Re: Tony Barr's Latest "Batch" -- Dec 6, 99
John Hatch
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Tony Barr's Latest "Batch" -- Dec 6, 99
Creator:
John Hatch
Date:
12/7/1999
Text:
Amen to the CLAM UP OCCASIONALLY!!
Sam E. Hamontree wrote:
>
> Tony, I have a difficult time understanding your position -- which when I
> boil it down -- is, that because I, as an Academy member, don't agree with
> your position, then I am uninformed. Tony, where do you get such crass?
> You have ripped this field, the leadership of the organization and belittled
> the practitioners, all over the fact that many do not agree with your
> position. CLAM UP OCCASIONALLY!!
>
> Sam Hamontree <Email Address Redacted>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Barr [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 1:18 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: InMotion article/US Politics
>
> 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.
>
>
Sam E. Hamontree wrote:
>
> Tony, I have a difficult time understanding your position -- which when I
> boil it down -- is, that because I, as an Academy member, don't agree with
> your position, then I am uninformed. Tony, where do you get such crass?
> You have ripped this field, the leadership of the organization and belittled
> the practitioners, all over the fact that many do not agree with your
> position. CLAM UP OCCASIONALLY!!
>
> Sam Hamontree <Email Address Redacted>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Barr [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
> Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 1:18 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: InMotion article/US Politics
>
> 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.
>
>
Citation
John Hatch, “Re: Tony Barr's Latest "Batch" -- Dec 6, 99,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213341.
