Qualifications (Continued)
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Description
Collection
Title:
Qualifications (Continued)
Creator:
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Date:
1/23/2006
Text:
I thought you all might be interested in the following conversation.
Carol
_____
----- Original Message -----
From: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD) < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: Carey Glass < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 3:46 PM
Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Agreed!!!!!!!!!! - Don't give up the fight - I just hope and pray that people in all fields (O&P, PT, OT) wake up soon!
Thanks for your comments -
Best,
Carol
-----Original Message-----
From: Carey Glass [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:39 PM
To: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Hi Carol,
I hope this note finds you well and fully recovered. To answer your question, Yes New Jersey has licensure and we were actually the first state to pass a licensure bill. As far as our discussion PT's and the turf wars, I am dismayed that the real battle isn't between the allied health practitioners of P&O, PT, OT and Rec Therapy, but with the ...health insurance industry.
If anyone takes a good look they will see we are over regulated and underpaid for our services while insurance companies continue to dictate care and care options without the benefit of expert consultation. The irony of all this is that the small P&O and PT practice are so busy try to make a living they don't see what is happening the national stage. Just the fact that the consensus committee never was able to come to agreement is a perfect example of the near-sightedness of those individuals who stick to what they see as a turf war.
I guess people of compromise are still the silent majority who haven't been able to get their point across to the leaders and lobbyists for the major organizations. I've read some of the emails and articles by the APTA and others and I am really disappointed in the leadership's lack of understanding. The relationship that I have with my PT and OT colleagues has never been better and we understand our roles in the rehabilitation team but because of changes in reimbursement, the Team cannot function like it use to.
I hope that in the future insurance companies will understand that outcomes for our patients only comes from successful team work.
Sincerely,
Carey Glass CPO, LPO, FAAOP
----- Original Message -----
From: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD) < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: Carey Glass < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 5:47 PM
Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Hi, Carey -
... Thank you for your comments. I wasn't aware of your fight in NJ to obtain licensure. Did you obtain it? - I must admit that I've heard similar complaints in other states, which surprises me. The only reason I can think of as to why PTs would object to O&P licensure would have to do with language and/or identification of potential overlap in certain practice areas, otherwise known as encroachment.
Everybody seems to be afraid of that, maybe rightly so - I guess it depends on the practice areas. We PTs are still battling chiropractors, so I know how threatening encroachment issues can be. Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense to me why PTs would fight O&P regulation. It really does help to keep out the riff-raff!
I must agree with you, also, in your comments about joining together to stand against insurance companies. It's a sad state of affairs that premiums are on the increase (sometimes they are quite unreasonable) while benefits continue to shrink. Uniting together to fight on that battleground seems worthwhile for all of us - I have no argument with you there. Some of us are already involved in that fight (such as in the ACA's effort in their Action Plan for People with Limb Loss [APPLL]). Your suggestion is well taken.
Thanks again for your comments and thoughts. I only hope that this topic doesn't just disappear off the radar - It's too important to drop - I've heard from many PTs and O&Ps who agree.
Best wishes,
Carol
-----Original Message-----
From: Carey Glass [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 11:20 AM
To: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Dear Carol,
In your letter to Dale you state that PT's have not hindered legislation for O&P licensure, well I beg to differ. In fact in the State of NJ they acted continuously to try and stop the legislation. This caused great financial expense to people who only wanted to improve care and protect the public. I find it interesting how quickly people forget their opposition once the licensure was past. The interesting point about your average PT is that they have no interest in doing O&P but the executive boards of their organizations seem to find it necessary to constantly harp on their wish to supply O&P. Maybe the rank and file should reconsider who their leaders are and get people to represent their true interests. Sorry if I am on a soap box but each state has its issue as well as the national issues. What we really should be looking into is why insurance companies are able to regulate themselves to the point where your patient pays for insurance and cannot receive benefits because the insurance company has either capped payments or says that we don't pay for that service. This issue is a national one which effects all parts of rehabilitation. Instead of fighting each other we should be fighting the insurance companies and their selective and reduced payment system.
Now that I have vented please have a most joyous and happy holiday whatever you celebrate! Merry Xmas, Happy Chanukah, Happy Kwanza
Carey Glass CPO, LPO, FAAOP
Carol
_____
----- Original Message -----
From: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD) < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: Carey Glass < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 3:46 PM
Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Agreed!!!!!!!!!! - Don't give up the fight - I just hope and pray that people in all fields (O&P, PT, OT) wake up soon!
Thanks for your comments -
Best,
Carol
-----Original Message-----
From: Carey Glass [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 9:39 PM
To: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Hi Carol,
I hope this note finds you well and fully recovered. To answer your question, Yes New Jersey has licensure and we were actually the first state to pass a licensure bill. As far as our discussion PT's and the turf wars, I am dismayed that the real battle isn't between the allied health practitioners of P&O, PT, OT and Rec Therapy, but with the ...health insurance industry.
If anyone takes a good look they will see we are over regulated and underpaid for our services while insurance companies continue to dictate care and care options without the benefit of expert consultation. The irony of all this is that the small P&O and PT practice are so busy try to make a living they don't see what is happening the national stage. Just the fact that the consensus committee never was able to come to agreement is a perfect example of the near-sightedness of those individuals who stick to what they see as a turf war.
I guess people of compromise are still the silent majority who haven't been able to get their point across to the leaders and lobbyists for the major organizations. I've read some of the emails and articles by the APTA and others and I am really disappointed in the leadership's lack of understanding. The relationship that I have with my PT and OT colleagues has never been better and we understand our roles in the rehabilitation team but because of changes in reimbursement, the Team cannot function like it use to.
I hope that in the future insurance companies will understand that outcomes for our patients only comes from successful team work.
Sincerely,
Carey Glass CPO, LPO, FAAOP
----- Original Message -----
From: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD) < <Email Address Redacted> >
To: Carey Glass < <Email Address Redacted> >
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 5:47 PM
Subject: RE: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Hi, Carey -
... Thank you for your comments. I wasn't aware of your fight in NJ to obtain licensure. Did you obtain it? - I must admit that I've heard similar complaints in other states, which surprises me. The only reason I can think of as to why PTs would object to O&P licensure would have to do with language and/or identification of potential overlap in certain practice areas, otherwise known as encroachment.
Everybody seems to be afraid of that, maybe rightly so - I guess it depends on the practice areas. We PTs are still battling chiropractors, so I know how threatening encroachment issues can be. Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense to me why PTs would fight O&P regulation. It really does help to keep out the riff-raff!
I must agree with you, also, in your comments about joining together to stand against insurance companies. It's a sad state of affairs that premiums are on the increase (sometimes they are quite unreasonable) while benefits continue to shrink. Uniting together to fight on that battleground seems worthwhile for all of us - I have no argument with you there. Some of us are already involved in that fight (such as in the ACA's effort in their Action Plan for People with Limb Loss [APPLL]). Your suggestion is well taken.
Thanks again for your comments and thoughts. I only hope that this topic doesn't just disappear off the radar - It's too important to drop - I've heard from many PTs and O&Ps who agree.
Best wishes,
Carol
-----Original Message-----
From: Carey Glass [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 11:20 AM
To: Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD)
Subject: Re: [OANDP-L] Qualifications
Dear Carol,
In your letter to Dale you state that PT's have not hindered legislation for O&P licensure, well I beg to differ. In fact in the State of NJ they acted continuously to try and stop the legislation. This caused great financial expense to people who only wanted to improve care and protect the public. I find it interesting how quickly people forget their opposition once the licensure was past. The interesting point about your average PT is that they have no interest in doing O&P but the executive boards of their organizations seem to find it necessary to constantly harp on their wish to supply O&P. Maybe the rank and file should reconsider who their leaders are and get people to represent their true interests. Sorry if I am on a soap box but each state has its issue as well as the national issues. What we really should be looking into is why insurance companies are able to regulate themselves to the point where your patient pays for insurance and cannot receive benefits because the insurance company has either capped payments or says that we don't pay for that service. This issue is a national one which effects all parts of rehabilitation. Instead of fighting each other we should be fighting the insurance companies and their selective and reduced payment system.
Now that I have vented please have a most joyous and happy holiday whatever you celebrate! Merry Xmas, Happy Chanukah, Happy Kwanza
Carey Glass CPO, LPO, FAAOP
Citation
Sheredos, Carol (NIH/NICHD), “Qualifications (Continued),” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 24, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/226048.
