Harvard and Radcliffe may take longer than expected to decide how to rearrange their relationship.

Several groups in the community have suggested that merger may not be the perfect answer.

President Pussy said yesterday he does not think that merger will be accomplished by 1970. "I don't think Harvard is ready for it yet," he said.

The president of the Radeliffe Alumnae association said that some other institutional arrangement might better serve the needs of women at Harvard.

"Eventually women may not need a special focus in the University," Mrs. Barbara Voss said. "But right now at Harvard, where the whole focus has been masculine, it would not be true to our own instincts to turn things completely over to men." She mentioned the number of women Faculty members and career planning for women as topics that men might consider insufficiently.

Pusey also said yesterday that he does not "think it is feasible for Harvard to change the number of its women students now."

Anne R. Thornton '69, president of the Harvard Women's Law Student Association, said she feels that Radcliffe should not merge unless Harvard agrees both to accept financial responsibility for Radcliffe and to "get more women into the Harvard community."

"It's a question of strategy," she said. "After merger. there will be a less effective voice for women."

Pusey also said, "Call this male chauvinist if you like-there are many people here who would be unhappy to see the number of men reduced."

Pusey said of merger that "the Faculty is not now ready to say that they're in favor of such a close relationship."

The Faculty voted February 10 to defer any decision on the future relationship between the two schools "until all considerations pro and con and all voices within the two communities have been heard."

Edward L. Keenan Jr. '57, lecturer on History, presenting the motion to the Faculty on behalf of the Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid, said that the question of what institutional structure would be best is still an open question.