FW: [OANDP-L] Seeking Source of Proponents of O&P Regulation in New York / Follow up
Tony Barr
Description
Collection
Title:
FW: [OANDP-L] Seeking Source of Proponents of O&P Regulation in New York / Follow up
Creator:
Tony Barr
Date:
4/12/2006
Text:
Is there a licensure bill that is truly working? Are there tangible examples
of the process of licensure working? Are we designing a Trojan horse built
on anecdotal information, or is there substance to this implied gift of
professional recognition?
The bottom line for me is...If you pass a licensure bill that really
protects patients, and truly upholds professional recognition, and creates
an environment of accountability...I can see the light...
If licensure becomes another pseudo-standard, another place we need to drop
more coin to continue on the ride...why bother? Be kind with the responses
please...
Mike Madden, CPO
To better comply with Mike's request, to be kind with responses, and
because politeness is most often relayed as artificial good humor...here is
my response to a vent view points of a serious subject to better ensure
qualified health care and patient protection. However, I first invite Mike
and others to better see the light and who don't adamately support O&P
Regulation, to review and read what their regulation battle scared
colleagues have to say about it in most all regulated states, in the below
links.
Licensure: Learning from Mistakes
<URL Redacted>
Licensure: Setting O&P Professionals Apart from General Providers
<URL Redacted>
Licensure: Advice from Battle-Hardened Warriors
<URL Redacted>
My take:
If a consumer complains/reports that there is an impaired licensed
practitioner such as a drug, alcohol or mentally deranged licensed
practitioner working on them ,the impaired practitioner program would
investigate them possibly require periodic blood tests and periodic
professional check ups and unannounced follow up to see that they were
helped through the counseling they would need or until they were off the
drugs. If they did not comply their license would be taken away.
In unregulated states anyone found to be an alcoholic drug addict or
mentally impaired can continue to practice without impunity. Does that not
help protect the patient?
Not to say that that New York would have any unscrupulous providers,(?) the
licensure law in Florida and other states have been very effective in
screening out potential criminals and or sex offenders. It has disciplined
practitioners that have practiced beyond the scope of their practice by
imposing large fines and further continuous investigations.
It assures that practitioners receive minimum educational training and
continuing education. Prior to licensure many private practice practitioners
particularly in South Florida did not hold certifications at all or had not
been to a single continuing ed program in years.In Florida each licensed
practitioner has a continuing education audit conducted on the them in each
licensing period.
Becoming a licensed practitioner is being accountable to your profession and
your patients.
It keeps out untrained unscrupulous individuals that would prey on the
venerable.
Mr. Madden points out why bother if the licensure law doesn't protect the
patient so I ask why have any laws at all? If criminals are just going to
break them anyway , why have them? We could eliminate the police departments
,the judicial system and close the prisons. I think he is on to something
here. Just think of the money we could save ? :)
That is an argument?
You can twist it anyway you want but in the end , licensure will provide
protections to the majority of patients from unlicensed , untrained or
unscrupulous persons and will give ALL patients recourse if they are abused
or mistreated by one of these individuals. This is an undeniable fact.
My gut feeling is those providers whom adamantly oppose licensure in this
highly specialized health care arena, don't see it as not better
protecting the patient from receiving unqualified services, but oppose it
because:
1)They will require being properly trained to perform licensed activities
2)They will have accountability and oversight that will be enacted with
regulation,
3)They will be required to financially support the cost of having it.
Perhaps providers from the other regulated states might care to comment.
Can ya see the light a little clearer now Mike ?
Tony Barr
of the process of licensure working? Are we designing a Trojan horse built
on anecdotal information, or is there substance to this implied gift of
professional recognition?
The bottom line for me is...If you pass a licensure bill that really
protects patients, and truly upholds professional recognition, and creates
an environment of accountability...I can see the light...
If licensure becomes another pseudo-standard, another place we need to drop
more coin to continue on the ride...why bother? Be kind with the responses
please...
Mike Madden, CPO
To better comply with Mike's request, to be kind with responses, and
because politeness is most often relayed as artificial good humor...here is
my response to a vent view points of a serious subject to better ensure
qualified health care and patient protection. However, I first invite Mike
and others to better see the light and who don't adamately support O&P
Regulation, to review and read what their regulation battle scared
colleagues have to say about it in most all regulated states, in the below
links.
Licensure: Learning from Mistakes
<URL Redacted>
Licensure: Setting O&P Professionals Apart from General Providers
<URL Redacted>
Licensure: Advice from Battle-Hardened Warriors
<URL Redacted>
My take:
If a consumer complains/reports that there is an impaired licensed
practitioner such as a drug, alcohol or mentally deranged licensed
practitioner working on them ,the impaired practitioner program would
investigate them possibly require periodic blood tests and periodic
professional check ups and unannounced follow up to see that they were
helped through the counseling they would need or until they were off the
drugs. If they did not comply their license would be taken away.
In unregulated states anyone found to be an alcoholic drug addict or
mentally impaired can continue to practice without impunity. Does that not
help protect the patient?
Not to say that that New York would have any unscrupulous providers,(?) the
licensure law in Florida and other states have been very effective in
screening out potential criminals and or sex offenders. It has disciplined
practitioners that have practiced beyond the scope of their practice by
imposing large fines and further continuous investigations.
It assures that practitioners receive minimum educational training and
continuing education. Prior to licensure many private practice practitioners
particularly in South Florida did not hold certifications at all or had not
been to a single continuing ed program in years.In Florida each licensed
practitioner has a continuing education audit conducted on the them in each
licensing period.
Becoming a licensed practitioner is being accountable to your profession and
your patients.
It keeps out untrained unscrupulous individuals that would prey on the
venerable.
Mr. Madden points out why bother if the licensure law doesn't protect the
patient so I ask why have any laws at all? If criminals are just going to
break them anyway , why have them? We could eliminate the police departments
,the judicial system and close the prisons. I think he is on to something
here. Just think of the money we could save ? :)
That is an argument?
You can twist it anyway you want but in the end , licensure will provide
protections to the majority of patients from unlicensed , untrained or
unscrupulous persons and will give ALL patients recourse if they are abused
or mistreated by one of these individuals. This is an undeniable fact.
My gut feeling is those providers whom adamantly oppose licensure in this
highly specialized health care arena, don't see it as not better
protecting the patient from receiving unqualified services, but oppose it
because:
1)They will require being properly trained to perform licensed activities
2)They will have accountability and oversight that will be enacted with
regulation,
3)They will be required to financially support the cost of having it.
Perhaps providers from the other regulated states might care to comment.
Can ya see the light a little clearer now Mike ?
Tony Barr
Citation
Tony Barr, “FW: [OANDP-L] Seeking Source of Proponents of O&P Regulation in New York / Follow up,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 5, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/226621.
