SIP Organization Name Committee Meeting Minutes, 2016 November 30

SIP Organization Name Committee
Meeting Minutes
November 30, 2016
Members attending: Karlee Fellner, Kyle Hill, Carolyn Barcus, Joe Gone, Angela Enno, 
Janet Thomas (minute taker)
Members absent: Joseph Trimble, Carolyn Thomas-Morris
Guests/Council of Elders: John Chaney, Teresa LaFramboise, Rebecca Foster, Daniel 
Foster, Mark Daniels
Guests unable to attend: Douglas McDonald, Candace Fleming, Jacqueline Gray
I.  Review of process 
Karlee reviewed the process that we have gone through to get to this point. She recounted
the business meeting last June. She noted that the term “Indian” is perceived as offensive 
and derogatory in Canada, except within the community. Other SIP members from the 
U.S. expressed that they did not identify with that term; Indigenous people from Hawaii, 
Alaska, South America, and Central America are not covered by that term. Karlee 
recalled a general sentiment in favor of respecting the feelings and opinions of the Elders.
Mark was in attendance in June. He recalled that the discussion was leaning toward a 
name change, and that Joe Trimble was in favor of a name change. Carolyn pointed out 
that there were important voices not represented at the meeting, and so this committee 
decided to directly reach out to the Elders by inviting them to participate in this meeting. 
II. Discussion about a possible name change
Rebecca said that she felt her voice and those of others who were a part of the founding 
of the organization were getting put aside. Rebecca said that she is proud of being an 
Indian. She described how hard her grandfather fought to preserve Indian culture. She 
said that traditional Indian culture discourages Elders from arguing and speaking up 
about their views, and she expressed concern that, if the identity of the organization 
changes, they may just quietly withdraw.
Rebecca noted that if SIP changes to include all of these other groups, then the 
organization will no longer be what it was conceived to be. American Indian graduate 
students and psychologists needed a place to go and that led to the formation of SIP. She 
expressed concern that those who do not identify as American Indian are now telling SIP 
members the correct way to do things.
Doug sent his opinion. He wanted to maintain the SIP name as it is, unless Joe Trimble 
and others voice a different view, in which case he would defer to them. 
Teresa pointed out that Alaskan Natives are included in the current name. She observed 
that there is a new generation that wants to put everything out on the listserv. Teresa 
added that SIP was originally designed to give Indian people a voice in mental health 
issues. 
Mark suggested that we have a prayer to set the tone for the meeting. 
Dan clarified that he would not leave the group just because of a name change but said 
that he is aging and so may be backing out of the group. He talked about the affiliation he
feels with First Nations people as well as Indigenous people in South and Central 
America and other places, but he said that he is and always will be an American Indian.
Dan offered a prayer.
John said that he has not heard a convincing argument about changing the name, and so 
he wanted to vote “no.” 
Angela expressed that she is both Indian and Native American. Her tribe has been split at 
the U.S. border as a result of colonization. She expressed frustration about the desire to 
separate people by these borders. She said that the commitment to the term, “American 
Indian” feels like a rejection of Native people who live outside the current U.S. borders. 
Angela said she was heartened to see how tribes from all over have joined the effort at 
Standing Rock, adding that “we are stronger together.” She thought we should approach 
the conversation from a place of love and joy.
Mark brought up the issue of a possible name change years ago, and the conversation was
shut down. He emphasized his desire to be respectful of other Elders. Mark pointed out 
that, if the organization was being formed today, the language would be different. Today, 
we use different terminology in our academic writing, and the organization’s name would
reflect that.
He observed the concern that by changing the name, the focus could change. He noted 
that SIP has been very inclusive of Maori, Canadian, South American, Central American 
relatives. Mark said he saw changing the name to be more inclusive as nothing but a 
benefit, and it is reflective of a spirit that has been a part of SIP.
Rebecca said there is pressure in some communities to change the ceremonies to 
modernize them. Elders have declined those requests because these ceremonies have been
the tradition for centuries. SIP is inclusive, but the Elders hold on to the old ways. 
Moving into the modern will cause the loss of everything. She and Dan will be leaving 
their jobs in June, and no one has come to take over for them. She said that she found it 
offensive to say that being Indian was an embarrassment. 
Kyle said that he grew up with the term “Indian,” and he is comfortable with being called
Indian. He mentioned that East Indian people have expressed interest in joining the 
organization and that the term has been confusing for them.
2
Joe G. said he had not formed a strong opinion about the name change, seeing arguments 
on both sides. Tradition is by definition conservative. Joe said that the term “Indian” is 
important in the U.S., given all of the many societies, government agencies, and 
programs that include it. He said there are legal reasons for using the term, in addition to 
the political reasons. Joe said he thought SIP should defer to the Elders and drop the idea 
of considering a name change at this time. It could be revisited in the future. 
Dan said “theoretical physics is advanced one death at a time.” He said that American 
Indian was not a proud term at one time. As an Indian, he said “we sought to bring pride 
and accomplishment to the term.”
John said he was glad to hear everyone’s voices today. 
Teresa summarized that she, Dan, Rebecca, Carolyn B., John, and Doug are opposed to 
the name change. Joe T. was open to and leaning toward a change (based on comments 
made at the meeting last June). Mark is in favor of a name change. 
Carolyn B. expressed her respect for the young people who have other opinions. Carolyn 
said she grew up as a Black Feet Indian. She understands that others may want to do 
something different, but her desire is to retain the name.
Kyle suggested that the committee give a report to the full membership in June. Carolyn 
recommended that he submit something in response to the call for programs for the next 
SIP Conference. 
Karlee said she is still thinking about those who were not able to participate in this call 
and those who expressed other opinions at the June meeting and on the listserv.
Although in favor of a name change, Angela said she would like to defer to the Elders at 
this point and close the discussion. 
III. Decision
A decision was made to retain the name, American Indian and Alaskan Native Society of 
Indian Psychologists.
Kyle said he thought this was a beautiful process. He and others expressed gratitude to 
everyone for participating. 
IV. Future plans
Carolyn said that the process seemed to be ready to be concluded. Kyle said he would 
email committee members about a follow-up meeting. 
3
SIP Organization Name Committee
Meeting Minutes
October 13, 2016
Attending: Karlee Fellner, Kyle Hill, Carolyn Barcus, Joe Gone, Janet Thomas (minute 
taker)
Absent: Angela Enno, Joseph Trimble, Carolyn Thomas-Morris
I. Issues from previous meeting
1) Decision about whether to convene a talking circle at the SIP conference to discuss the
matter of the organization's name.
2) Question regarding borders, i.e., whether the organization is intended to include only 
Americans or those from other countries such as those in North and South America.
3) Analysis of comments from the listserv
Joe T. notified us that he had an unexpected conflict and so could not attend the meeting 
today. During our last meeting, he offered to try to identify a graduate student to analyze 
the content of the comments on the list pertaining to the organization's name. He wrote to
let us know that he was not able to find a student to do this analysis. 
II. Process for considering the organization name
Joe G. recalled that we had not resolved the question as to whether the decision should 
ultimately be deferred to the elders, and if so, exactly who belongs to that group.
Carolyn B. said that the Council of Elders is comprised of all of the past presidents of 
SIP, and others that may be added. 
Karlee suggested that we remain flexible about what to do following the talking circle. 
She said that a decision might come out of that discussion.
Carolyn B. noted that many of the elders no longer attend the SIP conference. She 
suggested that we could send them the past minutes and invite them to a conference call. 
Joe G. suggested a process of either letting the individuals who attend SIP make the 
decision (a group that would include non-Native people), or one in which everyone could
participate. He thought we should either let the elders decide or include the whole 
organization, perhaps using the listserv.
Carolyn B. said that, if the talking circle is included, it should be a piece of the process. 
Native members should make the ultimate decision about the name. 
4
Janet said that she would not weigh in on the decision. Carolyn suspected that Steve 
Behnke would likely do the same. 
Karlee said that a talking circle at SIP would not necessarily require the exclusion of 
everyone who could not attend in person. She suggested that others could participate by 
phone or through the use of other technology. Another option would be for people to 
submit something in writing that could be read during the talking circle. 
Karlee added that she had envisioned non-Native members being a part of the talking 
circle, and she suggested that they could share ideas from their own perspectives. She 
said that this would give everyone an opportunity to listen to every voice in person, and 
that it would be a different conversation than one that might occur on a listserv.
Joe G. said that he believes everyone would welcome a ceremony, but that the Council of
Elders should be the ones to decide. If the talking circle is to be an important part of the 
process, then we have to consider that many of the decision makers are not likely to be in 
attendance. Most of them do not typically attend the conference, and the cost of travel 
would make it difficult or impossible for many to come. So, they would not be able to 
benefit from the input of those in the talking circle. 
Karlee suggested that we extend a strong invitation to the elders to attend. If they are 
willing to participate, but cannot attend in person, we could find a way to include them 
using technology. 
Janet suggested that the elders could be contacted and asked whether they are willing and
able to participate. With that information, we could decide how best to address whatever 
concerns they raise. 
Carolyn B. said that she has a list of the Council of Elders and that some of them are no 
longer members of SIP. She offered to send them an email asking them to convene. This 
would mark the first time the group has ever been asked to convene. 
Joe G. suggested that we invite them to rejoin the organization. Carolyn B. said that they 
could be invited to join, but that it would be disrespectful to require that they pay dues in 
order to participate in this process. 
Janet asked whether we needed to ask the Executive Committee before convening the 
group. Carolyn B. said that we should inform them, but do not need permission. 
Carolyn clarified that we will begin by inviting the elders to participate in a conference 
call meeting with our committee. When we know who is willing, we can then set a time. 
Kyle and Karlee will draft an agenda for that meeting between the elders and our 
committee. The committee will review and modify that draft agenda as needed. 
The next meeting for the committee will occur on Wednesday, November 30th at 1:30 
Eastern, 12:30 Central, 11:30 Mountain, and 10:30 Pacific time. 
5
SIP Organization Name Committee
Meeting Minutes
September 23, 2016
Attending: Karlee Fellner, Kyle Hill, Carolyn Barcus, Joe Gone, Carolyn Thomas-
Morris, Joe Trimble, Janet Thomas (minute taker)
Absent: Angela Enno
I Agenda
Kyle reviewed some of the concerns that were raised at about the name of the 
organization at the annual meeting and in subsequent posts to the SIP list.
We discussed how to approach this discussion today, and we decided to focus on process.
II. Process for addressing the issue of the SIP's name
Carolyn M. reflected on her 20 years of membership in SIP and recommended a cultural 
approach that does not impose a deadline but allows whatever time we need to make this 
decision. She further suggested that the ultimate decision about the organization's name 
be turned over to the elders. Carolyn expressed a preference for the name "American 
Indian and Alaskan Native Society of Psychologists."
Karlee mentioned the "border issues" that should be considered. Karlee elucidated her 
point: The borders between the United States and other countries are arbitrary and were 
established by the colonizers. The boarders were drawn without regard to tribal 
homelands, and they divided numerous communities. She wondered whether she, as a 
Canadian, should be a part of the discussion if the organization is exclusively 
"American."
Carolyn M. said that she wants SIP to be inclusive, but she didn't believe that SIP could 
or should advocate for people from other countries. She further suggested that an 
organizational mission statement could delineate the intent of SIP to be inclusive and 
welcoming to everyone. 
Joe G. suggested that we have too many suggestions for names to call for a vote at this 
point. Regarding process, he noted that several people have suggested that we wait and 
consider letting the elders make a decision. 
Carolyn M. said she was not comfortable voting on the matter. 
Karlee suggested that SIP could create a talking circle (including ceremony) next June 
that would allow everyone who can attend to participate in a discussion of the issue.
6
Carolyn B. noted that we should try to minimize divisiveness, and such a process (i.e., a 
talking circle) could allow for that. Meeting outdoors would allow for ceremony, and 
Carolyn said she could arrange for an outdoor location for this purpose. It was proposed 
that this be done somewhere other than the University, possibly on Monday evening. 
Carolyn M. underscored her earlier suggestion that a council of elders, informed by the 
comments made during the talking circle, should make a final decision about the name.
Carolyn B. thought it would be best if the group could reach consensus in the talking 
circle. If the discussion becomes too divisive, and a clear decision does not emerge from 
the talking circle, then the default decision would be to leave the name as it is and to table
further consideration of a name change for some period of time, such as 5 years. 
Joe T. suggested that a content analysis of all of the comments received would be helpful 
in illuminating the thoughts, feelings, and opinions of those who have submitted their 
ideas. He has software that could be used to extract this information in an objective 
manner. Joe offered to identify a graduate student in his program to do this. 
Joe G. said that, if the decision is put to the elders, it seems clear that that they will decide
to retain the name, and so he wonders whether it is worth the work involved. 
Karlee recommended that we may need more than one circle to reach consensus, and that 
such concurrence would obviate the need to ask the elders to make a decision. 
Carolyn M. agreed with Karlee that the circle would be a good idea, but she continued to 
believe that the elders should be the ones to make the final decision, particularly because 
the issue has become so contentious. 
The two options were summarized:
1) Convene a talking circle at the convention. Trust that the group will reach consensus.
2) Convene the talking circle, and then defer the decision to a council of elders.
Karlee asked whether membership in a council of elders had been established. Carolyn B.
said it was recommended that such a council would be comprised of past presidents, but 
she assumed that other elders, such as Joseph Trimble, would be included.
Joe G. expressed concern that any decision based on views expressed during a talking 
circle, held in conjunction with the SIP meeting, would only represent the views of those 
who are able to attend. Such a group may not be representative of the full membership. 
The Committee ultimately decided to ponder these points, to reconvene in a month, and 
to continue the discussion through email in the interim. 
Next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 13, at 11:00 am Central Time; 
12:00 Mountain Time; 1:00 Pacific Time.
7
SIP Organization Name Committee
Meeting Minutes
August 22, 2016
Attending: Karlee Fellner, Kyle Hill, Carolyn Barcus, Joe Gone, Janet Thomas (minute 
taker)
Absent: Joe Trimble; Angela Enno
I. Overview of the agenda 
Kyle reviewed some of the concerns that were raised at the annual meeting about the 
name of the organization.

East Indian psychologists have expressed interest in joining. 

The term "Indian" is considered derogatory in some places, such as Canada. 
Karlee noted that there are a number of SIP members who do not identify with that term 
(e.g., those from Central and South America, Hawaii)
Carolyn said that we need to be respectful of those who worked hard to name the 
organization initially, and that we need to attend to our process. Dan Foster and Joe 
Trimble were part of the group that named the organization, and getting their input would
be helpful. 
II. Discussion of process
Joe G. raised the issue of how we might approach the decision. 
1. Create a forum for discussion; vote, and let the majority rule.
2. Defer to the Elders and/or long-term members to make the decision about whether
to change the organization's name.
Carolyn assumed it would be a democratic process including members of SIP. 
Kyle said he wanted to find a way to make the decision-making process inclusive of all 
SIP members (e.g., Elders, students, academics, clinicians). 
Joe suggested a process of asking people to submit suggestions for names, along with 
their rationales. 
Karlee supported the idea of soliciting submissions to the committee members, and 
proposed that we could consolidate them, and present them to the membership. 
Joe said the voting could be complicated in that it may not be clear exactly who is a 
current member. There was also discussion about who would be invited to vote. Would 
voting only be limited to current members?
8
The Committee decided it would be important to consult with Chris Morris and Wendy 
Peters to see what would be involved in creating a voting process online rather than just 
voting at the annual meeting in June. 
Carolyn said that one option would be for a discussion to take place on the listserv 
throughout the year, and then a vote could be taken in person at the meeting. 
Karlee heard that the Executive Committee may be working on bylaws changes, and they
requested that we get this worked out so that they can consider the name in their work. 
III. Possible courses of action
Carolyn suggested two courses of action: 
1. Contact Chris and Wendy (Carolyn)
2. We start by asking people on the listserv - Tell them that we are exploring the 
idea of changing the name of the organization and requesting input. (Karlee)
Karlee agreed to draft an email to the listserv, and will send it to us for editing by August
26th. The Committee will review it. 
Janet suggested that we include background information about how this issue came up at 
the meeting to inform those who were not in attendance. Karlee will include this in the 
email draft.
Kyle suggested we consider asking members for input about the process rather than 
moving directly to gathering ideas from the membership. Carolyn said that she believed 
that the Committee has already been empowered to take the lead and set a process. If 
other members offer ideas about the process, we can consider them, but she suggested we
move forward. 
Our goal is to send the email to the listserv inviting their input by September 1st. 
Members will be asked to submit their ideas by September 30th. 
Karlee suggested that people send their suggestions to Janet who will compile them for 
the Committee. 
Carolyn will call Angela to see if she still wants to be involved and let her know about 
the next meeting. 
Janet will contact Joe Trimble about the meeting time. 
Next meeting: Thursday, September 22nd at 9:00 Pacific, 10:00 Mountain, 11:00 Central
9