2005 AGM Minutes

Red Deer Lodge Hotel
Red Deer, Alberta
May 9, 2005

The meeting was called to order at 12:10 pm

I. Acceptance of the Agenda for the 2005 AGM

M/S/C Thomas MacKay/Glenys Godlovitch that the agenda be accepted as presented.

II. Approval of the Minutes of the 2005 AGM

M/S/C Glenys Godlovitch/Gordon MacPherson that the minutes of the 9 th annual general meeting be approved as circulated.

III. Report from the Chair – Joe MacGillivray

Joe MacGillivray indicated that as a result of the work he is doing across the country he has found that PHEN is becoming recognized across the province as well as nationally for its value to the health system. Many PHEN alumni continue to share information about PHEN, interesting other health professionals in the resources that PHEN has developed as well as the concept of a health ethics network.

The PHEN Board met last fall and developed some key strategic directions to help the organization move forward which are outlined in the 10 th anniversary report. A copy of PHEN’s ten-year report (1995-2005) was circulated to the membership.

IV. Report from the Executive Director - Al-Noor Nenshi Nathoo
Al-Noor Nenshi Nathoo presented a summary of the annual operations of the Network. PHEN has been in existence for ten years and the anniversary report provides a summary of what PHEN has done during this time.

Al-Noor indicated that some of the challenges/questions that the organization currently faces include:

• Internally the greatest challenge is the demand on PHEN versus the availability of resources to meet that demand. In order to expand to meet growing demands, PHEN will need to look at a variety of possible sources of funding.
• Fear Factor – unfortunately many people continue to feel intimidated on hearing the word ethics because of the policing connotation. This can often be mitigated by better communication and education – that ethics is primarily about developing space for moral reflection, not telling others what to do. Our hope is that eventually ethics will simply be an accepted part of decision-making in every organization.

V. Financial Report

Joe MacGillivray presented the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005. While revenue remained consistent, expenses were higher than in previous years resulting in a deficit.

Alberta Health and Wellness and the Regional Health Authorities provide the majority of PHEN’s funding. Recently, the Network has initiated more concerted efforts to generate increased revenue from fee-for-service activities.

M/S/C Jean Graham/Mary-Karen Reid that the audited financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 be approved and accepted as presented.

VI. Appointment of Auditors for 2005-2006

M/S/C Gordon MacPherson/Nancy Goddard that Deloitte and Touche be re-appointed as auditors for the fiscal year 2005-2006.

VII. Membership Structure

Al-Noor Nenshi Nathoo initiated discussion and sought feedback on the question of PHEN membership for ethics committees.

He explained that currently there are two categories of PHEN membership - individual and organizational/institutional. Clinical and research ethics committees have a profound interest in promoting ethics, yet a lot of members of ethics committees in Alberta are not members of PHEN. It is likely that this is largely a procedural issue as opposed to a lack of interest. To address this, we may wish to develop a way for ethics committees to become PHEN members such that all members of the committee receive the benefits of individual membership.

One way to do this would be to add a membership category for Ethics Committees (general ethics committees – including both clinical and research) enabling all committee members to receive the same benefits as individual PHEN members. This would require that we clarify the distinction between ethics committee and organizational memberships. Another avenue would be to modify the definition of organizational membership to include ethics committees.

In general, feedback from the membership present suggested that making it easier for ethics committee members to collectively become PHEN members would be a positive step.

Glenys Godlovitch pointed out that there might concern that adding an ethics committee category may result in a significant number of non-active members (who became members by virtue of their institution instead of by personal choice), which might in turn create a quorum issue. Barbara Russell suggested that it may be appropriate to have differential fees for ethics committees within and outside of the province.

VIII. Board Membership, Ratification and Election

Joe called for nominations for the two positions to be elected by the membership.

M/S/C Thaine Olsen/Thomas MacKay that Eric Wasylenko be nominated for the vacant Board position.

M/S/C Glenys Godlovitch/Stacey Page that Nina Preto be nominated for the vacant Board position

Joe MacGillivray called for nominations 3 times. There were no additional nominations.

M/S/C Margaret Plain/Thaine Olsen moved that nominations cease.

Eric Wasylenko and Nina Preto are elected to the PHEN Board by acclamation.

Each of the newly nominated board members presented information about themselves to the membership.

IX. Members Open Forum

This portion of the meeting is for members to share information and issues that they feel the board and staff of PHEN should be aware of. It is also an opportunity to offer some suggestions for the direction of the society.

Joe MacGillivray explained that there has been some interest from other provinces in creating similar organizations that are linked to PHEN. There are a number of opportunities for PHEN to branch out and share its expertise with health organizations and professionals across the country.

Thaine Olsen indicated that he was somewhat concerned about expanding PHEN too far into other provinces and stretching its resources. Joe explained that Alberta’s funding would definitely stay within the province, but in order to expand there would need to be financial commitment from other provincial governments. The idea is to share resources that are already developed. Eric Wasylenko opined that the resources PHEN has shared with Calgary Health Region has helped the regions ethics resources to expand.

Barbara Russell suggested that we would need to be careful about expanding the PHEN model to other jurisdictions with different community views and needs regarding health care.

Dennis Moore indicated that he is attending from Saskatchewan and has taken the PHEN Distance Education Course. He indicated that the information he has gleaned has helped to support the development of ethics within their health region.

Sheila Toews from Winnipeg indicated that the links, assistance and advice she received from PHEN have been a significant help to them in developing their ethics supports and resources. She highly recommends PHEN’s website as a source of information.

Barbara Russell indicated that a recent survey of Albertans and Canadians suggested they do not place a high value on ethics – rather they would prefer money to be spent on direct medical services. It is often difficult to show the tangible value of ethics.

Perry Mill suggested that perhaps asking generic organizations to include PHEN materials and information in their materials might help educate the general public.

Mary-Karen Reid wondered if PHEN has considered developing a package of information that might be helpful for other provinces as they look at developing their ethics resources/networks.

X. Any Other Business, Questions From The Floor

XI. Adjournment