InMotion article/US Politics
Tony Barr
Description
Collection
Title:
InMotion article/US Politics
Creator:
Tony Barr
Date:
12/6/1999
Text:
InMotion November/December 1999 issue contained AOPA's legal
representative, Martha Rinker's article on the proposed Harkin O&P medicare
legislation without mention of alternative and perhaps the more meaningfull
patient protection initiative the Wexler HR 1938 legislation proposal.
The Academy's national leadership chose last year to delegate federal
legislative lobbying
efforts and responsibilities to the AOPA leadership.
AOPA, the Academy and the O&P national office continues to not disseminate
information of
other legislative proposals to the general Academy membership even though
it is specifically the
Academy's mission statement to promote patient advocacy and high standards
in patient care through education,literature and research!!!
What gives! From all accounts that I have been provided, the professional
chapter
membership associations of AAOP, the Academy members, have not been
properly informed
by AOPA or Academy national leadership of the available options of current
legisaltive initiatives that will mandate the future criteria of educational
requirements for all Medicare O&P providers.
Attached is a summary and comparison of the more stringent legislation which
better
encourages protection of the patient and furthers the scientific and
educational attainments of ABC certified orthotists and prosthetists through
a variety of continuing education programs.
Amputee advocate George Boyer's ongoing quest for the formation of a Amputee
Union indeed has
merit but ,as he has correctly points out, ACA's is a noneffective consumer
advocacy leader due to the influence of considerable advertising revenues
from AOPA members to their consumer magazine,InMotion, and federal funding
grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Perhaps it would be in the best interest of the profession and the consumer
for the Academy leadership to consider their own union of professionals to
(1) promote patient advocacy (2) better advance the quality of care for the
physically challenged indivisual and (3) require ALL providers of custom O&P
services meet the educational and training standards required by the
Committee on Accredidation of Allied Health Care Education Programs(CAAHEP).
Or at the very least, ask their national leadership why all Academy Chapters
and their members continue not to be informed of the legislative options
currently on the table!
Academy members who remain silent and inactive in advocating for the
establishment of meaningfull CAAHEP criteria for medicare O&P providers
will continue to compete with lesser qualified providers for O&P services
under the Harkin proposal. The independent ABC certified or state licensed
practitioner is particullary vulnerable to being put out of business by
those providers whom have lesser education qualifications as deemed
qualified by the Secretary as proposed under the Harkin Bill.Where is ABC
in all this?Why have they remained silent!
The issue of patient protection should no longer alone be consumer driven.
It is not only the profession's responsibility to advocate patient advocacy
but it is also a question of their professional survival as a qualified
CAAHEP practitioner to stand up and advocate the highest educational
standards possible to better protect the patient and lay the foundation to
obtain proper O&P reimbursement in the future.
Tony Barr
PS : I apologize for posting previously only a portion of my message and
attachment.
representative, Martha Rinker's article on the proposed Harkin O&P medicare
legislation without mention of alternative and perhaps the more meaningfull
patient protection initiative the Wexler HR 1938 legislation proposal.
The Academy's national leadership chose last year to delegate federal
legislative lobbying
efforts and responsibilities to the AOPA leadership.
AOPA, the Academy and the O&P national office continues to not disseminate
information of
other legislative proposals to the general Academy membership even though
it is specifically the
Academy's mission statement to promote patient advocacy and high standards
in patient care through education,literature and research!!!
What gives! From all accounts that I have been provided, the professional
chapter
membership associations of AAOP, the Academy members, have not been
properly informed
by AOPA or Academy national leadership of the available options of current
legisaltive initiatives that will mandate the future criteria of educational
requirements for all Medicare O&P providers.
Attached is a summary and comparison of the more stringent legislation which
better
encourages protection of the patient and furthers the scientific and
educational attainments of ABC certified orthotists and prosthetists through
a variety of continuing education programs.
Amputee advocate George Boyer's ongoing quest for the formation of a Amputee
Union indeed has
merit but ,as he has correctly points out, ACA's is a noneffective consumer
advocacy leader due to the influence of considerable advertising revenues
from AOPA members to their consumer magazine,InMotion, and federal funding
grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Perhaps it would be in the best interest of the profession and the consumer
for the Academy leadership to consider their own union of professionals to
(1) promote patient advocacy (2) better advance the quality of care for the
physically challenged indivisual and (3) require ALL providers of custom O&P
services meet the educational and training standards required by the
Committee on Accredidation of Allied Health Care Education Programs(CAAHEP).
Or at the very least, ask their national leadership why all Academy Chapters
and their members continue not to be informed of the legislative options
currently on the table!
Academy members who remain silent and inactive in advocating for the
establishment of meaningfull CAAHEP criteria for medicare O&P providers
will continue to compete with lesser qualified providers for O&P services
under the Harkin proposal. The independent ABC certified or state licensed
practitioner is particullary vulnerable to being put out of business by
those providers whom have lesser education qualifications as deemed
qualified by the Secretary as proposed under the Harkin Bill.Where is ABC
in all this?Why have they remained silent!
The issue of patient protection should no longer alone be consumer driven.
It is not only the profession's responsibility to advocate patient advocacy
but it is also a question of their professional survival as a qualified
CAAHEP practitioner to stand up and advocate the highest educational
standards possible to better protect the patient and lay the foundation to
obtain proper O&P reimbursement in the future.
Tony Barr
PS : I apologize for posting previously only a portion of my message and
attachment.
Citation
Tony Barr, “InMotion article/US Politics,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 28, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213205.
