As part of the effort to provide family science professionals information about the policymaking process, NCFR will share occasional updates about proposed legislation, member work related to policy, and other family policy news through a new item in Zippy News, NCFR's weekly newsletter, titled "Family Policy Watch."

In the May 2015 installment of Family Policy Watch, we summarized an Oklahoma bill for which NCFR members Kelly Roberts, Ph.D, LMFT, and Ronald Cox, Ph.D., helped to draft the original language. Dr. Roberts and member Matthew Brosi, Ph.D., LMFT, continue to work on the implementation of the law.

In addition to the Family Policy Watch, many individuals are asking for specific resources and stories on how to work with legislators. To provide a success story with tips, Dr. Roberts graciously agreed to write about her experiences trying to pass legislation.

The following portion of this article was written by Kelly Roberts, Ph.D., LMFT, University of North Texas.

When I finished my marriage and family therapy degree in 2002, I knew two things about legislative processes: (1) "The West Wing" was the greatest show on television; and (2) on some level I could handle legislative work because I was an NPR and current events junkie. It's now 2015 and I can attest that one of those two ideals remains true. The other may never be.

The Rookie Years

Master's degree in hand I thought, "Note to self: investigate turning my thesis into a statewide survey. There may be some policy implications for divorcing couples. How invasive might a law be requiring therapy prior to filing for a divorce if a couple has minor children? Would it pass?" Having only just defended my research, I was eager to propose a study to the Oklahoma Marriage Initiative, now known as Project Relate, as part of their efforts to strengthen marriages.

Following multiple meetings with multiple stakeholders and major revisions, my "Oklahoma Help Seeking Survey" was funded. Upon analyzing the results, I engaged a legislator to author a bill requiring married couples with minor children to attend a minimum of two sessions of marital therapy prior to filing for divorce. After several hearings, a bill requiring "at least one two-hour session with a licensed behavioral health professional or member of the clergy" was heard on the Senate floor. Debate ensued for several minutes with one senator decrying that this legislation "invades the bedrooms of our citizens." The senator spoke passionately for her fully allotted time subsequently turning the debate narrative 180 degrees.

Those who had vocalized support before began agreeing with her views. As I sat in my university office watching the live vote online, I quietly experienced painful defeat.

A month later, the senator who killed the marital therapy requirement bill filed for divorce. In that real world family policy moment, I realized legislators are humans who may be passing or opposing laws about their own lives, much less the lives of those they represent.

Legislative Coming-of-Age

Soon after the legislative session adjourned sine die, I received a call to serve as Legislative Chair for the Oklahoma Association for Marriage and Family Therapy (OKAMFT). Their top legislative priority was to pass a bill requiring insurance companies to allow customers to seek behavioral health services from their preferred licensed professional. At that time, many companies only contracted with licensed clinical social workers (LCSWs) and psychologists. Unless licensed marital and family therapists (LMFTs) were allowed to bill for services, the profession would never be allowed to fully develop in Oklahoma, and families could not access the services best suited for their needs.

I accepted this appointment with deep hesitation about my effectiveness. Resolved to try again, I reflected and created a "Plus/Delta" list (Helminski & Koberna, 1995), focusing on personal and process areas of improvement. When the list was finished, the corrective plan seemed daunting:

1. I had been running a sole proprietor shop. I had personally decided what our state needed based upon one study that I conducted. I had approached a single legislator, co-created the language with only him, and created a sheet of talking points I single-handedly distributed to legislative aides, speaking in person with only a handful. Big lesson number one: I can't do this alone. People who are not included are unengaged. I needed to risk trusting and respecting others to join the process of creating positive change.
2. I wasn't even sure the bill was the best way to address the problem I had identified. As a systems theory aficionado, I had forgotten a key lesson in creating a solution: perspective taking. Unless all those involved in the system had been heard, the full problem couldn't be understood. And if a problem isn't understood, then any solution created is akin to spitting into a strong wind. No wonder one representative reflected: "I'm wondering who wins with this bill other than the therapists. It seems to me that all we're doing is boosting their bottom line." A decade ago I felt a strong sense of indignation and hurt after that remark. Today, I think he may not have gone far enough with his criticism. Big lesson number two: The problem must be understood in order to attempt a solution as lasting as legislative action.
3. Every step of the process had been rushed. The business of legislation runs on a strict calendar. By the time I found out there were filing deadlines and that legislators are limited in the number of bills they sponsor, it was almost too late. My bill was filed on the second-to-last day possible by a legislator who had not yet used up his allotted number. The bill was heard late in the process in both the House and Senate committees, and didn't reach the final floor for a debate until before sine die. As a professional, I fully understood this premise: "If it's not right, wait. Better to make it right than pay for fallout later." As someone shepherding her first bill, none of that mattered to me. I was emotionally invested and was making compromises to my personal integrity. I wanted the legislators to do the same. Big lesson number three: If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. Effective planning is essential!

Prime of policy life

I learned a lifetime of lessons from those "big three" Plus/Deltas which eventually resulted in success at my second attempt to pass legislation.

After I agreed to take the Legislative Chair position, I worked on driving a bill with the understanding that I would need help. OKAMFT's general lobbyist and I strategized to create, shepherd, and pass "The Freedom of Choice" bill. A strict planning calendar was created and begun a year in advance of our target pass date. We planned meetings, called OKAMFT members to explain the bill and ask for their involvement, provided newsletter updates, and more. It took six months and about 20 drafts before we agreed to appropriate, cohesive, fair and clear language, and all of this work had to occur before we identified the right sponsor for this important legislation.

Much time and energy was spent on perspective taking. There were only 550 LMFTs in the state at that time but there were 2,500 Licensed Professional Counselors who were in the same situation. Once leadership meetings were held with the Oklahoma Counseling Association we had our first allies. We then approached the Licensed Alcohol and Drug Counselors and successfully engaged ally number two. And, after three meetings and a private lunch with the executive director of the National Association for Social Workers Oklahoma Division (NASW-OK), I received a key message we needed for our bill to pass: NASW-OK would "not oppose" the Freedom of Choice Bill. I wanted to shout out loud; I think I calmly took a long drink of my iced tea and expressed my deep appreciation, perhaps twice. Immediately, I called our lobbyist who said, "Now€¦ now it's time to find the right sponsor for your bill." And we did. We found the right sponsor, and the right co-sponsors in both the House and Senate. Soon, a working draft of the bill began moving through the committee process.

Simultaneously, time was spent with the membership educating them on how to help build momentum for a bill. We wrote phone call scripts. We made sure members knew who their legislators were, and we gave them talking points that were proactively supportive of Republican and Democratic platforms, depending upon which party representative they were engaging. At that point, the Psychiatric Nurses Association approached us and we had our fourth ally, but there was a hitch. Although the House committee process went smoothly, the Republican-controlled Senate was not receiving the bill favorably. Many senators were supporters of free markets and believed insurance companies should have limited oversight, that they should be able to make their own decisions about who they contract with and why.

The hardest conversation I had that year was with our OKAMFT leadership, our lobbyist, and our ally leadership about whether to pull the bill. A rule in the Oklahoma Legislature states that if you bring a bill to the floor for debate and it is defeated, you cannot bring it again for three years. After much "perspective taking," we pulled the bill. That night I cried like a baby.

The following year, we formulated better arguments for the Republican Caucus and the bill passed. As I sat in the gallery watching red and green lights illuminate one by one on the voting tally board I cried like a baby again. This time, the tears were joyful. The "big three" had worked, over 4,000 clinical professionals could now contract with insurance companies, and hundreds of thousands of Oklahomans could access formerly unreachable services.

Legislative reflections

These were hard, quiet, emotional lessons learned and are lessons I hope you can take away from this particular article. In closing I want to share with you some words that our lobbyist shared with me when I asked, "Do you ever get to the point where you genuinely feel you can handle the legislative processes? She wrote:

[Legislative processes] taught me a new definition of failure and success. One day's success can be tomorrow's failure. You cannot own either outcome. If you do, de-pression would be your best friend. Sometimes when you least expect it, you win for the people. The truth I count on is: never underestimate the power of one committed individual; they can change the world. You can never quit, and sometimes, you have to retreat and regenerate your passion.

And, I agree with every word she wrote.

Reference

Helminski, L. & Koberna, S. (1995). Total quality in instruction: A systems approach. In H. V. Roberts (Ed.), Academic initiatives in total quality for higher education (pp. 309-362). Milwaukee, WI: ASQC Quality Press.

Additional resource

For an example of how one individual helped to advocate for Family Life Education, see Dawn Cassidy's CFLE Network column, "A Family Life Education Advocacy Success Story."

If you are interested in helping develop resources for impacting family policy or advocating for the profession, please email Jennifer Crosswhite. 

Copyright © 2015 National Council on Family Relations (NCFR). Contact NCFR for permission to reprint, reproduce, disseminate, or distribute by any means.