Re: Legislative Action Alert--California Practitioners
tony barr
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Legislative Action Alert--California Practitioners
Creator:
tony barr
Date:
12/31/2003
Text:
The O&P barn door got left open as providers remain passive in support of
regulating their profession and are distracted having alphabet soup wars!!
The Barr Foundation supports Al Pike's recent request for the ACA leadership
to activate their advocacy role by
helping defeat this legislation in California. This can be accomplished thru
the submission of a formal ACA Position Statement by their Advocacy
Committee, provided it is currently a standing committee (!) and contacting
every California amputee member in its NLLIC(National Limb Loss Data Bank)
to defeat the legislation.
Perhaps ACA would consider providing this position statement since its
advocacy members are primarily AOPA members and manufacture representatives
and not practitioners or patients.
We, in particular, want to reach out to newly elected ACA Chairman Kurt
Collier whom is not only a amputee but the Chairman of the Board of ACA, a
Academy member, prior manufacture rep for Ossur, and certified practitioner
to help convince ACA to make the right decision on this issue and initiate
their advocacy mission on future issue that would benefit amputees,not the
industry nor necessarily the profession.
I wonder however, how commited AOPA members,other manufacturers and the
major chains of O&P facilities, truly ARE to defeating this California
initiative, when if it was succesfully passed,would expand a larger client
base for their products and more cost effective labor for providing these
health care services.
Hanger and BOC did not endorse specific provider qualifcation language when
they had the opportunity at the Post Neg Reg Proposed Rule submission to
CMS.
Perhaps if AOPA is truly ademanet and dedicated to defeating this state
proposal as they and NAAOP were in helping defeat a similar national
legislative assualt,they consider forming a joint task force effort by both
the trade and professional organizations(AOPA,NAAOP and the
Academy)specifically targeted to gaining the support of the national
disability organizations whose members include orthotic users,ie. National
Spina Bifida, MS,Polio,Easter Seals,Scoliosis, etc.to gain their support.
Don't you find it odd that these comprehensive orthotic user organizations
were not represented at Neg Reg or are involved with this issue when we are
talking about a much broader scope of services in the delivery of
comprehensive orthotic devices.
Their organizations numbers are much larger than those who have limb loss
and they are better funded than amputees organizations and tend to be more
proactive.
In response to Mr. Friedman's CPO below comments regarding AOPA's good
work to oppose the measure, perhaps a lesson can be learned by AOPA,the
Academy, politically inactive O&P practitioners in unlicensed states, that
the current state legislative PT and OT proposals and assaults are being
targeted primarily in O&P unregulated states by the national OT and PT
membership organizations, whose O&P fully qualified care claim doesn't
necessarily represent those of all PTs and OTS licensed professionals.
PTs and OTs had the intitive to get icensed in every state of the 50
staeswhile O&P providersdebate the benefits and....the accountability!
O&P providers are licensed in only ten !!
Why is that?
Even a mandatory certification qualification of every provider suported
unilaterally by credentialling and professional asscociations would be
better than we have now,no mantartory licensure or certification in 40
states.
Perhaps the Academy and individual O&P professions should consider taking a
stronger role in supporting and regulating the their O&P profession in their
respective states if not for better protecting the patient from receiving
unqualified care, but not to allow more providers on their turf.
It would be nice to see a state regulation workshop at any O&P event and
perhaps start with February's Academy Meeting in New Orleans !
Having met with the leadership of COPA, at their invitation in Reno during
the past October AOPA meeting, this state association's regulation efforts
appeared to of stalled since some of their members,including manufactures,
did want to compromise state regulation of O&P with allowing the necessary
grandfathering concessions to providers whom are BOC certified or having
been allowed to practice without certification for 5 or more years.
This is unfortunate since while they argue the qualifications of providers
seeking to be regulated, other (licensed health care professionals) but not
necessarily qualified providers, could possibly be included to deliver the
full range of O&P services.
The perception by lawmakers and including California's new governor and
other states is that we must reduce state deficits and the cost of health
care services. A state licensed PT and OT is just as qualified to deliver
the broad range of O&P services as unlicensed non certified O&P providers,if
not more so.They at least have a license to lose if they screw up and the
state gets state license revenue to support the regulation.
More providers mean more competitors for bidding O&P contacts and providing
the healthcare services, in spite of the reality that not all are qualified
to perform these services. Two Billion Dollars in in national annual revenue
isnt exactly chump change !!
FOOD FOR THOUGHT!
Happy New Year and thanks for listening again to the regulation drum!
Squeaky Wheel,
Tony Barr
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of jjartificiallimbbrace
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 11:22 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: [OANDP-L] response to legislation alert for California
First, thank you to AOPA for the information and your work.
Secondly, to all practitioners in California - You must respond to this
situation.
This will just become another nail in the coffin for our profession if we do
not respond to the request of these therapists. Listed below is a list of
all of the senators on the Business and Professions Committee. Take the
time to send a letter to each of the Senators as well as your local Senator.
Sincerely,
Jason Friedman, C.P.O.
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of Philip Tamoush
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:20 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Legislative Action Alert--California Practitioners
Friends at AOPA and the Academy: I have written our Southern California
amputee support group (MAAF) and am writingmy own letters, but I strongly
urge you to contact the Amputee Coalition of America (ACA) who hopefully by
now are maintaining a network of addresses, email and otherwise, in
California, so that consumers/patients can also write letters. It is really
critical that we get amputees at least involved in this. Phil Tamoush,
Amputee and Public Member of ABC On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 16:44:29 -0500 AOPA
< <Email Address Redacted> > writes:
> * * * URGENT LEGISLATIVE ACTION ALERT * * * December 29, 2003
>
> Dear California Practitioners:
>
> On January 12, 2004, the California State Senate Business and
> Professions Committee will consider legislation that would expand the
> California Physical Therapy Practice Act to permit physical therapists
> (PTs) to prescribe, fabricate and fit patients with any type of
> orthotic or prosthetic device and to train patients in the use of
> prosthetic devices. The bill number for this legislation is SB 77.
>
> The O&P profession needs to tell California state senators immediately
> that expanding the PT's scope of practice into the orthotics and
> prosthetics field will risk consumer safety and the quality of care
> delivered to patients in California. Moreover, lawmakers should know
> that the proposal will likely lead to increased Medi-Cal costs at a
> time when the state is facing a severe fiscal crisis and provider
> payments continue to come under assault.
>
> The American Orthotic & Prosthetic Association (AOPA) and the
> California Orthotic and Prosthetic Association (COPA) are making our
> views on this legislation known to the Business and Professions
> Committee. But, as always, your personal experiences will carry the
> most weight with your state senator since you are best qualified to
> describe how this legislation will directly impact California patients
> in need of O&P services. Therefore, we ask that you write a personal
> letter to your state senator and relay the following message:
>
> * * * PHYSICAL THERAPISTS ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO PRESCRIBE, FABRICATE,
> FIT AND REPAIR THE FULL RANGE OF ORTHOTIC AND PROSTHETIC DEVICES * * *
>
> Last year, we were able to defeat this measure because of significant
> input from the provider community. This input is needed again. If
> PTs are successful in California, it will be far easier for them to
> include O&P in other state PT practice act expansion efforts. That is
> why your input on this critical issue is essential.
>
> Your correspondence should be sent to your state senator as well as
> Senate Business and Professions Committee Chair Liz Figueroa.
> Chairwoman Figueroa's fax is (916) 324-0917.
> Correspondences must be received by January 5, 2004.
>
> You can identify your senator and his or her address by ZIP CODE
> through the following Internet link:
>
> <URL Redacted>
>
> To assist you in writing to your state senator, AOPA has included a
> draft letter (below) to serve as a guide. Please feel free to make
> changes to this letter and include your personal views on the issue.
>
> If you have any questions or need additional help writing your state
> senators, contact Walter Gorski at AOPA at (571) 431-0809. Thank you
> for your continued efforts on behalf of the O&P field.
> ________________________________________
>
> * * * SAMPLE LETTER * * *
>
> December 2003
>
> The Honorable Liz Figueroa
> California State Senate
> Chairwoman, Business and Professions Committee State Capitol, Room
> 4061 Sacramento, CA 95814
>
> By Fax: (916) 324-0917
>
> Dear Chairwoman Figueroa:
>
> I would like to express my strong opposition to provisions included in
> SB 77 that would allow physical therapists to prescribe, fabricate and
> fit the full range of orthotic services to patients as well as fit and
> repair prosthetic devices. These provisions are included in
> Subsections E and F of Section 1 of the legislation.
>
> As a <PROSTHETIST/ORTHOTIST>, I believe that this proposal is clearly
> out of the scope of practice of physical therapists and will have a
> negative effect on consumer safety and the quality of orthotic and
> prosthetic services provided to California residents. To ensure that
> patients only receive the highest level of orthotic/prosthetic care
> available, I urge you to eliminate the provisions that would give
> physical therapists the ability to prescribe, fabricate and provide
> any orthotic or prosthetic device.
>
> An orthotist is a health care professional who makes, fits, adjusts
> and repairs orthotic devices for patients who need added support for
> body parts that have been weakened by injury, disease or disorders of
> the nerves, muscles or bones. A prosthetist is a health care
> professional who makes, fits, adjusts and repairs artificial limbs for
> those who have suffered amputations through injury or illness. Both
> disciplines require extensive professional education, experience and
> training to make artificial limbs or orthopedic braces for an
> individual patient.
>
> It is my firm belief that physical therapists do not possess the
> formal education, training and experience necessary to prescribe,
> fabricate, fit and repair orthotic and prosthetic devices to patients
> as would be permitted by this legislation. Equally important,
> physical therapists do not have the proper equipment necessary to
> ensure correct fitting or the training necessary to repair the full
> range of orthotic and prosthetic devices available in today's
> marketplace.
>
> Let me give you an example of what could happen if untrained
> individuals, such as PTs, are allowed to prescribe and provide an
> orthotic or prosthetic device or if someone improperly fits an
> orthotic or prosthetic device to a patient. <INSERT YOUR EXAMPLE
> HERE>
>
> I know you take great pride and care in protecting the quality of
> health care services provided in California. Therefore, because of
> the threat posed by allowing untrained physical therapists to
> prescribe, fabricate and provide orthotic and prosthetic devices, I
> hope that you will eliminate subsection E and F from SB 77.
>
> Thank you for considering my views on SB 77. I would be more than
> willing to discuss this issue with you or your staff. Please call me
> at <INSERT PHONE NUMBER> if you have any questions about my concerns.
> I
> will look forward to hearing your views on this matter.
>
> Sincerely,
>
********************
To unsubscribe, send a message to: <Email Address Redacted> with
the words UNSUB OANDP-L in the body of the
message.
If you have a problem unsubscribing,or have other
questions, send e-mail to the moderator
Paul E. Prusakowski,CPO at <Email Address Redacted>
OANDP-L is a forum for the discussion of topics
related to Orthotics and Prosthetics.
Public commercial postings are forbidden. Responses to inquiries
should not be sent to the entire oandp-l list. Professional credentials
or affiliations should be used in all communications.
regulating their profession and are distracted having alphabet soup wars!!
The Barr Foundation supports Al Pike's recent request for the ACA leadership
to activate their advocacy role by
helping defeat this legislation in California. This can be accomplished thru
the submission of a formal ACA Position Statement by their Advocacy
Committee, provided it is currently a standing committee (!) and contacting
every California amputee member in its NLLIC(National Limb Loss Data Bank)
to defeat the legislation.
Perhaps ACA would consider providing this position statement since its
advocacy members are primarily AOPA members and manufacture representatives
and not practitioners or patients.
We, in particular, want to reach out to newly elected ACA Chairman Kurt
Collier whom is not only a amputee but the Chairman of the Board of ACA, a
Academy member, prior manufacture rep for Ossur, and certified practitioner
to help convince ACA to make the right decision on this issue and initiate
their advocacy mission on future issue that would benefit amputees,not the
industry nor necessarily the profession.
I wonder however, how commited AOPA members,other manufacturers and the
major chains of O&P facilities, truly ARE to defeating this California
initiative, when if it was succesfully passed,would expand a larger client
base for their products and more cost effective labor for providing these
health care services.
Hanger and BOC did not endorse specific provider qualifcation language when
they had the opportunity at the Post Neg Reg Proposed Rule submission to
CMS.
Perhaps if AOPA is truly ademanet and dedicated to defeating this state
proposal as they and NAAOP were in helping defeat a similar national
legislative assualt,they consider forming a joint task force effort by both
the trade and professional organizations(AOPA,NAAOP and the
Academy)specifically targeted to gaining the support of the national
disability organizations whose members include orthotic users,ie. National
Spina Bifida, MS,Polio,Easter Seals,Scoliosis, etc.to gain their support.
Don't you find it odd that these comprehensive orthotic user organizations
were not represented at Neg Reg or are involved with this issue when we are
talking about a much broader scope of services in the delivery of
comprehensive orthotic devices.
Their organizations numbers are much larger than those who have limb loss
and they are better funded than amputees organizations and tend to be more
proactive.
In response to Mr. Friedman's CPO below comments regarding AOPA's good
work to oppose the measure, perhaps a lesson can be learned by AOPA,the
Academy, politically inactive O&P practitioners in unlicensed states, that
the current state legislative PT and OT proposals and assaults are being
targeted primarily in O&P unregulated states by the national OT and PT
membership organizations, whose O&P fully qualified care claim doesn't
necessarily represent those of all PTs and OTS licensed professionals.
PTs and OTs had the intitive to get icensed in every state of the 50
staeswhile O&P providersdebate the benefits and....the accountability!
O&P providers are licensed in only ten !!
Why is that?
Even a mandatory certification qualification of every provider suported
unilaterally by credentialling and professional asscociations would be
better than we have now,no mantartory licensure or certification in 40
states.
Perhaps the Academy and individual O&P professions should consider taking a
stronger role in supporting and regulating the their O&P profession in their
respective states if not for better protecting the patient from receiving
unqualified care, but not to allow more providers on their turf.
It would be nice to see a state regulation workshop at any O&P event and
perhaps start with February's Academy Meeting in New Orleans !
Having met with the leadership of COPA, at their invitation in Reno during
the past October AOPA meeting, this state association's regulation efforts
appeared to of stalled since some of their members,including manufactures,
did want to compromise state regulation of O&P with allowing the necessary
grandfathering concessions to providers whom are BOC certified or having
been allowed to practice without certification for 5 or more years.
This is unfortunate since while they argue the qualifications of providers
seeking to be regulated, other (licensed health care professionals) but not
necessarily qualified providers, could possibly be included to deliver the
full range of O&P services.
The perception by lawmakers and including California's new governor and
other states is that we must reduce state deficits and the cost of health
care services. A state licensed PT and OT is just as qualified to deliver
the broad range of O&P services as unlicensed non certified O&P providers,if
not more so.They at least have a license to lose if they screw up and the
state gets state license revenue to support the regulation.
More providers mean more competitors for bidding O&P contacts and providing
the healthcare services, in spite of the reality that not all are qualified
to perform these services. Two Billion Dollars in in national annual revenue
isnt exactly chump change !!
FOOD FOR THOUGHT!
Happy New Year and thanks for listening again to the regulation drum!
Squeaky Wheel,
Tony Barr
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of jjartificiallimbbrace
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2003 11:22 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: [OANDP-L] response to legislation alert for California
First, thank you to AOPA for the information and your work.
Secondly, to all practitioners in California - You must respond to this
situation.
This will just become another nail in the coffin for our profession if we do
not respond to the request of these therapists. Listed below is a list of
all of the senators on the Business and Professions Committee. Take the
time to send a letter to each of the Senators as well as your local Senator.
Sincerely,
Jason Friedman, C.P.O.
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
Behalf Of Philip Tamoush
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:20 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Legislative Action Alert--California Practitioners
Friends at AOPA and the Academy: I have written our Southern California
amputee support group (MAAF) and am writingmy own letters, but I strongly
urge you to contact the Amputee Coalition of America (ACA) who hopefully by
now are maintaining a network of addresses, email and otherwise, in
California, so that consumers/patients can also write letters. It is really
critical that we get amputees at least involved in this. Phil Tamoush,
Amputee and Public Member of ABC On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 16:44:29 -0500 AOPA
< <Email Address Redacted> > writes:
> * * * URGENT LEGISLATIVE ACTION ALERT * * * December 29, 2003
>
> Dear California Practitioners:
>
> On January 12, 2004, the California State Senate Business and
> Professions Committee will consider legislation that would expand the
> California Physical Therapy Practice Act to permit physical therapists
> (PTs) to prescribe, fabricate and fit patients with any type of
> orthotic or prosthetic device and to train patients in the use of
> prosthetic devices. The bill number for this legislation is SB 77.
>
> The O&P profession needs to tell California state senators immediately
> that expanding the PT's scope of practice into the orthotics and
> prosthetics field will risk consumer safety and the quality of care
> delivered to patients in California. Moreover, lawmakers should know
> that the proposal will likely lead to increased Medi-Cal costs at a
> time when the state is facing a severe fiscal crisis and provider
> payments continue to come under assault.
>
> The American Orthotic & Prosthetic Association (AOPA) and the
> California Orthotic and Prosthetic Association (COPA) are making our
> views on this legislation known to the Business and Professions
> Committee. But, as always, your personal experiences will carry the
> most weight with your state senator since you are best qualified to
> describe how this legislation will directly impact California patients
> in need of O&P services. Therefore, we ask that you write a personal
> letter to your state senator and relay the following message:
>
> * * * PHYSICAL THERAPISTS ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO PRESCRIBE, FABRICATE,
> FIT AND REPAIR THE FULL RANGE OF ORTHOTIC AND PROSTHETIC DEVICES * * *
>
> Last year, we were able to defeat this measure because of significant
> input from the provider community. This input is needed again. If
> PTs are successful in California, it will be far easier for them to
> include O&P in other state PT practice act expansion efforts. That is
> why your input on this critical issue is essential.
>
> Your correspondence should be sent to your state senator as well as
> Senate Business and Professions Committee Chair Liz Figueroa.
> Chairwoman Figueroa's fax is (916) 324-0917.
> Correspondences must be received by January 5, 2004.
>
> You can identify your senator and his or her address by ZIP CODE
> through the following Internet link:
>
> <URL Redacted>
>
> To assist you in writing to your state senator, AOPA has included a
> draft letter (below) to serve as a guide. Please feel free to make
> changes to this letter and include your personal views on the issue.
>
> If you have any questions or need additional help writing your state
> senators, contact Walter Gorski at AOPA at (571) 431-0809. Thank you
> for your continued efforts on behalf of the O&P field.
> ________________________________________
>
> * * * SAMPLE LETTER * * *
>
> December 2003
>
> The Honorable Liz Figueroa
> California State Senate
> Chairwoman, Business and Professions Committee State Capitol, Room
> 4061 Sacramento, CA 95814
>
> By Fax: (916) 324-0917
>
> Dear Chairwoman Figueroa:
>
> I would like to express my strong opposition to provisions included in
> SB 77 that would allow physical therapists to prescribe, fabricate and
> fit the full range of orthotic services to patients as well as fit and
> repair prosthetic devices. These provisions are included in
> Subsections E and F of Section 1 of the legislation.
>
> As a <PROSTHETIST/ORTHOTIST>, I believe that this proposal is clearly
> out of the scope of practice of physical therapists and will have a
> negative effect on consumer safety and the quality of orthotic and
> prosthetic services provided to California residents. To ensure that
> patients only receive the highest level of orthotic/prosthetic care
> available, I urge you to eliminate the provisions that would give
> physical therapists the ability to prescribe, fabricate and provide
> any orthotic or prosthetic device.
>
> An orthotist is a health care professional who makes, fits, adjusts
> and repairs orthotic devices for patients who need added support for
> body parts that have been weakened by injury, disease or disorders of
> the nerves, muscles or bones. A prosthetist is a health care
> professional who makes, fits, adjusts and repairs artificial limbs for
> those who have suffered amputations through injury or illness. Both
> disciplines require extensive professional education, experience and
> training to make artificial limbs or orthopedic braces for an
> individual patient.
>
> It is my firm belief that physical therapists do not possess the
> formal education, training and experience necessary to prescribe,
> fabricate, fit and repair orthotic and prosthetic devices to patients
> as would be permitted by this legislation. Equally important,
> physical therapists do not have the proper equipment necessary to
> ensure correct fitting or the training necessary to repair the full
> range of orthotic and prosthetic devices available in today's
> marketplace.
>
> Let me give you an example of what could happen if untrained
> individuals, such as PTs, are allowed to prescribe and provide an
> orthotic or prosthetic device or if someone improperly fits an
> orthotic or prosthetic device to a patient. <INSERT YOUR EXAMPLE
> HERE>
>
> I know you take great pride and care in protecting the quality of
> health care services provided in California. Therefore, because of
> the threat posed by allowing untrained physical therapists to
> prescribe, fabricate and provide orthotic and prosthetic devices, I
> hope that you will eliminate subsection E and F from SB 77.
>
> Thank you for considering my views on SB 77. I would be more than
> willing to discuss this issue with you or your staff. Please call me
> at <INSERT PHONE NUMBER> if you have any questions about my concerns.
> I
> will look forward to hearing your views on this matter.
>
> Sincerely,
>
********************
To unsubscribe, send a message to: <Email Address Redacted> with
the words UNSUB OANDP-L in the body of the
message.
If you have a problem unsubscribing,or have other
questions, send e-mail to the moderator
Paul E. Prusakowski,CPO at <Email Address Redacted>
OANDP-L is a forum for the discussion of topics
related to Orthotics and Prosthetics.
Public commercial postings are forbidden. Responses to inquiries
should not be sent to the entire oandp-l list. Professional credentials
or affiliations should be used in all communications.
Citation
tony barr, “Re: Legislative Action Alert--California Practitioners,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222181.
