Re: Response to George B.
George Boyer
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Response to George B.
Creator:
George Boyer
Date:
12/23/1999
Text:
Bill - Since you addressed your response below to the list it is appropriate for
me to do the same. Ergo. GB.
PS - 'discussing the salary issue' with the lists, OANDP as well as amp-l (as was
pointed out by someone else also, was totally inappropriate to begin with, except
perhaps to invite confidential replies. As I said, consensus cannot construct
ethicalness of behavior. GB.
George Boyer wrote:
> No, Bill.....this is not the same. Mere consensus CANNOT construct ethical
> correctness. If there is indeed a question of *possible* ethical procedure
> there should be no hesitation in getting feedback from any and all. If it is a
> question of evaluating a matter ALREADY transacted then the matter IS CLEARLY
> inappropriate for consensus and should be addressed confidentially to, perhaps,
> a lawyer or an ethics committee of the professional organization. In which
> case the lists would not be involved until the outcome became known at which
> point open exchange could evaluate the decision reached. Look, the important
> thing to keep in mind is that we all, professionals and patient-clients, are
> involved in ONE communal interactive enterprise and that direct exchange is
> essential in serving the greatest good of BOTH groups.
>
> AND, Bill, I want to post this exchange to the lists so that we may progress
> toward unity and communication and mutual understanding. WE ARE NOT ENEMIES,
> dammit!! George Boyer.
>
> Bill Lifford wrote:
>
> > Hi George,
> >
> > In response to your response:
> >
> > > Bill Lifford, Paul and Wayne and list members of both lists: It has
> > > been my impression that OANDP-L is routinely posted to AMP-L thus I hadn't
> > > the slightest
> > > hesitation in answering you, Bill, as I did....thinking further that this
> > > was an opportunity for
> > > greater exposure of what is certainly the greater good of amputees and of
> > > the practitioners.
> >
> > I can kind of understand your line of thinking... but I did ask for private
> > responses only! I think that just as AMP-L is a place to discuss amputee
> > issues and such, O&P-L is a place where practitioners should be able to
> > discuss some practitioner-specific matters that should not or need not go
> > beyond those borders. Example: If a practitioner is concerned that
> > something he did may or may not be one hundred percent ethical, and wants
> > feedback on the issue, it could be disastrous to his career if his/her post
> > were to be cross-posted without his/her consent.... possibly biasing some of
> > his/her patients/clients against the practitioner when in fact it may be
> > totally undeserved. No one can always know the right thing to do in every
> > situation, and I think that although the listservs are in the long run both
> > devoted to better serving our clients/patients, O&P-L and AMP-L have to be
> > areas where some degree of privacy is respected if you don't have permission
> > to cross post an item. Consider it practitioner confidentiality just as
> > clients/patients wish their records confidential.
> >
> > > On these two lists, AMP-L and OANDP-L, there is precious little discussion
> > > of
> > > background philosophical issues affecting both practitioners and clients
> > > (patients) so, when I
> > > can, I try to bring these matters to the fore. This is what motivates me
> > > often and I DEFY
> > > ANY OF YOU todemonstrate that this is not appropriate. If you are
> > > professionals and we are
> > > patients (clients) then we have one hell of a lot to keep track of in
> > > those areas. Saying the matters have been put to bed is ridiculous
> > > because they change with the clock. In order for us to remain sanely in
> > > touch with each other we better make damn sure we do a lot of talking and
> > > posting back and forth or there is apt to be a revolution in the
> > > arrangement of things which will make the notion of a union of amputees
> > > seem like an ice cream social.
> >
> > Which background philosophical issues are you talking about? I'm not 100%
> > sure I follow you here. Do we want amputees and prosthetists to be on the
> > same page? Of course. I would like us to be allies and co-workers. I
> > don't like that some people are constantly suspicious and/or resentful
> > towards prosthetists. A prosthetic fitting (I think) is a mutual
> > engagement, not a top-down caregiving model where everything is very
> > decisively laid out before the amputee and the amputee is not given an
> > active (or at least informed) role in the prosthetic decisions that lie
> > ahead. I don't think that a practitioner's salary is really one of those
> > issues, though. When I go to work each morning, my commitment to my
> > clients/patients is number one. Like many people, if it were truly about
> > money, I could make much more as a computer programmer. But I love this
> > field because it is all about helping people. When you are emotionally
> > connected to your work, your ethos and commitment are solid as rock.
> >
> > With regards to the union of amputees, I think you're going to have to lay
> > out an outline of the union's probable structure, mission statement, and
> > objectives, etc., for someone to take up the cause with the intent of
> > founding it rather than merely discussing the notion. Sketch out some of
> > these and I would certainly be interested in discussing the matter further.
> > I'll even help you start it if you wish (though I am not an amputee). It's
> > just that when it remains so abstract it becomes hard to really put stock in
> > it. I think it's hard to start something like that from nothing... it's
> > better to create something and then modify it to suit your needs. Why not
> > actually start your own amputee union, and modify it to accomodate the
> > growth of it and the directions it wants to take? Simply calling out for
> > someone else to start up a union doesn't do much to actually get it started.
> >
> > In the beginning you made it sound threatening, like practitioners and O&P
> > companies should fear the power ofthis amputee union that was going to smite
> > the practitioners who were untalented in your opinion. I don't think this
> > was your original intent, but somehow the notion got across and that's why
> > the idea has met with such resistance and negativity on the practitioners'
> > side. What do you think of this?
> >
> > > There is some question of embarrassment about salary matters??? Hell
> > > man, I (we amputees) sincerely want you to make a hugely comfortable
> > > living, as comfortable
> > > as ANY of the professionals.....AND we want and demand of you that you
> > > perform at
> > > maximum professional level, that the ethos of the master craftsman perfuse
> > > your activity.
> >
> > For this very reason, the ethos of a master craftsman or of a medical
> > professional made me very uncomfortable with discussing my salary issues
> > with AMP-L. Also, as soon as an athlete's or star's salary is announced, it
> > becomes the first thing people think of : That bum makes $3.2 million a
> > year and he still doesn't hit .300.... I don't wish for this kind of
> > thinking to trickle down to the point where amputees are saying, How could
> > he be worth $$$? I didn't have a good fitting with him!
> >
> > Certainly practitioners are glad that amputees in general don't begrudge us
> > the right to earn a decent living (or better). Whether or not I make what
> > I consider to be an appropriate salary actually does not affect what I do
> > when I am in the room with a patient/client. They come first, and the
> > salary issue is a separate issue to be taken up with superiors, bosses,
> > etc. I still don't see where the salary issue was all that appropriate to
> > discuss with AMP-L.
> >
> > > You think we amputees harass you, nipping at your heels and yapping???
> >
> > Not the case at all. You know, we have had extensive dialogues on various
> > amputee issues.
> >
> > > NO NO NO people, I am aiming at the HEART!!! Of both camps!! This is too
> > > important to us to just quibble. And any of you who have used an
> > > artificial limb for real know that it is a hell of a lot more important
> > > than just making money. This is not just a negativistic commando
> > > raid.....I want to get
> > > us all in the habit of real communication so the effort can assume its
> > > rightful position in the
> > > roster of medical arts.
> >
> > Well, I think you do genuinely mean well, even if you do drive me crazy at
> > times (meant in a friendly way). Just please ask me next time if you want
> > to use my posts? You asked me before and it was fine.
> >
> > Bill Lifford, CP
me to do the same. Ergo. GB.
PS - 'discussing the salary issue' with the lists, OANDP as well as amp-l (as was
pointed out by someone else also, was totally inappropriate to begin with, except
perhaps to invite confidential replies. As I said, consensus cannot construct
ethicalness of behavior. GB.
George Boyer wrote:
> No, Bill.....this is not the same. Mere consensus CANNOT construct ethical
> correctness. If there is indeed a question of *possible* ethical procedure
> there should be no hesitation in getting feedback from any and all. If it is a
> question of evaluating a matter ALREADY transacted then the matter IS CLEARLY
> inappropriate for consensus and should be addressed confidentially to, perhaps,
> a lawyer or an ethics committee of the professional organization. In which
> case the lists would not be involved until the outcome became known at which
> point open exchange could evaluate the decision reached. Look, the important
> thing to keep in mind is that we all, professionals and patient-clients, are
> involved in ONE communal interactive enterprise and that direct exchange is
> essential in serving the greatest good of BOTH groups.
>
> AND, Bill, I want to post this exchange to the lists so that we may progress
> toward unity and communication and mutual understanding. WE ARE NOT ENEMIES,
> dammit!! George Boyer.
>
> Bill Lifford wrote:
>
> > Hi George,
> >
> > In response to your response:
> >
> > > Bill Lifford, Paul and Wayne and list members of both lists: It has
> > > been my impression that OANDP-L is routinely posted to AMP-L thus I hadn't
> > > the slightest
> > > hesitation in answering you, Bill, as I did....thinking further that this
> > > was an opportunity for
> > > greater exposure of what is certainly the greater good of amputees and of
> > > the practitioners.
> >
> > I can kind of understand your line of thinking... but I did ask for private
> > responses only! I think that just as AMP-L is a place to discuss amputee
> > issues and such, O&P-L is a place where practitioners should be able to
> > discuss some practitioner-specific matters that should not or need not go
> > beyond those borders. Example: If a practitioner is concerned that
> > something he did may or may not be one hundred percent ethical, and wants
> > feedback on the issue, it could be disastrous to his career if his/her post
> > were to be cross-posted without his/her consent.... possibly biasing some of
> > his/her patients/clients against the practitioner when in fact it may be
> > totally undeserved. No one can always know the right thing to do in every
> > situation, and I think that although the listservs are in the long run both
> > devoted to better serving our clients/patients, O&P-L and AMP-L have to be
> > areas where some degree of privacy is respected if you don't have permission
> > to cross post an item. Consider it practitioner confidentiality just as
> > clients/patients wish their records confidential.
> >
> > > On these two lists, AMP-L and OANDP-L, there is precious little discussion
> > > of
> > > background philosophical issues affecting both practitioners and clients
> > > (patients) so, when I
> > > can, I try to bring these matters to the fore. This is what motivates me
> > > often and I DEFY
> > > ANY OF YOU todemonstrate that this is not appropriate. If you are
> > > professionals and we are
> > > patients (clients) then we have one hell of a lot to keep track of in
> > > those areas. Saying the matters have been put to bed is ridiculous
> > > because they change with the clock. In order for us to remain sanely in
> > > touch with each other we better make damn sure we do a lot of talking and
> > > posting back and forth or there is apt to be a revolution in the
> > > arrangement of things which will make the notion of a union of amputees
> > > seem like an ice cream social.
> >
> > Which background philosophical issues are you talking about? I'm not 100%
> > sure I follow you here. Do we want amputees and prosthetists to be on the
> > same page? Of course. I would like us to be allies and co-workers. I
> > don't like that some people are constantly suspicious and/or resentful
> > towards prosthetists. A prosthetic fitting (I think) is a mutual
> > engagement, not a top-down caregiving model where everything is very
> > decisively laid out before the amputee and the amputee is not given an
> > active (or at least informed) role in the prosthetic decisions that lie
> > ahead. I don't think that a practitioner's salary is really one of those
> > issues, though. When I go to work each morning, my commitment to my
> > clients/patients is number one. Like many people, if it were truly about
> > money, I could make much more as a computer programmer. But I love this
> > field because it is all about helping people. When you are emotionally
> > connected to your work, your ethos and commitment are solid as rock.
> >
> > With regards to the union of amputees, I think you're going to have to lay
> > out an outline of the union's probable structure, mission statement, and
> > objectives, etc., for someone to take up the cause with the intent of
> > founding it rather than merely discussing the notion. Sketch out some of
> > these and I would certainly be interested in discussing the matter further.
> > I'll even help you start it if you wish (though I am not an amputee). It's
> > just that when it remains so abstract it becomes hard to really put stock in
> > it. I think it's hard to start something like that from nothing... it's
> > better to create something and then modify it to suit your needs. Why not
> > actually start your own amputee union, and modify it to accomodate the
> > growth of it and the directions it wants to take? Simply calling out for
> > someone else to start up a union doesn't do much to actually get it started.
> >
> > In the beginning you made it sound threatening, like practitioners and O&P
> > companies should fear the power ofthis amputee union that was going to smite
> > the practitioners who were untalented in your opinion. I don't think this
> > was your original intent, but somehow the notion got across and that's why
> > the idea has met with such resistance and negativity on the practitioners'
> > side. What do you think of this?
> >
> > > There is some question of embarrassment about salary matters??? Hell
> > > man, I (we amputees) sincerely want you to make a hugely comfortable
> > > living, as comfortable
> > > as ANY of the professionals.....AND we want and demand of you that you
> > > perform at
> > > maximum professional level, that the ethos of the master craftsman perfuse
> > > your activity.
> >
> > For this very reason, the ethos of a master craftsman or of a medical
> > professional made me very uncomfortable with discussing my salary issues
> > with AMP-L. Also, as soon as an athlete's or star's salary is announced, it
> > becomes the first thing people think of : That bum makes $3.2 million a
> > year and he still doesn't hit .300.... I don't wish for this kind of
> > thinking to trickle down to the point where amputees are saying, How could
> > he be worth $$$? I didn't have a good fitting with him!
> >
> > Certainly practitioners are glad that amputees in general don't begrudge us
> > the right to earn a decent living (or better). Whether or not I make what
> > I consider to be an appropriate salary actually does not affect what I do
> > when I am in the room with a patient/client. They come first, and the
> > salary issue is a separate issue to be taken up with superiors, bosses,
> > etc. I still don't see where the salary issue was all that appropriate to
> > discuss with AMP-L.
> >
> > > You think we amputees harass you, nipping at your heels and yapping???
> >
> > Not the case at all. You know, we have had extensive dialogues on various
> > amputee issues.
> >
> > > NO NO NO people, I am aiming at the HEART!!! Of both camps!! This is too
> > > important to us to just quibble. And any of you who have used an
> > > artificial limb for real know that it is a hell of a lot more important
> > > than just making money. This is not just a negativistic commando
> > > raid.....I want to get
> > > us all in the habit of real communication so the effort can assume its
> > > rightful position in the
> > > roster of medical arts.
> >
> > Well, I think you do genuinely mean well, even if you do drive me crazy at
> > times (meant in a friendly way). Just please ask me next time if you want
> > to use my posts? You asked me before and it was fine.
> >
> > Bill Lifford, CP
Citation
George Boyer, “Re: Response to George B.,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213310.
