Re: FW: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
limbmaker1
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: FW: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
Creator:
limbmaker1
Date:
3/6/2004
Text:
John,
You brought up an interesting point that caught my attention. You mentioned
old ABC certifees. First of all, it hit home, I AM an old certifee! But
it also reminded of the change and evolution in ABC and the credentialing
process. A very short time ago, circa pre-1975, the requirements to sit for
ABC examination were a High School diploma, 4 years of documentable
experience, and letters from physicians attesting to one's competency. That
was the cut-off year. Anyone looking to become certified after that had to
have at least an Associates' degree. It was a banner year for ABC with more
than 400 examinees. My numbers might be a bit skewed, remember I am an old
certifee! Just look around, there's lots of them still in practice today,
many whom you may look up to for advice and guidance!
Are we all so naive to think educational standards are going to remain
stagnant? I believe one step in the right direction was ABC's moving to a 5
year certificate. Oh boy what debates that conjured up! However it was a
step in the right direction - fostering continued higher education and
forcing some to not sit back on their laurels.
A thought I have, would be to take it to the next level. Why not initiate a
Re-Test for competency. It would provide proof that one did more than
simply sign in, or give their swipe card to a friend while they were out on
the links. It would be a challenge for both the ABC practitioners and those
BOC practitioners who feel they are on an even keel.
There will ultimately be only one credentialing body. No doubt in my mind.
This is not a new debate, it's just new people on the debating team! Perhaps
that body should be neither ABC nor BOC, rather the individual states
regulating the industry/profession.
One last thought. I've been reading all the posts, and many of you feel your
credentials will mean nothing if there's unity. Be proud of what you have
accomplished, know that you have excelled in your chosen profession and be
confident in the fact that nobody can ever dilute the education, hard work
and sacrifices you made on your own behalf.
Nufsed,
Joseph F. Carideo Jr., CP (E)
----- Original Message -----
From: John E. Messer < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: [OANDP-L] FW: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John E. Messer [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:46 PM
> To: Frank Friddle, Jr.
> Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
>
>
> Frank,
>
> In a response to an earlier post you stated,ABC is the largest and oldest
> credentialing organization in the O&P profession and is recognized
globally
> in regard to
> our standards. Today, individual practitioners have a choice to what
> credentialing body to
> associate with. The reasons and standards that you used in making that
> decision years ago
> are intact and are being applied to this very day. The choice is yours.
>
>
> ABC is recognized globally in regard to our standards? If this statement
is
> indeed factual then why are we changing our standards? The only reason
that
> I can think of for this extension of credentials to BOC certifees is to
> decrease the membership of the BOC and ultimately cause its demise. If the
> ABC is successful in this attempt how long will it be before there is
> another BOC
> and the Standards that you speak of as being globally recognized will be
> changed again?
>
> I feel that I understand the need for one certifying agency, but if
nothing
> is done to control the forces that created the BOC originally I feel we
will
> be in exactly this same spot 20 years from now.
>
> To the old ABC certifees on the list---any interest in a new
credentialing
> body that recognizes the requirements that we had to meet and sacrifices
> that we made to achieve certification?
>
> John E. Messer
> CO,
> Board Eligible Prosthetist (results next week? BOC would have been much
> faster-- I could already be a CPO)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]On
> Behalf Of Frank Friddle, Jr.
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 2:48 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
>
>
> > <<<<The recent BOC/ABC events have prompted this communication. As a CPO
I
> > am trying to sort out these issues and define my position. I realize ABC
> has
> > not asked for my opinion nor does it appear to be interested in its
> members
> > option on this topic. Therefore, with no advocate for certified
> > practitioners I feel I need to be proactive and define my and my
patients
> > best interests.
> >
> > Specifically, can you help me answer the following questions.
> >
> > 1. Like all certified practitioners I have spent considerable time,
money
> > and sacrifice to obtain and maintain my ABC credentials. Given ABC's
offer
> > to now give these credentials away it would seem these credentials are
now
> > worth much less than I paid for them. Please explain how this benefits
me
> or
> > my patients?
>
> > The time and money spent are for the educational tools that can enable
you
> to
> provide high quality patient care. The quality of care that you dispense
is
> not and
> should not be dependent upon what type of acronym is behind one's name.
> There are
> many outstanding practitioners on both sides of this issue. Consequently,
> there are some
> practitioners on both sides that do not deliver the highest quality of
> patient care. A college
> diploma does not ensure that an individual is exceptionally brilliant.
> Do what you do and do it well.
>
> > 2. ABC has, at its core, been a consumer protection organization. All
> > patients could be reassured of a minimum competency/training level. In
> light
> > of ABC's offer to BOC, what assurances do consumers now have?
>
> > ABC's standards have not changed. All certifees must adhere to the same
> standards of
> continuing education, facility accreditation, and code of ethics.
>
> > 3. This year I must renew my credentials. I am short credits and if I do
> not
> > pay substantial fees to obtain these credits ABC will suspend my
> > credentials. Given ABC's offer elevate BOC practitioner to certified
> > practitioners, how do I reconcile the fact ABC is ready to suspend my
> > credentials and then give them away to individuals who can not and are
not
> > required to meet the same standards ABC holds me to?
>
> > Once an individual is credentialed by ABC, they will have to meet the
> exact same
> standards as all ABC practitioners. Only those BOC practitioners that are
in
> good
> standing will be accepted into ABC. Therefore, they must have obtained
> the required continuing educational credits required by BOC.
>
> > 4. Given ABC's failure to promote ABC credentials and differentiate them
> > from BOC why shouldn't an ABC practitioner switch certification agencies
> and
> > enjoy the benefits of BOC (i.e. free annual dues, parity with ABC at the
> > federal and State level, a say in how and who runs the certification
> agency
> > and other potential financial savings)? >>>>
>
> The federal government has recognized the BOC practitioner as qualified
> under
> the law and is paid by the same sources as an ABC practitioner. ABC can
> promote
> their standards but it is up to the individual practitioner to both
promote
> and demonstrate
> their ability to provide quality patient care. ABC is the largest and
oldest
> credentialing
> organization in the O&P profession and is recognized globally in regard to
> our standards.
> Today, individual practitioners have a choice to what credentialing body
to
> associate with.
> The reasons and standards that you used in making that decision years ago
> are intact and
> are being applied to this very day. The choice is yours.
>
> Frank Friddle, Jr., CO, FAAOP
>
>
You brought up an interesting point that caught my attention. You mentioned
old ABC certifees. First of all, it hit home, I AM an old certifee! But
it also reminded of the change and evolution in ABC and the credentialing
process. A very short time ago, circa pre-1975, the requirements to sit for
ABC examination were a High School diploma, 4 years of documentable
experience, and letters from physicians attesting to one's competency. That
was the cut-off year. Anyone looking to become certified after that had to
have at least an Associates' degree. It was a banner year for ABC with more
than 400 examinees. My numbers might be a bit skewed, remember I am an old
certifee! Just look around, there's lots of them still in practice today,
many whom you may look up to for advice and guidance!
Are we all so naive to think educational standards are going to remain
stagnant? I believe one step in the right direction was ABC's moving to a 5
year certificate. Oh boy what debates that conjured up! However it was a
step in the right direction - fostering continued higher education and
forcing some to not sit back on their laurels.
A thought I have, would be to take it to the next level. Why not initiate a
Re-Test for competency. It would provide proof that one did more than
simply sign in, or give their swipe card to a friend while they were out on
the links. It would be a challenge for both the ABC practitioners and those
BOC practitioners who feel they are on an even keel.
There will ultimately be only one credentialing body. No doubt in my mind.
This is not a new debate, it's just new people on the debating team! Perhaps
that body should be neither ABC nor BOC, rather the individual states
regulating the industry/profession.
One last thought. I've been reading all the posts, and many of you feel your
credentials will mean nothing if there's unity. Be proud of what you have
accomplished, know that you have excelled in your chosen profession and be
confident in the fact that nobody can ever dilute the education, hard work
and sacrifices you made on your own behalf.
Nufsed,
Joseph F. Carideo Jr., CP (E)
----- Original Message -----
From: John E. Messer < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 11:10 PM
Subject: [OANDP-L] FW: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John E. Messer [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 9:46 PM
> To: Frank Friddle, Jr.
> Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
>
>
> Frank,
>
> In a response to an earlier post you stated,ABC is the largest and oldest
> credentialing organization in the O&P profession and is recognized
globally
> in regard to
> our standards. Today, individual practitioners have a choice to what
> credentialing body to
> associate with. The reasons and standards that you used in making that
> decision years ago
> are intact and are being applied to this very day. The choice is yours.
>
>
> ABC is recognized globally in regard to our standards? If this statement
is
> indeed factual then why are we changing our standards? The only reason
that
> I can think of for this extension of credentials to BOC certifees is to
> decrease the membership of the BOC and ultimately cause its demise. If the
> ABC is successful in this attempt how long will it be before there is
> another BOC
> and the Standards that you speak of as being globally recognized will be
> changed again?
>
> I feel that I understand the need for one certifying agency, but if
nothing
> is done to control the forces that created the BOC originally I feel we
will
> be in exactly this same spot 20 years from now.
>
> To the old ABC certifees on the list---any interest in a new
credentialing
> body that recognizes the requirements that we had to meet and sacrifices
> that we made to achieve certification?
>
> John E. Messer
> CO,
> Board Eligible Prosthetist (results next week? BOC would have been much
> faster-- I could already be a CPO)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]On
> Behalf Of Frank Friddle, Jr.
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 2:48 PM
> To: <Email Address Redacted>
> Subject: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response
>
>
> > <<<<The recent BOC/ABC events have prompted this communication. As a CPO
I
> > am trying to sort out these issues and define my position. I realize ABC
> has
> > not asked for my opinion nor does it appear to be interested in its
> members
> > option on this topic. Therefore, with no advocate for certified
> > practitioners I feel I need to be proactive and define my and my
patients
> > best interests.
> >
> > Specifically, can you help me answer the following questions.
> >
> > 1. Like all certified practitioners I have spent considerable time,
money
> > and sacrifice to obtain and maintain my ABC credentials. Given ABC's
offer
> > to now give these credentials away it would seem these credentials are
now
> > worth much less than I paid for them. Please explain how this benefits
me
> or
> > my patients?
>
> > The time and money spent are for the educational tools that can enable
you
> to
> provide high quality patient care. The quality of care that you dispense
is
> not and
> should not be dependent upon what type of acronym is behind one's name.
> There are
> many outstanding practitioners on both sides of this issue. Consequently,
> there are some
> practitioners on both sides that do not deliver the highest quality of
> patient care. A college
> diploma does not ensure that an individual is exceptionally brilliant.
> Do what you do and do it well.
>
> > 2. ABC has, at its core, been a consumer protection organization. All
> > patients could be reassured of a minimum competency/training level. In
> light
> > of ABC's offer to BOC, what assurances do consumers now have?
>
> > ABC's standards have not changed. All certifees must adhere to the same
> standards of
> continuing education, facility accreditation, and code of ethics.
>
> > 3. This year I must renew my credentials. I am short credits and if I do
> not
> > pay substantial fees to obtain these credits ABC will suspend my
> > credentials. Given ABC's offer elevate BOC practitioner to certified
> > practitioners, how do I reconcile the fact ABC is ready to suspend my
> > credentials and then give them away to individuals who can not and are
not
> > required to meet the same standards ABC holds me to?
>
> > Once an individual is credentialed by ABC, they will have to meet the
> exact same
> standards as all ABC practitioners. Only those BOC practitioners that are
in
> good
> standing will be accepted into ABC. Therefore, they must have obtained
> the required continuing educational credits required by BOC.
>
> > 4. Given ABC's failure to promote ABC credentials and differentiate them
> > from BOC why shouldn't an ABC practitioner switch certification agencies
> and
> > enjoy the benefits of BOC (i.e. free annual dues, parity with ABC at the
> > federal and State level, a say in how and who runs the certification
> agency
> > and other potential financial savings)? >>>>
>
> The federal government has recognized the BOC practitioner as qualified
> under
> the law and is paid by the same sources as an ABC practitioner. ABC can
> promote
> their standards but it is up to the individual practitioner to both
promote
> and demonstrate
> their ability to provide quality patient care. ABC is the largest and
oldest
> credentialing
> organization in the O&P profession and is recognized globally in regard to
> our standards.
> Today, individual practitioners have a choice to what credentialing body
to
> associate with.
> The reasons and standards that you used in making that decision years ago
> are intact and
> are being applied to this very day. The choice is yours.
>
> Frank Friddle, Jr., CO, FAAOP
>
>
Citation
limbmaker1, “Re: FW: [OANDP-L] An ABC Practitioner's Response,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 26, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/222695.
