CA response to PT legislation
Ralph W Nobbe
Description
Collection
Title:
CA response to PT legislation
Creator:
Ralph W Nobbe
Date:
1/5/2004
Text:
This message posted on behalf of Sheri Daley, administrative director of the
California Orthotic and Prosthetic Association.
Attention List Serve members and O&P Colleagues:
As a point of information, I would like to say that the California
Orthotics and Prosthetics Association has been actively working to amend
SB 77 since its introduction. In the spring of 2003, we were informed by
the physical therapists association's lobbyist that the bill would be
amended to exclude the language referring to orthotics and prosthetics.
COPA was very clear about the need to delineate the scopes of practice
for the two professions. Unfortunately, the PT association has decided to
remove the words orthotics and prosthetics from the original clause and
leave in all of the synonyms for orthotics, including supportive and
assistive devices. It also created a new clause giving PTs the ability to
provide all prosthetic care except for fabrication. Obviously, these
changes were not in the spirit of the negotiations and are a clear sign
that the association intends on going forward with a direct assault on
the O&P profession.
The situation has become more critical in that I have been told that the
bill's most vocal opposition, the OTs, have gone neutral with the latest
amendments. Clearly the aim of this bill is directed at your profession.
As the bill is now drafted, PTs would be able to prescribe devices and
therapy for those devices with no limit or oversight. Literally, a PT
could prescribe a brace and two years of therapy to learn how to walk in
it. It is apparent the state did not learn its lesson from the graduated
compression hose
debacle (rampant fraud and abuse). When I reviewed the PT's letter of
support which purports that
this bill is not expanding their scope of practice or putting patients at
risk I was dumbfounded. This is an obvious extension of the PT scope of
practice where there is no expectation of competence. The argument that a
wider availability of providers will somehow save costs is ludicrous. If
you read between the lines, the combination of a device and therapy is a
recipe for payment for gait therapy (as well as other services currently
provided at no cost orthotist prosthetists). The inclusion of these
service costs will result in a direct increase in cost to private
employers, Medi-Cal and workers comp.
The expansion of the PT scope of practice will only serve to legitimize
the substandard provision of O&P care. I have yet to see any document
that demonstrates that PT's are educated and trained in this area to the
degree prosthetists and orthotists are, and no one can produce a test or
other indicator that shows that competence for PTs is measured in this
field. The critical area of wound care and the possibility of disease
transmission is also completely ignored.
COPA has worked with other medical associations, AOPA and numerous
businesses on gathering a base of opposition to the measure. As Mr. Barr
pointed out, the PTs are successful in many states where the O&P
profession lags. Part of this is due to the disparity in numbers between
the professions, but part of this phenomena is other professions taking
advantage of a political void. The void is not with your state
association. COPA has been here and sends its lobbyist, board members and
industry representatives to meetings and hearings. We write letters, give
testimony and work with legislators and their staff. You have a very
dedicated core of concerned practitioners who are trying to carry the
load for the profession.
What we lack is grass roots support in California. As the marketing
coordinator for COPA I can report that by hosting a booth at the AOPA
national assembly, revamping our web site to allow for on-line membership
applications, and by sending a brochure to all orthotists and
prosthetists in the state urging them to join COPA and become active in
their state's future, we have netted less than ten responses (two of
which were from India). It is hard to communicate with and rally support
from a group that is scattered, inattentive and limited in its support.
We need your help. Following is a short checklist of what you can do, right
now to
improve our chances of success on this issue and several other issues on
the horizon:
1. Go to www.leginfo.ca.gov and find our who your legislators are. Use
the zip code for your place of employment and home under your
legislators and print them out.
2. Write a letter opposing SB 77 to each legislator on your list. Also
fax a letter of opposition to the following members of the Senate
Business and Professions Committee:
Liz Figueroa (Chair) 916-327-2433
Samuel Aanestad (Vice-Chair) - 916-324-0917
Jim Brulte 916-327-2272
Gilbert Cedillo 916-327-8817
Mike Machado 916-323-2304
Kevin Murray 916-445-8899
Edward Vincent 916-445-3712
Jay DeFuria, Committee Consultant: 916-324-0917
Fax a copy to COPA: 209-744-2673
3. Go to COPA's website at
<URL Redacted> and fill
out an application for membership (both individual and corporate
memberships are now available) so that I can add you to our e-mail list
and keep you informed.
4. Use your resources. Contact major employers, insurers, physicians and
hospitals to enlist their help in opposing this measure and keep working
on these contacts until you have been informed that the measure is dead
(in addition to the first hearing, the bill must also pass two finance
committee hearings, another policy committee hearing, two floor votes and
be signed by the Governor).
5. If you are in the Sacramento area on January 12th and would like to
attend the hearing, please call me so that I can organize our
presentation to the best extent possible. 209-744-2672
**********CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT**********
This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be
legally privileged. It is intended for the use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
reader of this email is not the intended recipient, or agent responsible for
delivering or copying of this communication, you are hereby notified that
any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then
delete it. Thank you
California Orthotic and Prosthetic Association.
Attention List Serve members and O&P Colleagues:
As a point of information, I would like to say that the California
Orthotics and Prosthetics Association has been actively working to amend
SB 77 since its introduction. In the spring of 2003, we were informed by
the physical therapists association's lobbyist that the bill would be
amended to exclude the language referring to orthotics and prosthetics.
COPA was very clear about the need to delineate the scopes of practice
for the two professions. Unfortunately, the PT association has decided to
remove the words orthotics and prosthetics from the original clause and
leave in all of the synonyms for orthotics, including supportive and
assistive devices. It also created a new clause giving PTs the ability to
provide all prosthetic care except for fabrication. Obviously, these
changes were not in the spirit of the negotiations and are a clear sign
that the association intends on going forward with a direct assault on
the O&P profession.
The situation has become more critical in that I have been told that the
bill's most vocal opposition, the OTs, have gone neutral with the latest
amendments. Clearly the aim of this bill is directed at your profession.
As the bill is now drafted, PTs would be able to prescribe devices and
therapy for those devices with no limit or oversight. Literally, a PT
could prescribe a brace and two years of therapy to learn how to walk in
it. It is apparent the state did not learn its lesson from the graduated
compression hose
debacle (rampant fraud and abuse). When I reviewed the PT's letter of
support which purports that
this bill is not expanding their scope of practice or putting patients at
risk I was dumbfounded. This is an obvious extension of the PT scope of
practice where there is no expectation of competence. The argument that a
wider availability of providers will somehow save costs is ludicrous. If
you read between the lines, the combination of a device and therapy is a
recipe for payment for gait therapy (as well as other services currently
provided at no cost orthotist prosthetists). The inclusion of these
service costs will result in a direct increase in cost to private
employers, Medi-Cal and workers comp.
The expansion of the PT scope of practice will only serve to legitimize
the substandard provision of O&P care. I have yet to see any document
that demonstrates that PT's are educated and trained in this area to the
degree prosthetists and orthotists are, and no one can produce a test or
other indicator that shows that competence for PTs is measured in this
field. The critical area of wound care and the possibility of disease
transmission is also completely ignored.
COPA has worked with other medical associations, AOPA and numerous
businesses on gathering a base of opposition to the measure. As Mr. Barr
pointed out, the PTs are successful in many states where the O&P
profession lags. Part of this is due to the disparity in numbers between
the professions, but part of this phenomena is other professions taking
advantage of a political void. The void is not with your state
association. COPA has been here and sends its lobbyist, board members and
industry representatives to meetings and hearings. We write letters, give
testimony and work with legislators and their staff. You have a very
dedicated core of concerned practitioners who are trying to carry the
load for the profession.
What we lack is grass roots support in California. As the marketing
coordinator for COPA I can report that by hosting a booth at the AOPA
national assembly, revamping our web site to allow for on-line membership
applications, and by sending a brochure to all orthotists and
prosthetists in the state urging them to join COPA and become active in
their state's future, we have netted less than ten responses (two of
which were from India). It is hard to communicate with and rally support
from a group that is scattered, inattentive and limited in its support.
We need your help. Following is a short checklist of what you can do, right
now to
improve our chances of success on this issue and several other issues on
the horizon:
1. Go to www.leginfo.ca.gov and find our who your legislators are. Use
the zip code for your place of employment and home under your
legislators and print them out.
2. Write a letter opposing SB 77 to each legislator on your list. Also
fax a letter of opposition to the following members of the Senate
Business and Professions Committee:
Liz Figueroa (Chair) 916-327-2433
Samuel Aanestad (Vice-Chair) - 916-324-0917
Jim Brulte 916-327-2272
Gilbert Cedillo 916-327-8817
Mike Machado 916-323-2304
Kevin Murray 916-445-8899
Edward Vincent 916-445-3712
Jay DeFuria, Committee Consultant: 916-324-0917
Fax a copy to COPA: 209-744-2673
3. Go to COPA's website at
<URL Redacted> and fill
out an application for membership (both individual and corporate
memberships are now available) so that I can add you to our e-mail list
and keep you informed.
4. Use your resources. Contact major employers, insurers, physicians and
hospitals to enlist their help in opposing this measure and keep working
on these contacts until you have been informed that the measure is dead
(in addition to the first hearing, the bill must also pass two finance
committee hearings, another policy committee hearing, two floor votes and
be signed by the Governor).
5. If you are in the Sacramento area on January 12th and would like to
attend the hearing, please call me so that I can organize our
presentation to the best extent possible. 209-744-2672
**********CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT**********
This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be
legally privileged. It is intended for the use of the individual or entity
to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
reader of this email is not the intended recipient, or agent responsible for
delivering or copying of this communication, you are hereby notified that
any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then
delete it. Thank you
Citation
Ralph W Nobbe, “CA response to PT legislation,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222269.
