 |
 |
HI Catherine, Of the organizations I am aware of, I think most if not all perform a service. There was one that had some misappropriation of funds by a single person (who went to jail I think) but that kind of situation can occur even in good organizations. My complaint is the duplication of effort, confusion over which to contribute to (leading to- in one case that I was familiar with - NO money being contributed to any PD charity), and petty bickering which could well have endangered the political efforts which led to the Udall Act. Catherine- you ask for ideas. I would like to hear some too. I have made some efforts, Perry Cohen has done a lot more. I think we had a chance last year to make some headway but the feelings were so strong that some of the people that I respect most on the list and who have done the most for the Udall bill and for our cause in general saw fit to avoid the issue I suspect because it is so divisive. I don't know the answer but I would like to hear some. Catherine S Berk wrote: > Mime-version: 1.0 > X-Priority: 3 > Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit > > Evening all, > The issues have been raised but how do we change the status quo? > Does anyone have any ideas how this question of competition and duplication > gets addressed? How do we make our needs known and changes made? How can > we be assured that monies designated for research is funding research? > Has anyone ever attended board meetings of the NPF, APDA, APF ? What goes on > at these get togethers? How meaningful are their mission statements? Do they > support collaboration or competition in finding a 'cure?' > I'm asking. > Catherine in Portsmouth -- ****************************************************************************************** Charles T. Meyer, M.D. Middleton (Madison), Wisconsin [log in to unmask] ******************************************************************************************