Re: ABC/BOC /a possible solution !?
tony barr
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: ABC/BOC /a possible solution !?
Creator:
tony barr
Date:
3/16/2004
Text:
Michael,
That didn't take long!
I would take this misunderstanding private but you cc the list so here are
three questions since your Objection was not relevant to my suggestion of
a possible solution instead of sand throwing at each other.
I am not the enemy.
Perhaps you can better educate me via private e-mail.
I did not nor have I ever condemed BOC reasons for not supporting ABC
manuvers as it percieves ABC to control the merger or unification of both
credentialing associations into one.
This whole problem stems from motivations of control and it is holding up
the process of both credentialed practitioners from protecting your
professsion.
I have three questions to what you stated was my feeding of
misinformation.
1) Although the BOC board is elected, did all the credentialed BOC
practitioners approve the terms of the now defunct unification proposal
prior to nintial negotiations? Half or 2/3?
2)What is the name of the BOC's professional organization.
3) When will we stop attacking each other and combine the talent that both
credentialed professionals have and rid ourselves of this mockery of the
profession that has been mostly due to this kind of cat fight generated
and fed by both associations.
My e-mail addres is <Email Address Redacted>
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael P Madden [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 5:32 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Cc: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] ABC/BOC /a possible solution !?
Tony,
FYI...BOC does elect their board...every level of BOC credential is
represented on that board...they are elected by the certifies's in a ballot
included with their yearly renewals.
That is one of the sticking points...BOC insists that the new entity created
in a merger (not a take over) be represented by a democratically elected
board, a board that represents all levels of the O&P profession...ABC at
present has balked at that concept being included in the end result of any
merger.
please stop feeding into the misinformation.
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:11:05 -0500 tony barr < <Email Address Redacted> > writes:
> Well stated James.
>
> Perhaps a mere patient of your services whom is not a practitioner nor
> credentialed, but somewhat familiar with the ongoing strife and
> controversy in your profession, can make better make suggestions
> without prejudice.
>
> The fact that neither BOC nor ABC practitioners have absolutely no say
> in the decisions made by their credentialing board, here maybe a
> possible solution and worth giving some thought.
>
> Professional unity via professional unification of both credentials
> thru the Academy not BOC and ABC.
>
> Ask the Academy ,thru a membership by-law change, not via a board of
> directors or management committee decision, to consider allowing BOC
> practitioners eligibility to Academy membership.
>
> ABC and BOC can't complain they have already endorsed the concept.
> If they
> do, who cares!
>
> As Joan Cestraro C.P. recently and appropriately pointed out the
> bigger picture here is the fact that ABC Practitioners have
> absolutely no say in the decisions of the ABC Board- a board that
> represents US?
> The same holds true for BOC practitioners.
>
> The NEW Academy can further provide the much needed unity of both
> certification credential providers under one professional umbrella and
> the
> leadership(?) of ABC and BOC can sit on the sidelines and see what
> happened as the result of their on going feuding and bickering !
>
> A united front of ABC/BOC practitioners membership in the Academy'scan
> lead to support and sponsorship of a National Licensure Conference,
> which can help all indivisual states become licensed and the
> requirement of a certification is less meaningful.
>
> Plus and perhaps more importantly, the NEW Academy as a professional
> organization of approx 3,000, can show more strength in numbers, can
> better unite on defending encroachment of other O&P providers and stop
> all of this nonsense...NOW.
>
> Now before all you ABC diehards start sending in your posts of
> disagreement, keep in mind that many of you were mailed your
> certificates in the early years of ABC and all licensure acts in 10
> states were passed because
> 3-5
> year grandfather criteria for ABC,BOC and non certified practitioners
> was established in every regulated state.
>
> Once licensure acts are enacted in all 50 states,you can better assure
> preventing encroachment of your profession and decide where to put
> optional certification insignias next to perhaps more meaninful
> credentials, LP,LO and LPO.
>
> Don't you think the the time has come for your field to be recognized
> as professional providers of O&P services and to make the transition
> from certified practitioner to licensed health care provider?
>
> The point being my friends, as Gary Lamb LPO ,past president of the
> Academy and Chairman of the Legislative Advocacy Committee of AAOP,
> correctly pointed out in the February 15, O&P Business News.
>
> any state without licensure of O&P has no standing. This means that
> physical therapists (and other licensed health care providers) can
> simply change their practice act in that state to provide O&P
> care...Then it becomes illegal for orthotists and
> prosthetists(credentialed or non
> credentialed) to deliver the care they have traditionally provided.
>
> Just as important, once united under one professional umbrella you can
> separate your services from DME and get on with many projects
> described by the NEW Academy's aggressive plans for Project Quantum
> Leap :
>
> 1) the task of educating third party payers and legislators that you
> provide a legitimate health care service and patient care along with a
> product, not just retail services.
>
> 2) Presenting O&P as a career option so we can ensure the viability
> of the field in the profession Don Katz ,CO, President of the
> Academy.
>
> 3) Developing a pathway of expansion for O&P Masters and doctoral
> degrees.
>
> 4) resolve the serious dilemma of the deficit in advanced educational
> opportunities in O&P.
>
> 5)Develop a master agenda for priority topics (like conducting a
> National Licensure Conference) and method for planning and conducting
> consensus conferences.
>
> At the very least, this suggestion may make BOC and ABC come back to
> the table!!
> But do you really want them do when you have no input or say in the
> matter ?
>
> No charge, but tax deductible donations are always graciously
> accepted!:)
>
> Tony Barr
> Barr Foundation
> www.oandp.com/barr
> www.ertlreconstruction.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
> Behalf Of James Cobb
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 12:25 AM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] ABC/BOC
>
> I attended the meeting in the Reno about the ABC-BOC merger talks and
> have also been reading most of the posts on this forum as well. I
> definitely see both sides of the coin. Here is my side. Every
> organization has good points and bad points. I have never been apart
> any organization nor heard of one that has satisfied 100 percent of it
> members. As a community of professionals we are all facing a grim
> future of insurance cut backs and reduction of benefits. We all need
> to be united in our fight to be allowed provide patient care. The
> million dollar question is how can we become united? We have two
> major certifying organizations with different avenues both being
> allowed to practice the same medicine. Unfortunately both have been
> pitted against each other and now our fight is against each other
> instead of against legislation. There are a lot of proud
> practitioners both ABC and BOC. Each feel stepped on. It has now
> become personal.
>
> I agree with Mr. Barr that every organization needs a good shaking
> up.
> This shaking up gets every ones opinions out on the table.
> Communication
> is our best tool, the lack of communication is our worst enemy.
> Every one
> in our profession at one time or another has thought or at least heard
> someone say that ABC certification is better than BOC. I have
> personally read many classifieds that asked for at least BOC
> certification.
> This
> implies that ABC practitioners utilize a higher standard of care than
> BOC.
> This again starts another thousand arguments and hurt feelings.
> Point
> being, we do need one set standard of practicing medicine, one
> credentialing body, and one huge voice shouting together in Washington
> D.C. I have a lot of friends ABC and BOC. I have a lot of friends
> who are doctors, nurses and therapists. We honestly look weak as a
> whole in the medical community. We need to strengthen and unite
> together. We also need to weed out the weak on both sides of the
> ABC-BOC street. Maybe we should think of these points before merger
> talks begin again. First, at a minimum all practitioners
> must of have completed a residency or a minimum hour trade course to
> ensure formal education. The problem with straight OJT is someone
> can't teach it if they don't know it. A professors job is to know it,
> all of it.
> Secondly, make everyone immediately retake an examination of their
> respective field/s. This will weed out some people; which is a good
> thing.
> Lastly, mandate tests or boards every 4-5 years along with CEU's.
> If we
> are going to unite we must all prove to be equal and then must set
> high standards for people to maintain. I really am not trying to
> anger anyone.
> I am trying to get us to think together as a whole for a resolution to
> the problem. The government and insurance companies will not wait for
> us to sort out our problems. I read a post earlier talking about
> animals and getting attacked when we are the weakest. Well friends,
> our community is very shaky right now. We need to be looking out for
> each other not hurting each other.
>
> Sincerely to all who provide orthotic and prosthetic patient care,
>
> James Cobb
>
>
That didn't take long!
I would take this misunderstanding private but you cc the list so here are
three questions since your Objection was not relevant to my suggestion of
a possible solution instead of sand throwing at each other.
I am not the enemy.
Perhaps you can better educate me via private e-mail.
I did not nor have I ever condemed BOC reasons for not supporting ABC
manuvers as it percieves ABC to control the merger or unification of both
credentialing associations into one.
This whole problem stems from motivations of control and it is holding up
the process of both credentialed practitioners from protecting your
professsion.
I have three questions to what you stated was my feeding of
misinformation.
1) Although the BOC board is elected, did all the credentialed BOC
practitioners approve the terms of the now defunct unification proposal
prior to nintial negotiations? Half or 2/3?
2)What is the name of the BOC's professional organization.
3) When will we stop attacking each other and combine the talent that both
credentialed professionals have and rid ourselves of this mockery of the
profession that has been mostly due to this kind of cat fight generated
and fed by both associations.
My e-mail addres is <Email Address Redacted>
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael P Madden [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 5:32 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Cc: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] ABC/BOC /a possible solution !?
Tony,
FYI...BOC does elect their board...every level of BOC credential is
represented on that board...they are elected by the certifies's in a ballot
included with their yearly renewals.
That is one of the sticking points...BOC insists that the new entity created
in a merger (not a take over) be represented by a democratically elected
board, a board that represents all levels of the O&P profession...ABC at
present has balked at that concept being included in the end result of any
merger.
please stop feeding into the misinformation.
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 16:11:05 -0500 tony barr < <Email Address Redacted> > writes:
> Well stated James.
>
> Perhaps a mere patient of your services whom is not a practitioner nor
> credentialed, but somewhat familiar with the ongoing strife and
> controversy in your profession, can make better make suggestions
> without prejudice.
>
> The fact that neither BOC nor ABC practitioners have absolutely no say
> in the decisions made by their credentialing board, here maybe a
> possible solution and worth giving some thought.
>
> Professional unity via professional unification of both credentials
> thru the Academy not BOC and ABC.
>
> Ask the Academy ,thru a membership by-law change, not via a board of
> directors or management committee decision, to consider allowing BOC
> practitioners eligibility to Academy membership.
>
> ABC and BOC can't complain they have already endorsed the concept.
> If they
> do, who cares!
>
> As Joan Cestraro C.P. recently and appropriately pointed out the
> bigger picture here is the fact that ABC Practitioners have
> absolutely no say in the decisions of the ABC Board- a board that
> represents US?
> The same holds true for BOC practitioners.
>
> The NEW Academy can further provide the much needed unity of both
> certification credential providers under one professional umbrella and
> the
> leadership(?) of ABC and BOC can sit on the sidelines and see what
> happened as the result of their on going feuding and bickering !
>
> A united front of ABC/BOC practitioners membership in the Academy'scan
> lead to support and sponsorship of a National Licensure Conference,
> which can help all indivisual states become licensed and the
> requirement of a certification is less meaningful.
>
> Plus and perhaps more importantly, the NEW Academy as a professional
> organization of approx 3,000, can show more strength in numbers, can
> better unite on defending encroachment of other O&P providers and stop
> all of this nonsense...NOW.
>
> Now before all you ABC diehards start sending in your posts of
> disagreement, keep in mind that many of you were mailed your
> certificates in the early years of ABC and all licensure acts in 10
> states were passed because
> 3-5
> year grandfather criteria for ABC,BOC and non certified practitioners
> was established in every regulated state.
>
> Once licensure acts are enacted in all 50 states,you can better assure
> preventing encroachment of your profession and decide where to put
> optional certification insignias next to perhaps more meaninful
> credentials, LP,LO and LPO.
>
> Don't you think the the time has come for your field to be recognized
> as professional providers of O&P services and to make the transition
> from certified practitioner to licensed health care provider?
>
> The point being my friends, as Gary Lamb LPO ,past president of the
> Academy and Chairman of the Legislative Advocacy Committee of AAOP,
> correctly pointed out in the February 15, O&P Business News.
>
> any state without licensure of O&P has no standing. This means that
> physical therapists (and other licensed health care providers) can
> simply change their practice act in that state to provide O&P
> care...Then it becomes illegal for orthotists and
> prosthetists(credentialed or non
> credentialed) to deliver the care they have traditionally provided.
>
> Just as important, once united under one professional umbrella you can
> separate your services from DME and get on with many projects
> described by the NEW Academy's aggressive plans for Project Quantum
> Leap :
>
> 1) the task of educating third party payers and legislators that you
> provide a legitimate health care service and patient care along with a
> product, not just retail services.
>
> 2) Presenting O&P as a career option so we can ensure the viability
> of the field in the profession Don Katz ,CO, President of the
> Academy.
>
> 3) Developing a pathway of expansion for O&P Masters and doctoral
> degrees.
>
> 4) resolve the serious dilemma of the deficit in advanced educational
> opportunities in O&P.
>
> 5)Develop a master agenda for priority topics (like conducting a
> National Licensure Conference) and method for planning and conducting
> consensus conferences.
>
> At the very least, this suggestion may make BOC and ABC come back to
> the table!!
> But do you really want them do when you have no input or say in the
> matter ?
>
> No charge, but tax deductible donations are always graciously
> accepted!:)
>
> Tony Barr
> Barr Foundation
> www.oandp.com/barr
> www.ertlreconstruction.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On
> Behalf Of James Cobb
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2004 12:25 AM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] ABC/BOC
>
> I attended the meeting in the Reno about the ABC-BOC merger talks and
> have also been reading most of the posts on this forum as well. I
> definitely see both sides of the coin. Here is my side. Every
> organization has good points and bad points. I have never been apart
> any organization nor heard of one that has satisfied 100 percent of it
> members. As a community of professionals we are all facing a grim
> future of insurance cut backs and reduction of benefits. We all need
> to be united in our fight to be allowed provide patient care. The
> million dollar question is how can we become united? We have two
> major certifying organizations with different avenues both being
> allowed to practice the same medicine. Unfortunately both have been
> pitted against each other and now our fight is against each other
> instead of against legislation. There are a lot of proud
> practitioners both ABC and BOC. Each feel stepped on. It has now
> become personal.
>
> I agree with Mr. Barr that every organization needs a good shaking
> up.
> This shaking up gets every ones opinions out on the table.
> Communication
> is our best tool, the lack of communication is our worst enemy.
> Every one
> in our profession at one time or another has thought or at least heard
> someone say that ABC certification is better than BOC. I have
> personally read many classifieds that asked for at least BOC
> certification.
> This
> implies that ABC practitioners utilize a higher standard of care than
> BOC.
> This again starts another thousand arguments and hurt feelings.
> Point
> being, we do need one set standard of practicing medicine, one
> credentialing body, and one huge voice shouting together in Washington
> D.C. I have a lot of friends ABC and BOC. I have a lot of friends
> who are doctors, nurses and therapists. We honestly look weak as a
> whole in the medical community. We need to strengthen and unite
> together. We also need to weed out the weak on both sides of the
> ABC-BOC street. Maybe we should think of these points before merger
> talks begin again. First, at a minimum all practitioners
> must of have completed a residency or a minimum hour trade course to
> ensure formal education. The problem with straight OJT is someone
> can't teach it if they don't know it. A professors job is to know it,
> all of it.
> Secondly, make everyone immediately retake an examination of their
> respective field/s. This will weed out some people; which is a good
> thing.
> Lastly, mandate tests or boards every 4-5 years along with CEU's.
> If we
> are going to unite we must all prove to be equal and then must set
> high standards for people to maintain. I really am not trying to
> anger anyone.
> I am trying to get us to think together as a whole for a resolution to
> the problem. The government and insurance companies will not wait for
> us to sort out our problems. I read a post earlier talking about
> animals and getting attacked when we are the weakest. Well friends,
> our community is very shaky right now. We need to be looking out for
> each other not hurting each other.
>
> Sincerely to all who provide orthotic and prosthetic patient care,
>
> James Cobb
>
>
Citation
tony barr, “Re: ABC/BOC /a possible solution !?,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 7, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222577.
