark!
Her letter envisioned the association as “a voluntary, self-regulating body
– a professional association of Pathwork helpers … made up of whoever
chooses to help define and support Pathwork helpership.”
Susan’s
proposal was made following a survey of Helpers, Apprentice Helpers, Counselors,
teachers, and trainees, almost all in the US and Canada. The survey was conducted in very early 1999, and its findings strongly
supported proceeding with the formation of PHANA. A PHANA Council was formed in summer 1999 with the following membership:
California:
Melanie Tarkenton, Canada: Roddy Duchesne, Mid-Atlantic: Jeff
Fishel, Montana: Catherine Nelson, New York: Irene Koenig, Philadelphia:
Donna Evans-Strauss, Administrator: Maraiel Ruth (California).
Following
its formation, PHANA Council focused its work mainly on a more detailed survey
of Helpers in the US and Canada directed towards establishing more clearly the
parameters of the association that Helpers are in favor of setting up. Particular parameters researched by the survey included the level of
acceptable annual fees, specific benefits sought by members, and criteria for
Helpers and Counselors. This survey took longer than expected, and its results were
not considered until the Council’s June 2000 meeting. All 47 respondents to the survey favored the setting up of
PHANA, and 30 of the 47 made specific dollar value suggestions concerning
acceptable maximum fee levels. Suggested
maximum fees ranged from $40 to $200, with an average of $107.
The June
2000 Council drew up plans to launch PHANA in the spring of 2001. In the event, these plans were delayed by
the need for wide consultation, and by three main
additional factors. Wide consultation
was needed to align the concept, role, and services of the association with the
views of its potential members. Without considerable consultation, there
was a danger that PHANA would be perceived as being implemented in a top-down
manner - and might fail to attract members who would join a member-oriented
association - as PHANA seeks to become and be.
The
first main delaying factor was Council’s need to address an
additional request made by the Foundation Board. This was that the Council consider a description of the nascent Toronto
Helpership Development Circle (THDC), when the THDC would be in a position to
provide this description. This
request was clearly appropriate in view of the Foundation’s charge to PHANA to
“Assist the maintenance of quality in Pathwork training programs in the US and
Canada.” (see Mission Statement).
At the same time, Council’s need to respond to this request
necessitated a considerable expansion in the Council’s work on Helper training
comparisons. Ultimately, this work led to the Helpership Training
Standards Consultation conducted in 2001, with a report produced in August 2001.
This report met
with the approval from all interested parties, a considerable achievement
given the difficulty of the issues addressed. The process yielding this
good result is notable: senior Pathwork teachers and leaders generously
provided the content, while PHANA Council provided the mechanics. This
provides a concrete example of how it is possible to use organizational
arrangements in an open and transparent way to foster and strengthen the
Pathwork community. It is good to have this example, since it can help
to alleviate some of the fears that have been expressed concerning the setting
up of PHANA, namely that PHANA may operate in a top-down, closed-door,
and politicized or partisan manner. To see the summary results of the
Helpership Training Standards Consultation please click here.
The
second main factor that contributed to slowing Council’s progress in formally
launching PHANA was that Council wished to launch PHANA in as inclusive way as possible,
avoiding reinforcing divisions within the community. As much as possible,
Council wished to find a way to bridge between mainstream Pathwork Helpers and “The
50/50 Work©” Helpers. In this context, Council particularly acknowledges the significant contribution of
Lorraine Marino. The conclusion of
these discussions was that there is a wide range of views and positions among
“The 50/50 Work©” Helpers. The best approach is to go ahead with setting up PHANA, focusing mainly
on mainstream Pathwork Helpers and Apprentices and – in effect
– building the mainstream Pathwork end of the bridge. Once that end of the bridge is in place, it will become
clearer how to extend the bridge to “The 50/50 Work©” Helpers.
The
third main delaying factor was the need to find a way to launch PHANA with the best prospects of
financial viability. Foundation funding was for a limited duration, and
the association would have to be financially self-supporting. This
consideration pushed towards launching a substantial association that included a
wide band of member categories and had a wide range of activities and
services. This approach was written into a detailed PHANA Launch
Proposal draft considered by Council in September 2001. Council
decided that this approach was too ambitious and the proposal was completely
rewritten by October 2001. The October version proposed a phased,
step-by-step launch, initially creating a minimum size, minimum budget, very simple version of
PHANA. Council and Foundation Board consultation around the October
proposal resulted in a revised version: the December 11, 2001 PHANA Launch
Proposal used in a consultation involving
126 Helpers, Apprentices, Counselors, and Board Members. The number of US/Canadian Helpers and Apprentices included in the
consultation was 115, 83% of the 138 then currently known potential initial
launch PHANA members, i.e. US/Canadian Helpers and Apprentices
potentially interested in joining PHANA.
2002 to
Date
Following
the December 2001 consultation, the PHANA Launch Proposal was revised to
incorporate comments and views and to spell out the launch procedure. This
resulted in the PHANA Launch
document, effectively the blueprint for the launch process and for the initial version
of PHANA. Invitations to join PHANA were mailed on March 20, 2002, and the
first entries in the Register of Pathwork Helpers
were put up on the PHANA web site on April 24/02. For accounting
purposes, May 1, 2002, is counted as the official starting date of PHANA as an
association with members.
On April 30,
2003, at the end of its first year, PHANA had 60 members. It had by then
become apparent that PHANA was having difficulty remaining adequately connected
with the Pathwork Regions, although its Chapter connections were generally good.
The PHANA Coordinator made visits to each of the Pathwork Regions in the course
of 2003, out of which came a proposal for the creation of a North American
Pathwork governing body. Drafts of proposal were shared with the
Foundation and Regional leaders, and following a preliminary meeting of Pathwork
leaders in Philadelphia, April 18-20, 2003, PHANA convened a Leadership Meeting
and Helper Training Meeting at the Sevenoaks Pathwork Center, August 18-20,
2003. This was followed by a second meeting in Philadelphia November 7-10,
2003, which agreed upon the creation of a North American Pathwork Association
Formation Team (NFT) -- which in turn led to the formation of the North American
Pathwork Association (NAPA) in September 2004. With its creation, NAPA
essentially took over PHANA's previous overall mission of
fostering "communication, cooperation and mutual understanding between and
within all Pathwork Regions, Chapters and Groups" in North America.
In December
2004, PHANA
adopted a new Mission, "Phase
2" Program,
and Code of Conduct, following consultation with its
membership.
Latest Revision: December 15/04
Top
PHANA
Launch Contents
Council
Reports & Minutes
Home
Page
