Re: Qualifications
Terry Supan
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: Qualifications
Creator:
Terry Supan
Date:
12/15/2005
Text:
I would like to take the time to compliment both Jim and Carol for their
posting this morning. Carol and I have had several private messaged and
I am grateful for her further explanation today.
Jim, if anyone is offended by your thoughtful post, then they need to
reread it and think about what you said. As a former member of the
AAOP, NCOPE, CAAHEP, US-ISPO, ABC, CARF, and NRM
boards/commission/committee, I will echo your frustration with the whole
situation. Having spent twenty-five years working to help develop a
professional pathway based on education and clinical training, it became
very disheartening to see BIPA 2000, Section 427 cut the foundation from
under my profession.
I do not like what the ABC Board felt they had to do about trying to
merge the BOC accredited individuals into their ranks, but when the
President signed BIPA 2000, an Act of Congress stated that the ABC and
BOC were equal. One certification body with uniform standard, after any
grandfathering, was their goal. I am sure that the ABC negotiating team
bargained in good faith and I am also sure that irrespective of what the
BOC board member wanted to do, the BOC administration, as it had done
several times in the past, caused those negotiations to fail.
That same Act of Congress said that qualified physical therapist and
qualified occupational therapists could also be providers of custom
orthoses and prostheses. To almost everyone at the NRM that meant that
the therapists needed additional O&P education and clinical experience.
To the APTA qualified meant licensed and nothing more. Even though
the therapist members of the NRM committee admitted that the vast
majority of PTs would never fabricate and rarely fit a custom orthosis
or prosthesis, they still would not even discuss any compromise on their
position. That is why the NRM failed.
As for licensure, my only remaining official position is Vice Chair of
the Illinois O, P, & Ped Licensure Board. Ours is one of the tougher
Practice Acts which, since grandfathering ended in 2003, requires
CAAHEP education, NCOPE residency and passage of the complete ABC
examination. There are no $75 short cuts. IF you practice without a
license or beyond your scope of practice, you would be putting any other
license at risk for ethical violations. With the new CMS regulations it
should be cut and dry in states with licensure. (That is if the DMERCs
follow the rules and don't make another multi-million dollar mistake
like they did in Miami.) To echo Carol, the only way to regulate this
profession is through licensure. Certification is voluntary and only
affects those that are certified. Licensure gives you the privilege to
practice but it can always be taken away.
Terry Supan, CPO, FAAOP, FISPO
Jim DeWees wrote:
> ...
>
> Just as a warning, this will most likely offend many people out
> there. I am sorry if it does, but I am trying to be careful and avoid
> generalities. I will use specific issues, specific cases, but for
> these cases, there are many other ones very similar to what I am
> getting at.
>
> I decided to go into prosthetics after having an accident and becoming
> a BK amputee myself in 1998. I was already in the medical field,
> doing pathology at a university hospital for about 9 years. I had a
> couple choices to make...
posting this morning. Carol and I have had several private messaged and
I am grateful for her further explanation today.
Jim, if anyone is offended by your thoughtful post, then they need to
reread it and think about what you said. As a former member of the
AAOP, NCOPE, CAAHEP, US-ISPO, ABC, CARF, and NRM
boards/commission/committee, I will echo your frustration with the whole
situation. Having spent twenty-five years working to help develop a
professional pathway based on education and clinical training, it became
very disheartening to see BIPA 2000, Section 427 cut the foundation from
under my profession.
I do not like what the ABC Board felt they had to do about trying to
merge the BOC accredited individuals into their ranks, but when the
President signed BIPA 2000, an Act of Congress stated that the ABC and
BOC were equal. One certification body with uniform standard, after any
grandfathering, was their goal. I am sure that the ABC negotiating team
bargained in good faith and I am also sure that irrespective of what the
BOC board member wanted to do, the BOC administration, as it had done
several times in the past, caused those negotiations to fail.
That same Act of Congress said that qualified physical therapist and
qualified occupational therapists could also be providers of custom
orthoses and prostheses. To almost everyone at the NRM that meant that
the therapists needed additional O&P education and clinical experience.
To the APTA qualified meant licensed and nothing more. Even though
the therapist members of the NRM committee admitted that the vast
majority of PTs would never fabricate and rarely fit a custom orthosis
or prosthesis, they still would not even discuss any compromise on their
position. That is why the NRM failed.
As for licensure, my only remaining official position is Vice Chair of
the Illinois O, P, & Ped Licensure Board. Ours is one of the tougher
Practice Acts which, since grandfathering ended in 2003, requires
CAAHEP education, NCOPE residency and passage of the complete ABC
examination. There are no $75 short cuts. IF you practice without a
license or beyond your scope of practice, you would be putting any other
license at risk for ethical violations. With the new CMS regulations it
should be cut and dry in states with licensure. (That is if the DMERCs
follow the rules and don't make another multi-million dollar mistake
like they did in Miami.) To echo Carol, the only way to regulate this
profession is through licensure. Certification is voluntary and only
affects those that are certified. Licensure gives you the privilege to
practice but it can always be taken away.
Terry Supan, CPO, FAAOP, FISPO
Jim DeWees wrote:
> ...
>
> Just as a warning, this will most likely offend many people out
> there. I am sorry if it does, but I am trying to be careful and avoid
> generalities. I will use specific issues, specific cases, but for
> these cases, there are many other ones very similar to what I am
> getting at.
>
> I decided to go into prosthetics after having an accident and becoming
> a BK amputee myself in 1998. I was already in the medical field,
> doing pathology at a university hospital for about 9 years. I had a
> couple choices to make...
Citation
Terry Supan, “Re: Qualifications,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 24, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/225897.
