Re: Federal Legislation
David Hendricks, CPO, FAAOP
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Federal Legislation
Creator:
David Hendricks, CPO, FAAOP
Text:
Dear O&P Colleagues:
In the current qualification debate, a contributor wrote:
<< I've seen ABC practitioners with about as much drive as a snail in winter,
and I've met BOC practitioners who really want to learn and do a good job >>
Her point was that, because they have enthusiasm and concern for their
patients, the best BOC practitioners are better than the worst ABC
practitioners. Of course they are! But that's beside the point.
When you are talking about group standards in a profession, whether licensure
or certification, you aren't ever talking about the best professionals. They
always exceed those standards. You are talking about the bottom of the heap,
the minimum floor under which it is not acceptable to be. And when you talk
about the performance of a group as a whole, you are talking about the mean
capabilities of that group -- the average competency of the practitioners in
that group.
And when you think that way, you realize that more education in better, more
training is superior. It's as simple as that. And this is why licensure
boards, who deal with minimum standards, have set their floors at levels
based on ABC models. Sure, they have allowed those below that floor to be
grandfathered in, but they have set up continuing education criteria which
will eventually cause even those grandfathered in under those minimum
standards to rise to those standards.
Now, although I am ABC credentialed, I am not an apologist for ABC nor a
denigrator of BOC practitioners. I sell an orthotic product, and I sell it to
both alike. I do ask credentials when I sell it, not to distinguish between
ABC and BOC, both of whom I consider qualified as orthotists, but to weed out
orthotic wannabes from other professions, such as pharmacy, DME, etc.
So let's be reasonable in this debate. It doesn't advance understanding to
say silly things like, because of licensure, ABC and BOC practitioners are
equal, when one requires a baccalaureate and the other a diploma. But
neither does it advance understanding to say that one group isn't qualified
to perform that vast majority of our functions -- fit a hyperextension
orthosis, measure for an AFO, make a foam impression of a foot, etc.
Internecine warfare will not advance the profession one iota; collaborative
education will advance it a great deal.
I think we should agree that education is good -- and that more education is
better. It's that simple. And, instead of arguing about individual
superiority, or group inferiority, let's put our energy into making us all
better!
It's as true now as it ever was: It is better to light one candle than to
curse the darkness.
My $ .02.
David
David Hendricks, CPO, FAAOP
HOPE, Inc.
Zephyrhills, FL
www.acebrace.com
(800) 613-8852
fax: (888) 440-1217
In the current qualification debate, a contributor wrote:
<< I've seen ABC practitioners with about as much drive as a snail in winter,
and I've met BOC practitioners who really want to learn and do a good job >>
Her point was that, because they have enthusiasm and concern for their
patients, the best BOC practitioners are better than the worst ABC
practitioners. Of course they are! But that's beside the point.
When you are talking about group standards in a profession, whether licensure
or certification, you aren't ever talking about the best professionals. They
always exceed those standards. You are talking about the bottom of the heap,
the minimum floor under which it is not acceptable to be. And when you talk
about the performance of a group as a whole, you are talking about the mean
capabilities of that group -- the average competency of the practitioners in
that group.
And when you think that way, you realize that more education in better, more
training is superior. It's as simple as that. And this is why licensure
boards, who deal with minimum standards, have set their floors at levels
based on ABC models. Sure, they have allowed those below that floor to be
grandfathered in, but they have set up continuing education criteria which
will eventually cause even those grandfathered in under those minimum
standards to rise to those standards.
Now, although I am ABC credentialed, I am not an apologist for ABC nor a
denigrator of BOC practitioners. I sell an orthotic product, and I sell it to
both alike. I do ask credentials when I sell it, not to distinguish between
ABC and BOC, both of whom I consider qualified as orthotists, but to weed out
orthotic wannabes from other professions, such as pharmacy, DME, etc.
So let's be reasonable in this debate. It doesn't advance understanding to
say silly things like, because of licensure, ABC and BOC practitioners are
equal, when one requires a baccalaureate and the other a diploma. But
neither does it advance understanding to say that one group isn't qualified
to perform that vast majority of our functions -- fit a hyperextension
orthosis, measure for an AFO, make a foam impression of a foot, etc.
Internecine warfare will not advance the profession one iota; collaborative
education will advance it a great deal.
I think we should agree that education is good -- and that more education is
better. It's that simple. And, instead of arguing about individual
superiority, or group inferiority, let's put our energy into making us all
better!
It's as true now as it ever was: It is better to light one candle than to
curse the darkness.
My $ .02.
David
David Hendricks, CPO, FAAOP
HOPE, Inc.
Zephyrhills, FL
www.acebrace.com
(800) 613-8852
fax: (888) 440-1217
Citation
David Hendricks, CPO, FAAOP, “Re: Federal Legislation,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/215459.
