the changing state of O and P
Tony Barr
Description
Collection
Title:
the changing state of O and P
Creator:
Tony Barr
Date:
11/3/2001
Text:
Dear Mr.Lamb,
Thank you for reaching out to this forum to further encourage participation and a better understanding of the three organizations.
It is very comforting to witness the new Academy leadership participating in these discussions openly and candidly with their colleagues and consumers that monitor this O&P listserve.
As a consumer and admirer of your profession, I would like to make some personal observations to your comments in order for me to obtain a better understanding of the issues and this alleged perceived sister and perhaps, colloquing relationship.
Once sisters whom, provided origin by the industry and previously proposed to consolidate by industry, now appear to be at even further odds than ever before.
I read in your message below describing one sister's (AAOP) mission statement to encourage and promote the highest standards of patient care through advocacy, education, research and literature. Another (ABC) is to encourage and promote the highest standards of professionalism. Still another (AOPA) does not elude to encouraging or promoting the highest standards but to work for favorable treatment of O&P in laws, regulations and for the industry. Although APOA is not the repository of standards for qualified O&P care. ABC is. Yet it is the trade organization that has been delegated the responsibility, by your organization, the professional association, to negotiate and facilitate legislative policies for qualified provider language.
It is the trade industry not the profession recommending minimum educational standards to those in a position to make new legislative policies and establish qualification criteria. This delegation by your association has come back to bite you in the a..! Now that the legislature has handed off the responsibility of determining provider language to NRC, my understanding is that the Academy will have a seat on the NRC represented by a lobbies whom has previously represented the members of the industry and national consumer interests. Nice neat package wouldn't you say?
Both ABC and the Academy have two words in common in their perspective position statements which are closely aligned to their own individual mission statements-highest standards and those standards previously met the minimum education essentials & credentialing for providers of comprehensive orthotic and prosthetic services,once matched to NCOPE's guidelines and essentials, which is basically ABC criteria.
When AOPA advocated and passed a recent by-law amendment, it reduced the highest standards qualification criteria to future members for their association. It was not consistent to ABC or Academy position statements or policy.Will the Academy and ABC follow this trend? I did not read in either of their position statements that the highest standards can be compromised and lowered if the association, seeks to increase membership revenue. Nor did I read that these highest standards can be compromised if there is not enough supply of qualified providers to meet the current demand for their services.
Both the Academy and ABC leadership provided no official position prior to the vote.Yet the current ABC, president personally endorsed the amendment in spite of his board recommending that ABC defer any position until a more complete analysis of its impact on their programs be compiled !
Taking no official position by either the Academy and ABC before the by-law amendment was voted on is, in my opinion, far worse than the pitiful participation by the AOPA voting membership I witnessed in Phoenix. And you wonder why there is apathy?
If the leadership of both organizations don't take a formal position on such a critical issue, why should there membership?
Perhaps you would be so kind to reply with your opinion on the following observations:
1) Is it coincidental that the AOPA by-law amendment be proposed and passed on the heals of the NRC hearings that will determine future provider qualifications?
2) Is it not odd that these hearings have no consumer appointments except for the Paralyzed Veterans Association, the majority of which do not utilize comprehensive O&P services?
3) Is it not puzzeling why ACA ,allegedly the national consumer association, has not stepped up to the plate and advocated on behalf of consumers at a time when the issues are current, as well as not requesting a position for their organization to the NRC hearings?
4) Where is the consumer voice in all this? Don't we have any opportunity to determine our own fate by participating in a process that would determine qualifications of providers of services that we receive?
5) Which of the three sister(?) organizations have any consumer members on their board ?
Mr.Lamb, again thank you for stating the purpose of each organization and your energized participation. It is not often that you have the top leadership, let alone the newly elected and well respected president of any association, be it professional, trade,consumer or credentialing, directly participate in constructive dialogue and differences of opinion.
The bottom line. There seems to be is no common blood,bond or issues that the sister organizations still share.
However, recent events might be reflecting that two of the three sisters maybe attempting to alienate and eliminate the other?
I hope and I'm confident that the New Academy will rise to the occasion and continue to act on behalf of the profession.
The profession, as well as the educated consumer, together should help determine what is good for the consumer.
Isn't this what it is suppose to be all about?
Tony Barr
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary A. Lamb < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] the changing state of O and P
> Dear John;
>
> I am energized by the passion you exude in your post. As some have said,
> there appears to be a mass generalization of three distinctly different O&P
> organizations. At the risk of insulting someone’s intelligence, and
> understanding the world and not just the USA is online, I would like to
> begin by briefly defining the three organizations in alphabetical order.
> The Academy (AAOP), American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists- A
> Professional Society- Membership consists of individuals. Several
> classifications of membership, the voting members are “Active” members. The
> mission of the American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists is to promote
> high standards of patient care through advocacy, education, and literature &
> research. .
> ABC - The American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics - A
> credentialing organization - there is no “membership”, there are thousands
> of credentialed practitioners and accredited facilities. The mission of the
> American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics Inc. is to
> encourage and promote the highest standards of professionalism in the
> delivery of orthotic and prosthetic services.
> AOPA - American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association - A National Trade
> Association - Membership consists of institutions, O&P Companies, Education
> and research programs, and Supplier/Manufacturer Companies. The mission of
> AOPA is to work for favorable treatment of the O&P business in laws,
> regulation and services; to help members improve their management and
> marketing skills; and to raise awareness and understanding of the industry
> and the association.
> The leadership of the organizations try to communicate to the field the
> issues and challenges they face regularly. > Sincerely,
>
> Gary A. Lamb CO, FAAOP
> President
> American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists
Thank you for reaching out to this forum to further encourage participation and a better understanding of the three organizations.
It is very comforting to witness the new Academy leadership participating in these discussions openly and candidly with their colleagues and consumers that monitor this O&P listserve.
As a consumer and admirer of your profession, I would like to make some personal observations to your comments in order for me to obtain a better understanding of the issues and this alleged perceived sister and perhaps, colloquing relationship.
Once sisters whom, provided origin by the industry and previously proposed to consolidate by industry, now appear to be at even further odds than ever before.
I read in your message below describing one sister's (AAOP) mission statement to encourage and promote the highest standards of patient care through advocacy, education, research and literature. Another (ABC) is to encourage and promote the highest standards of professionalism. Still another (AOPA) does not elude to encouraging or promoting the highest standards but to work for favorable treatment of O&P in laws, regulations and for the industry. Although APOA is not the repository of standards for qualified O&P care. ABC is. Yet it is the trade organization that has been delegated the responsibility, by your organization, the professional association, to negotiate and facilitate legislative policies for qualified provider language.
It is the trade industry not the profession recommending minimum educational standards to those in a position to make new legislative policies and establish qualification criteria. This delegation by your association has come back to bite you in the a..! Now that the legislature has handed off the responsibility of determining provider language to NRC, my understanding is that the Academy will have a seat on the NRC represented by a lobbies whom has previously represented the members of the industry and national consumer interests. Nice neat package wouldn't you say?
Both ABC and the Academy have two words in common in their perspective position statements which are closely aligned to their own individual mission statements-highest standards and those standards previously met the minimum education essentials & credentialing for providers of comprehensive orthotic and prosthetic services,once matched to NCOPE's guidelines and essentials, which is basically ABC criteria.
When AOPA advocated and passed a recent by-law amendment, it reduced the highest standards qualification criteria to future members for their association. It was not consistent to ABC or Academy position statements or policy.Will the Academy and ABC follow this trend? I did not read in either of their position statements that the highest standards can be compromised and lowered if the association, seeks to increase membership revenue. Nor did I read that these highest standards can be compromised if there is not enough supply of qualified providers to meet the current demand for their services.
Both the Academy and ABC leadership provided no official position prior to the vote.Yet the current ABC, president personally endorsed the amendment in spite of his board recommending that ABC defer any position until a more complete analysis of its impact on their programs be compiled !
Taking no official position by either the Academy and ABC before the by-law amendment was voted on is, in my opinion, far worse than the pitiful participation by the AOPA voting membership I witnessed in Phoenix. And you wonder why there is apathy?
If the leadership of both organizations don't take a formal position on such a critical issue, why should there membership?
Perhaps you would be so kind to reply with your opinion on the following observations:
1) Is it coincidental that the AOPA by-law amendment be proposed and passed on the heals of the NRC hearings that will determine future provider qualifications?
2) Is it not odd that these hearings have no consumer appointments except for the Paralyzed Veterans Association, the majority of which do not utilize comprehensive O&P services?
3) Is it not puzzeling why ACA ,allegedly the national consumer association, has not stepped up to the plate and advocated on behalf of consumers at a time when the issues are current, as well as not requesting a position for their organization to the NRC hearings?
4) Where is the consumer voice in all this? Don't we have any opportunity to determine our own fate by participating in a process that would determine qualifications of providers of services that we receive?
5) Which of the three sister(?) organizations have any consumer members on their board ?
Mr.Lamb, again thank you for stating the purpose of each organization and your energized participation. It is not often that you have the top leadership, let alone the newly elected and well respected president of any association, be it professional, trade,consumer or credentialing, directly participate in constructive dialogue and differences of opinion.
The bottom line. There seems to be is no common blood,bond or issues that the sister organizations still share.
However, recent events might be reflecting that two of the three sisters maybe attempting to alienate and eliminate the other?
I hope and I'm confident that the New Academy will rise to the occasion and continue to act on behalf of the profession.
The profession, as well as the educated consumer, together should help determine what is good for the consumer.
Isn't this what it is suppose to be all about?
Tony Barr
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary A. Lamb < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] the changing state of O and P
> Dear John;
>
> I am energized by the passion you exude in your post. As some have said,
> there appears to be a mass generalization of three distinctly different O&P
> organizations. At the risk of insulting someone’s intelligence, and
> understanding the world and not just the USA is online, I would like to
> begin by briefly defining the three organizations in alphabetical order.
> The Academy (AAOP), American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists- A
> Professional Society- Membership consists of individuals. Several
> classifications of membership, the voting members are “Active” members. The
> mission of the American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists is to promote
> high standards of patient care through advocacy, education, and literature &
> research. .
> ABC - The American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics - A
> credentialing organization - there is no “membership”, there are thousands
> of credentialed practitioners and accredited facilities. The mission of the
> American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics Inc. is to
> encourage and promote the highest standards of professionalism in the
> delivery of orthotic and prosthetic services.
> AOPA - American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association - A National Trade
> Association - Membership consists of institutions, O&P Companies, Education
> and research programs, and Supplier/Manufacturer Companies. The mission of
> AOPA is to work for favorable treatment of the O&P business in laws,
> regulation and services; to help members improve their management and
> marketing skills; and to raise awareness and understanding of the industry
> and the association.
> The leadership of the organizations try to communicate to the field the
> issues and challenges they face regularly. > Sincerely,
>
> Gary A. Lamb CO, FAAOP
> President
> American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists
Citation
Tony Barr, “the changing state of O and P,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 6, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/217969.
