remarks
Oswald, Paul Trent
Description
Collection
Title:
remarks
Creator:
Oswald, Paul Trent
Date:
12/14/2005
Text:
After waiting for responses to flow back to the list serve, I want to
make sure that everyone understands that my initial reaction was to the
separation of standards and the absence of inclusion of proficiencies or
practice standards. Exclusionary rhetoric is what keeps communication
guarded and arms folded. I understand and am more sensitive to the
passions and professionalism that I see from the responses. Thank you!
Neg Reg (sounds disparaging all by itself) happened and I for one do not
know what happened or why it happened other than why it was convened.
Please provide for me a link to any postscripts or position papers that
came out of these. Or does it matter?
After filtering through perceived disparaging remarks, this is what I
am hearing. Because of the absence of licensure there is more
opportunity for unprofessional practices. Because of a lack of a
unifying front, there is no oversight nor is there any review of our own
standards and practices as they are being applied. There has been a
division of the responsibility in the care of the amputee because of
historical rehabilitation clinic approach which included the check out
of a prosthesis by a PT and other overlapping responsibilities predating
the Allied Health rehabilitation team. Please tell me if I am wrong.
First I use the term historical to remind everyone that there was built
into the Rehabilitation practices the check out procedures of a
prosthesis by a Physical Therapist. There were rehabilitation centers
staffed by Occupational Therapists to check out and train upper limb
amputees in the same manner. These were presented as the historical
model of rehabilitation delivery when I was in school in 1978. These
were presented to us as an opportunity to understand the environment we
were entering into, anticipate and exchange dialogue and for us to
understand that in some PT schools this practice was still being taught.
Using this information I developed long term professional relationships
and friendships with Physical Therapists, Occupational Therapists and
Nurses. Thank you Barney!
Understanding that there is a historical component to the dialogue
presented, can we look forward and embrace ideas that can bring all of
our thinking into a new age. I too believe that the Academy is the
vehicle by which we can effect change but all, including AOPA, ABC and
NCOPEs, charges are specific to their charters. They do not include
Dispute Resolution, Medical Review or licensure oversight. Or do they?
There was an organization looking into state licensure that was
disbanded. What was it charged with and why did it go away? What are the
roadblocks to a unified standard? Who has the teeth built into their
charters? Many questions.
Ms Sheredos is right in saying that we are in control of our own destiny
and should stand up and do it. If it is already being done, then please
enlighten me and maybe some others out there who have not weighed in. I
am proud of the profession I entered in 1971, have taught and been
taught by PTs , OTs , RNs as well as patients, have been effected by
decisions made by our leadership, bring to the table skills of court
mediation and curriculum development besides 30 years of clinical
practice and am in a position now to invest time and energy in
developing a solution. First WE have to identify the problem for
ourselves? Please help me in identifying what table and where.
Paul Oswald CPO
Director O&P Program
OSU-Okmulgee
918-293-5327
<Email Address Redacted>
make sure that everyone understands that my initial reaction was to the
separation of standards and the absence of inclusion of proficiencies or
practice standards. Exclusionary rhetoric is what keeps communication
guarded and arms folded. I understand and am more sensitive to the
passions and professionalism that I see from the responses. Thank you!
Neg Reg (sounds disparaging all by itself) happened and I for one do not
know what happened or why it happened other than why it was convened.
Please provide for me a link to any postscripts or position papers that
came out of these. Or does it matter?
After filtering through perceived disparaging remarks, this is what I
am hearing. Because of the absence of licensure there is more
opportunity for unprofessional practices. Because of a lack of a
unifying front, there is no oversight nor is there any review of our own
standards and practices as they are being applied. There has been a
division of the responsibility in the care of the amputee because of
historical rehabilitation clinic approach which included the check out
of a prosthesis by a PT and other overlapping responsibilities predating
the Allied Health rehabilitation team. Please tell me if I am wrong.
First I use the term historical to remind everyone that there was built
into the Rehabilitation practices the check out procedures of a
prosthesis by a Physical Therapist. There were rehabilitation centers
staffed by Occupational Therapists to check out and train upper limb
amputees in the same manner. These were presented as the historical
model of rehabilitation delivery when I was in school in 1978. These
were presented to us as an opportunity to understand the environment we
were entering into, anticipate and exchange dialogue and for us to
understand that in some PT schools this practice was still being taught.
Using this information I developed long term professional relationships
and friendships with Physical Therapists, Occupational Therapists and
Nurses. Thank you Barney!
Understanding that there is a historical component to the dialogue
presented, can we look forward and embrace ideas that can bring all of
our thinking into a new age. I too believe that the Academy is the
vehicle by which we can effect change but all, including AOPA, ABC and
NCOPEs, charges are specific to their charters. They do not include
Dispute Resolution, Medical Review or licensure oversight. Or do they?
There was an organization looking into state licensure that was
disbanded. What was it charged with and why did it go away? What are the
roadblocks to a unified standard? Who has the teeth built into their
charters? Many questions.
Ms Sheredos is right in saying that we are in control of our own destiny
and should stand up and do it. If it is already being done, then please
enlighten me and maybe some others out there who have not weighed in. I
am proud of the profession I entered in 1971, have taught and been
taught by PTs , OTs , RNs as well as patients, have been effected by
decisions made by our leadership, bring to the table skills of court
mediation and curriculum development besides 30 years of clinical
practice and am in a position now to invest time and energy in
developing a solution. First WE have to identify the problem for
ourselves? Please help me in identifying what table and where.
Paul Oswald CPO
Director O&P Program
OSU-Okmulgee
918-293-5327
<Email Address Redacted>
Citation
Oswald, Paul Trent, “remarks,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/225913.
