Re: SMT (Full Version)

All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Manual Therapy



Message

JLS_PT_OCS -> Re: SMT (October 12, 2005 4:49:00 AM)

Diane- I see the sexist angle you are mentioning. My wife is something of a feminist, and it is interesting to see the historical development of professions that were predominantly male vs predominantly female.
Obviously, in western culture, the male professions dominated the female ones in terms of authoriy, and only when sufficient numbers of males joined a previously-female profession did the balance of power shift. Doesn't say much about the relative worth of males vs females, but does say a lot about the degree of built-in discrimination that's out there. It effectively means we're only half as far along (in medicine, science, economics, the arts etc etc) as we otherwise might be as a culture. Sad, huh?
J



Diane -> Re: SMT (October 12, 2005 4:57:00 AM)

Yes Jason, it's only been 150 years or so that women have been involved in health care in the institutional sense in any major way. Yay Flo. She raised the survival rate of the Crimean war wounded by 700% (stats that she kept herself) with nothing more than boiled bandages and carbolic acid applied liberally to surfaces/tools that came into contact with wounds. Of course, she had to convince/persuade (male) authority that she belonged at the front. Likewise, so did early rehabbers have to convince (male) authority that they (largely female) had something to offer war amputees besides life as invalids.



Barrett -> Re: SMT (October 12, 2005 5:01:00 AM)

Diane,

Ernie Johnson M.D. stopped her. A legendary physician in that specialty, he presided over a local culture of physician-controlled PT in the 70s that I doubt still exists though I have absolutely no contact with my alma mater. Last time I stopped by a gathering of OSU people at a national convention the school's director couldn't figure out how to pronounce my name. I assume she isn't a fan of my writing. I've offered to speak there-gratis-and been ignored.

Think I'd better just stay away.



Diane -> Re: SMT (October 12, 2005 5:12:00 AM)

I see you are not a fan of either of them.
Don't much blame you.
So that was the scoop/local history in your area.

Here, there was never really any restriction on manip. other than sexist restriction. The Brits who retired from the UK army populated Canada (we are a colonial vestige who still sport the queen on our money, you know..) and set up manip practices much the way chiros have since their inception. I guess the MD authority here weren't strong enough to stop them. Or the chiro authorities either. The Brit army PTs were not interested apparently in toeing anyone's line but their own. They made the Canadian system safe for direct access private practice PT from the beginning of PT in Canada, well, BC anyway. Good for them. Hurray for Canadian ex-Brit Army mobilipulators. Much as I dislike SMT I like very much that a group of SMT PT practitioners made Canada safe for PT.



JLS_PT_OCS -> Re: SMT (October 12, 2005 5:55:00 AM)

Yeah, you Canucks have had the right idea about PT services from the beginning. Too bad us southern neighbors are having to fight so hard for the basics.
I seriously doubt this DPT thing would have ever come up if we were just allowed to participate the healthcare system without interference from others. But then again, look how it's made us grow...
J



sinistre -> Re: SMT (January 24, 2006 10:35:00 AM)

Hey, what's the status on PTs using manips in the US now? I heard the Chiro org did manage to ban us from using manips - atleast in some states.

I might just be moving there to work sometime during the next 5 years or so - I would hate to be prohibited to use my skills.



JLS_PT_OCS -> Re: SMT (January 24, 2006 1:20:00 PM)

Ole-
This has been done to death on these boards, man.

I realize you're new and don't know. Try some searches for "manipulation" and "arkansas".
That'll get you started.
J



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode

0.047