Institutional Capture - a social and psychoanalytic analysis (Part 1)

In the first of two blogs concerning the capture of certain professional bodies, we have approached the urgent necessity for change through an analysis of the ways in which these organisations have wielded power over their members. The first blog addresses the social nature of the loss of capacity for critical thinking in organisations. The second blog will consider the dynamics behind the phenomenon of 'institutional capture’ from a psychoanalytic perspective.

Why are organisations lacking in critical thinking?

---

The highly esteemed policy analysts, Murray Blackman Mackenzie, described the social phenomenon of the ‘capture’ of our professional organisations, by an attitude which places ‘beyond discussion’ ‘claims about the primacy of self-declared gender over sex, with substantial implications for law and policy’ (MBM Nov 2020). The idea of ‘policy capture’ was set out in an MBM paper describing how Scottish Government decision-making, in this case on sex and gender identity issues, had been ‘directed towards the interests of a specific interest group, without due regard for other affected groups or the wider population.’ The paper questioned the adequacy of institutional safeguards against well-organised and highly purposeful lobbying, where ‘groups detrimentally affected have not had effective representation’ [1].

As far as psychotherapy and counselling professional bodies are concerned, the newly-formed successor entity to the Scope of Practice and Education (SCoPEd) partnership - the Partnership of Counselling and Psychotherapy Bodies (PCPB) - does, in particular, demand scrutiny. The identification of the following five distinct areas of concern as to what is happening within them, in turn begs serious questions as to the nature of the psychological dynamics that are fuelling this present crisis.

The insidious change of professional aims in clinical situations

Professional organisations, and our professional bodies in psychotherapy specifically, seem subject to capture in the same way by the ‘EDI’ (Equality, Diversity and Inclusion) perspective more generally. In this context, EDI is understood as shorthand for a social justice agenda that emphasises psychotherapy as a ‘moral mission’, as much as it is a professional discipline aimed at the amelioration of, generally, individual emotional distress.

The outsourcing of critical and analytic capacities in the workplace

Professional organisations have chosen to outsource their critical and analytic capacities to the lobbying of special interest groups rather than exercise their own thoughtful judgement in relation to their primary purpose. This has produced an erosion of the principles of professional practice and an abandonment of ethical responsibility.

The failure to exercise critical and reflective intelligence in favour of simplistic slogans

Where the clinical practice of psychotherapy requires us to ‘sit with’ our ‘not- knowing', our professional organisations have been more concerned to ‘stand with’ those perceived to be oppressed, silencing dissidence and disagreement in order to preserve their sense of moral rectitude, as Peter Daly, an employment and discrimination lawyer, identifies in his paper on the Forstater case. He suggests a problem with organisations representing the caring professions: morally-motivated organisations, professing an ethos of anti-discrimination, have failed ‘to undertake the requisite intellectual exercise to interrogate the contours of their own moral code.' Furthermore, a tendency towards a relatively simplistic assumption of their own moral rectitude facilitates a polarisation towards a sloganised understanding of what is and what is not, ‘diversity and inclusion’.

Maya Forstater expresses surprise at a lack of intellectual capacity amongst 'smart people'

The fear of legal action and loss of freedom of speech

Whereas the Equality Act enjoins a dynamic towards balancing what may be conflicting rights, there has been a fear of misinterpreting and/or misapplying the law, with attempts to go ‘above and beyond’ the law on EDI which may in fact be in breach of the Act. What is and is not acceptable as ‘freedom of speech and expression’ is also applicable to the training context and to clinical practice. The ethos of anti-discrimination invokes accusation of ‘bigotry’ and ‘hate crime’, precisely limiting freedom of speech and expression and increasing the likelihood of bullying, harassment and discrimination.

The question of legal action against legitimate gender-critical practitioners and clinicians

The position that the primacy of self-declared gender prevails over sex has been influential across a range of bodies, such that many women (and a few men) holding and expressing gender-critical views, have been deprived of their livelihood and silenced. This has now been shown to be – and always to have been - unlawful, as attested to by a series of crowd-funded court cases, from employment tribunals, and employment appeal tribunals, all the way through to consideration by the UK Supreme Court, whose April ruling finally puts biology and science at the heart of UK discrimination and human rights law. All of this, as illuminated by ‘Tribunal Tweets’ volunteers supporting ‘open justice’, has subjected the assumptions and practices supporting the primacy of self-declared gender to expert legal examination and close scrutiny, in full view of the general public. This process has been followed closely by large numbers, no doubt including those who contributed financially, and has been vindicated by a rather astonishing 84% success rate, according to Peter Daly, rather than the usual 20%, of such cases.

It is high time and more, that our professional organisations and public institutions woke up to the voices of women, speaking ‘for women’. They must grasp their responsibility to their members and to the public they are supposed to serve and who pay their wages. They must understand the importance for society as a whole, regarding the potential this movement displays in sowing division and harming us all.

Their responsibility is to regain their capacity to think, to grasp reality, and to stand for truth, however challenging that may, at first, appear to be.

[1] Murray, K, Hunter Blackburn, L (2019) ‘Losing sight of women's rights: the unregulated introduction of gender self-identification as a case study of policy capture in Scotland’. Scottish Affairs, Volume 28, Number 3

Author:

Mary MacCallum Sullivan, Psychotherapist, retired. Hon Fellow, UKCP; Former Moderator, UKCP Members Forum. Co-founder, Human Development Scotland; previously Acting Head of (then) Regent’s College School of Psychotherapy & Counselling.