O&P Business News /Panton
Jerry Levitt
Description
Collection
Title:
O&P Business News /Panton
Creator:
Jerry Levitt
Date:
1/27/2001
Text:
Mr. Panton was afforded the chance to respond to criticism concerning his alleged appointment to the Florida Board of O&P, expressed both on this list and in the O&P Business News. I am sure Mr. Panton is a dedicated and well-meaning individual, I don't know him personally, but he is just wrongheaded.
His response in the January 15th issue demonstrates just how out of touch he really is. His first assertion is that the old leaders of the Florida organization were poised to submit its final version of a licensure law at the time of their removal. This is not factual. A terrible bill, supported by the then leaders of the Florida organization, had already been introduced into the Senate and thankfully died in committee. This lousy bill is what shocked the practitioners of Florida into action. It was obvious the then leaders just didn't get it.
Mr. Panton then asserts the only difference between the old leaders and the new leaders was they want broad inclusion while the new leaders wanted exclusivity. This could not be further from the truth! The bill proposed and passed by this new leadership laid down a set of qualifications in education and training required to protect the patient. There is no mention of membership in any organization, just the basic qualifications. Anyone meeting these qualifications may be licensed. So to call this standards exclusionary is less then honest.
He then goes on to demonstrate his opposition to these minimum qualification by stating if your licensing bill is so exclusionary that you limit the number of people that ... are you really looking out after the good of the individuals ... or are you looking out after your own skin? This is an insult to the men and women that fought to have minimum standards mandated to protect the patient. Mr. Panton's idea is to lower the standards so anyone may practice, and to hell with the patient. Who's skin is really being looked after?
These minimum standards that the Florida group helped to have made into law were not randomly thought of, nor were they crafted to protect someone's market or financial security. These are the standards developed by an independent entity, a then affiliate of the American Medical Association, and recognized nationally as the minimum required to insure patient safety. Apparently Mr. Panton at one time also thought these standards were worthwhile, I notice he proudly(?) displays the initials CPO after his name. If these standards of education and training are not really necessary why did he make the effort and commitment to achieve them?
His last sentence in the reply sums up his position and what he wants to accomplish. He would seek to ...loosening of the laws that restrict out-of-state practitioners from moving to Florida. First off there is no restriction preventing out-of-state practitioners from moving to, or being licensed in, Florida. They must meet the same minimum standards as anyone else. No more no less. Mr. Panton is in effect saying he will work toward lowering the minimum standards in Florida, exposing the citizens of Florida to less then safe care. This does not speak well of Mr. Panton nor of the company he works for.
Florida's law is not about protecting practitioners its about protecting those of us requiring the services of prosthetists and/or orthotists. I for one do not relish the idea of having someone on the Board who's stated goal is to weaken the current law. To paraphrase the former president, it's about the patients stupid!
Get your small business started at Lycos Small Business at <URL Redacted>
His response in the January 15th issue demonstrates just how out of touch he really is. His first assertion is that the old leaders of the Florida organization were poised to submit its final version of a licensure law at the time of their removal. This is not factual. A terrible bill, supported by the then leaders of the Florida organization, had already been introduced into the Senate and thankfully died in committee. This lousy bill is what shocked the practitioners of Florida into action. It was obvious the then leaders just didn't get it.
Mr. Panton then asserts the only difference between the old leaders and the new leaders was they want broad inclusion while the new leaders wanted exclusivity. This could not be further from the truth! The bill proposed and passed by this new leadership laid down a set of qualifications in education and training required to protect the patient. There is no mention of membership in any organization, just the basic qualifications. Anyone meeting these qualifications may be licensed. So to call this standards exclusionary is less then honest.
He then goes on to demonstrate his opposition to these minimum qualification by stating if your licensing bill is so exclusionary that you limit the number of people that ... are you really looking out after the good of the individuals ... or are you looking out after your own skin? This is an insult to the men and women that fought to have minimum standards mandated to protect the patient. Mr. Panton's idea is to lower the standards so anyone may practice, and to hell with the patient. Who's skin is really being looked after?
These minimum standards that the Florida group helped to have made into law were not randomly thought of, nor were they crafted to protect someone's market or financial security. These are the standards developed by an independent entity, a then affiliate of the American Medical Association, and recognized nationally as the minimum required to insure patient safety. Apparently Mr. Panton at one time also thought these standards were worthwhile, I notice he proudly(?) displays the initials CPO after his name. If these standards of education and training are not really necessary why did he make the effort and commitment to achieve them?
His last sentence in the reply sums up his position and what he wants to accomplish. He would seek to ...loosening of the laws that restrict out-of-state practitioners from moving to Florida. First off there is no restriction preventing out-of-state practitioners from moving to, or being licensed in, Florida. They must meet the same minimum standards as anyone else. No more no less. Mr. Panton is in effect saying he will work toward lowering the minimum standards in Florida, exposing the citizens of Florida to less then safe care. This does not speak well of Mr. Panton nor of the company he works for.
Florida's law is not about protecting practitioners its about protecting those of us requiring the services of prosthetists and/or orthotists. I for one do not relish the idea of having someone on the Board who's stated goal is to weaken the current law. To paraphrase the former president, it's about the patients stupid!
Get your small business started at Lycos Small Business at <URL Redacted>
Citation
Jerry Levitt, “O&P Business News /Panton,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/215732.
