Re: NOMA is here ! Where are your professional and cred entialing Associations ????
Gingras, Ron
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: NOMA is here ! Where are your professional and cred entialing Associations ????
Creator:
Gingras, Ron
Date:
4/22/2002
Text:
Tony
You hit the nail on the head. The past lobbying policies have been
successful in keeping the educational standards vague or non existant
regardless of intent of the lobbyists. lobbying for one certification over
another ,kept everyone fighting among themselves concerning privately owned
and operated certification companies, that all claim their certification is
the one and only true credential leading to competence.
This discussion of which certification is superior can only lead to lessen
edcuational standards and provide cheaper labor costs which is very
appealing to many.I too would like to see lower costs but not at the
expenses of the training of the individual providing the care.
If you noticed AOPA has always preached that they support ABC standards but
has stopped short of representing the standards themselves independant from
the private certifcation company (ABC) i.e. CAAHEP standards ,the only
educational standard recognized by universities as the pathway that leads to
competence in orthotics and prosthetics .These educational requirements
stand on their own ! end of discussion. It is these standards that qualify
us, not the certifcation or club we belong to or the business organization
we belong to .
Ultimately the message to capital hill included the poison pill of
supporting ABC standards, taking away any possible way for congress to
support any type of educational standard . Congress is not going to appoint
a private certication company over the provision of O and P care for the
nation . What would happen if there were three certification organizations
that required CAAHEP standards, would that mean ABC would be the only
legitiment one?
I personally question if our current private system overseeing O and P can
adequately represent the needs of patients and qualified practitioners in
this country.It is time for a paradyme shift in how we look at the
profession . While the early vision of our predessors has moved us ahead to
where we are today, which is hundreds of miles ahead of where they were at
the time , the vehicle used to get us here is not any longer useful in
moving us forward. With deep respect for them,that old Studebaker isn't
making it any longer.
For the last 30 or so years we are going round and round without definition
or solid direction of our profession.We can no longer let the tail wag the
dog.We as practitioners need to do some soul searching.
One mans opinion.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony T. Barr [SMTP: <Email Address Redacted> ]
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 12:25 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: [OANDP-L] NOMA is here ! Where are your professional and
> credentialing Associations ????
>
> Here is my name, my credentials, and my opinion !
>
> Name: Tony Barr
> Credentials: amputee ( there are no consumer members of NOMA, AAOP or
> AOPA)
> Mission: TO advocate on behalf of amputees to better ensure consumer
> protection thru state and federal regulation.
> TO better ensure that only properly qualified providers of O&P services
> can
> be reimbursed for these services in order to further motivate and
> encourage
> insurance providers to provide proper coverage for comprehensive O&P
> health
> care services.
>
> Opinion!
>
> No one is responsible!!
> Not AOPA ,AAOP,NCAAOP nor the ABC. It was those big bad guys from NOMA .
> You know the ones without faces , names or standards.
> Isn't that convienient?
> Of course NOMAs members are all most likely members of AOPA .
> Now lets look at the facts .
> The ABC and AAOP boards were made aware
> of this situation in October almost two months before passage of the
> Harkin
> bill
> .
> Yet AAOP members were told nothing. Why?
> Were they afraid we would call our representatives and senators to fight
> for
> them demanding that
> educational standards be introduced to qualified provider language?
> Secondly , AOPA knows that they need a fall guy , I believe that NOMA is a
> partner to
> them. They can blame NOMA .Otherwise AOPA would loose further support
> from
> AAOP business owners and members for not supporting the ABC standards .
> AOPA counts on lobbying money from AAOP member owned businesses and
> individuals.
>
> Lastly , it clearly wasn't the fault of the BOC , PT's or OTs.
> AOPA introduced and supported the language recognizing certifications
> rather that educational standards knowing that it would qualify
> practically
> everyone to practice O and P. In this way BOC and the others would
> qualify.That was their goal .It took the ABC credentialed individual down
> a notch . They couldn't get these organizations to consolidate two years
> ago and
> they needed to get rid of the threat. They totally raped them by taking
> away the value of their training. All without a shot being fired! VERY
> SLICK.
>
> If AOPA truly represents ABC , AAOP and the industry legislatively and
> AAOP
> and ABC
> voted against it, why didn't they try to kill or table the bill until such
> a
> time an agreement could be reached?
>
> There is no way if all the disabled groups in the US came together they
> would be able to stop BOC PT's or OT's from being qualified providers.
> There are no educational standards.BY DESIGN.
>
> I have the outmost respect and admiration of this profession and for those
> that support advocacy for regulation and better patient protection.
> Certainly you can see thru this deception.
> The tail , the industry, is wagging the dog, the profession.
>
> It is a direct assault of the effectiveness of state and federal
> regulation and an attempt to sabotage established and successful
> regulation
> efforts.
>
>
You hit the nail on the head. The past lobbying policies have been
successful in keeping the educational standards vague or non existant
regardless of intent of the lobbyists. lobbying for one certification over
another ,kept everyone fighting among themselves concerning privately owned
and operated certification companies, that all claim their certification is
the one and only true credential leading to competence.
This discussion of which certification is superior can only lead to lessen
edcuational standards and provide cheaper labor costs which is very
appealing to many.I too would like to see lower costs but not at the
expenses of the training of the individual providing the care.
If you noticed AOPA has always preached that they support ABC standards but
has stopped short of representing the standards themselves independant from
the private certifcation company (ABC) i.e. CAAHEP standards ,the only
educational standard recognized by universities as the pathway that leads to
competence in orthotics and prosthetics .These educational requirements
stand on their own ! end of discussion. It is these standards that qualify
us, not the certifcation or club we belong to or the business organization
we belong to .
Ultimately the message to capital hill included the poison pill of
supporting ABC standards, taking away any possible way for congress to
support any type of educational standard . Congress is not going to appoint
a private certication company over the provision of O and P care for the
nation . What would happen if there were three certification organizations
that required CAAHEP standards, would that mean ABC would be the only
legitiment one?
I personally question if our current private system overseeing O and P can
adequately represent the needs of patients and qualified practitioners in
this country.It is time for a paradyme shift in how we look at the
profession . While the early vision of our predessors has moved us ahead to
where we are today, which is hundreds of miles ahead of where they were at
the time , the vehicle used to get us here is not any longer useful in
moving us forward. With deep respect for them,that old Studebaker isn't
making it any longer.
For the last 30 or so years we are going round and round without definition
or solid direction of our profession.We can no longer let the tail wag the
dog.We as practitioners need to do some soul searching.
One mans opinion.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony T. Barr [SMTP: <Email Address Redacted> ]
> Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2002 12:25 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: [OANDP-L] NOMA is here ! Where are your professional and
> credentialing Associations ????
>
> Here is my name, my credentials, and my opinion !
>
> Name: Tony Barr
> Credentials: amputee ( there are no consumer members of NOMA, AAOP or
> AOPA)
> Mission: TO advocate on behalf of amputees to better ensure consumer
> protection thru state and federal regulation.
> TO better ensure that only properly qualified providers of O&P services
> can
> be reimbursed for these services in order to further motivate and
> encourage
> insurance providers to provide proper coverage for comprehensive O&P
> health
> care services.
>
> Opinion!
>
> No one is responsible!!
> Not AOPA ,AAOP,NCAAOP nor the ABC. It was those big bad guys from NOMA .
> You know the ones without faces , names or standards.
> Isn't that convienient?
> Of course NOMAs members are all most likely members of AOPA .
> Now lets look at the facts .
> The ABC and AAOP boards were made aware
> of this situation in October almost two months before passage of the
> Harkin
> bill
> .
> Yet AAOP members were told nothing. Why?
> Were they afraid we would call our representatives and senators to fight
> for
> them demanding that
> educational standards be introduced to qualified provider language?
> Secondly , AOPA knows that they need a fall guy , I believe that NOMA is a
> partner to
> them. They can blame NOMA .Otherwise AOPA would loose further support
> from
> AAOP business owners and members for not supporting the ABC standards .
> AOPA counts on lobbying money from AAOP member owned businesses and
> individuals.
>
> Lastly , it clearly wasn't the fault of the BOC , PT's or OTs.
> AOPA introduced and supported the language recognizing certifications
> rather that educational standards knowing that it would qualify
> practically
> everyone to practice O and P. In this way BOC and the others would
> qualify.That was their goal .It took the ABC credentialed individual down
> a notch . They couldn't get these organizations to consolidate two years
> ago and
> they needed to get rid of the threat. They totally raped them by taking
> away the value of their training. All without a shot being fired! VERY
> SLICK.
>
> If AOPA truly represents ABC , AAOP and the industry legislatively and
> AAOP
> and ABC
> voted against it, why didn't they try to kill or table the bill until such
> a
> time an agreement could be reached?
>
> There is no way if all the disabled groups in the US came together they
> would be able to stop BOC PT's or OT's from being qualified providers.
> There are no educational standards.BY DESIGN.
>
> I have the outmost respect and admiration of this profession and for those
> that support advocacy for regulation and better patient protection.
> Certainly you can see thru this deception.
> The tail , the industry, is wagging the dog, the profession.
>
> It is a direct assault of the effectiveness of state and federal
> regulation and an attempt to sabotage established and successful
> regulation
> efforts.
>
>
Citation
Gingras, Ron, “Re: NOMA is here ! Where are your professional and cred entialing Associations ????,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 27, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/218868.
