Fw: legislative stand
Tony Barr
Description
Collection
Title:
Fw: legislative stand
Creator:
Tony Barr
Date:
1/11/2001
Text:
Paul, as a licensed practitioner, O&P Listserve entrepreneur and Academy
board director, perhaps many, that don't know you, perceive your advocacy as
artificial. I know better!!
You will always be a stand up guy and support what is right for the profession and patient.
Perhaps your response below may encourage other Academy officers and directors to participate in this dialog.
From the feedback we have received so far, there doesn't seem to be much support of the not securing CAAHEP standards to practitioners !!
How about words on this issue from Gorski,Lamb,Mars,Moretto Beattie and Katz!!??
Thanks for stating your position below and the compliment regarding my
personal advocacy.
A united team of consumer and profession participants can't be defeated in maintaining the highest standards to the profession.
The most important thing in communication is to hear what isn't being said.
Tony Barr
> Tony,
>
> My personal stance on any legislative initiatives related to qualified
> provider language has always been and always will be based upon the set of
> documented educational standards set by CAAHEP. I personally have never
> supported and never will support language that does not refer to specific
> educational standards. Educational standards supercede any voluntary
> certification agency in my opinion, and I have always supported strict
> adherence to this principle in any proposed language for legislative
> initiatives. Although I am certified by ABC, it is not the certification
> that made me a professional, it is the commitment and sacrifice necessary
to
> obtain a solid educational foundation, continued supervised post graduate
> training (residency), continued ethical professional conduct, and ongoing
> advanced continuing education that defines who I am as a professional. My
> ABC certification proves that I passed an exam, and voluntarily attain the
> required continuing education.
> My opinion on the recent legislation specific to the qualified provider
> language is that it is completely unacceptable. My basis for this is not
> specifically that OT's and PT's were mentioned in the language as much as
> the fact that the entry level educational standards for becoming a
qualified
> provider have been diluted to that of the lowest common denominator as
> defined by a certification agency that requires no formal university based
> education in Orthotics and prosthetics. I have an incredibly difficult
time
> applauding the success of the financial merits of the legislation when the
> principle of the educational standards have been compromised to a level
> which is not even considered acceptable in developing nations based upon
> ISPO standards.
>
> We as individual professionals must determine what is important to us and
> the future of our profession, and act accordingly. As you well know, and
I
> hate to beat a dead horse, the professional orthotists/prosthetists and
> consumers of Florida led a passionate (and self funded) fight against
> incredible resistance to obtain a meaningful piece of legislation that
> specifically refers to educational standards. References to credentialing
> agencies were intentionally left out of the bill and law because it was
not
> that difficult to recognize that the 'alphabet soup' game is not worth
> arguing about when there is absolutely no arguing about anatomy 101,
> psychology 101, kinesiology 301, lower limb orthotics 301, etc. The
> university based educational standards as adopted by CAAHEP are the
> foundation of our law, and therefore it is clearly defined what it takes
to
> enter as a practicing professional orthotist, prosthetist, or pedorthist
in
> the state of Florida.
>
.
> Leadership has the responsibility to mindfully see past the immediate
> interests of the now, and to critically evaluate the impact that decisions
> will have for generations. One of the only method of checks and balances
> that we have are those individual professionals and consumers who
thoroughly
> educate themselves on the history, facts, and details of an issue and
> challenge the leadership to move forward in a given direction. In a
> democratic society and organization, the leadership should lead based upon
> the will and best interests of the people. In the case of our profession,
> it is imperative that the individual practitioners begin to take a more
> active role at educating themselves on the issues, sharing their opinions
> with other (in the trenches) practitioners, educate each other on the
> details, and share their views with the leadership in a thoughtful,
> productive, and non-inflammatory manner. When the leadership doesn't
> listen, that may be the indication of a problem. The key is initiating
> non-aggressive communication. Names, addresses, phone numbers, and email
> addresses of professional leadership are all available on the internet and
> in industry publications, and there are always forums (beer and bull) at
the
> national meetings where individuals can express their concerns. The
> individual practitioner has to form an opinion, take a stand, and
> participate in the direction of this profession.
>
> I appreciate your continued passion as a patient advocate and the
continued
> efforts of the Barr Foundation. Although many may identify you as a
> radical, it's the radicals that make history and have initiated some of
the
> greatest changes in the world. I applaud your ability to continue against
> the resistance in expressing your beliefs, and encourage you to continue
to
> funnel your energies towards efforts that are in the best interest of
> persons with disabilities.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Paul E. Prusakowski, CPO
>
> p.s.
> You may wish to refer to a document that is at the Academy website at the
> following address <URL Redacted>.
> This may help you fill in a bit more of the picture for yourself.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
board director, perhaps many, that don't know you, perceive your advocacy as
artificial. I know better!!
You will always be a stand up guy and support what is right for the profession and patient.
Perhaps your response below may encourage other Academy officers and directors to participate in this dialog.
From the feedback we have received so far, there doesn't seem to be much support of the not securing CAAHEP standards to practitioners !!
How about words on this issue from Gorski,Lamb,Mars,Moretto Beattie and Katz!!??
Thanks for stating your position below and the compliment regarding my
personal advocacy.
A united team of consumer and profession participants can't be defeated in maintaining the highest standards to the profession.
The most important thing in communication is to hear what isn't being said.
Tony Barr
> Tony,
>
> My personal stance on any legislative initiatives related to qualified
> provider language has always been and always will be based upon the set of
> documented educational standards set by CAAHEP. I personally have never
> supported and never will support language that does not refer to specific
> educational standards. Educational standards supercede any voluntary
> certification agency in my opinion, and I have always supported strict
> adherence to this principle in any proposed language for legislative
> initiatives. Although I am certified by ABC, it is not the certification
> that made me a professional, it is the commitment and sacrifice necessary
to
> obtain a solid educational foundation, continued supervised post graduate
> training (residency), continued ethical professional conduct, and ongoing
> advanced continuing education that defines who I am as a professional. My
> ABC certification proves that I passed an exam, and voluntarily attain the
> required continuing education.
> My opinion on the recent legislation specific to the qualified provider
> language is that it is completely unacceptable. My basis for this is not
> specifically that OT's and PT's were mentioned in the language as much as
> the fact that the entry level educational standards for becoming a
qualified
> provider have been diluted to that of the lowest common denominator as
> defined by a certification agency that requires no formal university based
> education in Orthotics and prosthetics. I have an incredibly difficult
time
> applauding the success of the financial merits of the legislation when the
> principle of the educational standards have been compromised to a level
> which is not even considered acceptable in developing nations based upon
> ISPO standards.
>
> We as individual professionals must determine what is important to us and
> the future of our profession, and act accordingly. As you well know, and
I
> hate to beat a dead horse, the professional orthotists/prosthetists and
> consumers of Florida led a passionate (and self funded) fight against
> incredible resistance to obtain a meaningful piece of legislation that
> specifically refers to educational standards. References to credentialing
> agencies were intentionally left out of the bill and law because it was
not
> that difficult to recognize that the 'alphabet soup' game is not worth
> arguing about when there is absolutely no arguing about anatomy 101,
> psychology 101, kinesiology 301, lower limb orthotics 301, etc. The
> university based educational standards as adopted by CAAHEP are the
> foundation of our law, and therefore it is clearly defined what it takes
to
> enter as a practicing professional orthotist, prosthetist, or pedorthist
in
> the state of Florida.
>
.
> Leadership has the responsibility to mindfully see past the immediate
> interests of the now, and to critically evaluate the impact that decisions
> will have for generations. One of the only method of checks and balances
> that we have are those individual professionals and consumers who
thoroughly
> educate themselves on the history, facts, and details of an issue and
> challenge the leadership to move forward in a given direction. In a
> democratic society and organization, the leadership should lead based upon
> the will and best interests of the people. In the case of our profession,
> it is imperative that the individual practitioners begin to take a more
> active role at educating themselves on the issues, sharing their opinions
> with other (in the trenches) practitioners, educate each other on the
> details, and share their views with the leadership in a thoughtful,
> productive, and non-inflammatory manner. When the leadership doesn't
> listen, that may be the indication of a problem. The key is initiating
> non-aggressive communication. Names, addresses, phone numbers, and email
> addresses of professional leadership are all available on the internet and
> in industry publications, and there are always forums (beer and bull) at
the
> national meetings where individuals can express their concerns. The
> individual practitioner has to form an opinion, take a stand, and
> participate in the direction of this profession.
>
> I appreciate your continued passion as a patient advocate and the
continued
> efforts of the Barr Foundation. Although many may identify you as a
> radical, it's the radicals that make history and have initiated some of
the
> greatest changes in the world. I applaud your ability to continue against
> the resistance in expressing your beliefs, and encourage you to continue
to
> funnel your energies towards efforts that are in the best interest of
> persons with disabilities.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Paul E. Prusakowski, CPO
>
> p.s.
> You may wish to refer to a document that is at the Academy website at the
> following address <URL Redacted>.
> This may help you fill in a bit more of the picture for yourself.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Citation
Tony Barr, “Fw: legislative stand,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 22, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/215673.
