|
SJBird55 -> Re: Decision in Arkansas Case reached (April 14, 2005 2:04:00 AM)
|
What I don't understand in that whole case is that the PT board did determine that he was practicing physical therapy and that what he was doing was within the scope of his practice. Since that was the case... well, how come there technically wasn't a battle between the chiropractic board and the PT board? Meaning - he as an individual should not have been involved in the battle between the boards. In my opinion, I have a hard enough time worrying about myself and making sure I'm practicing within what is written for me to follow, am I also supposed to know exactly what the chiropractic act states (or if the athletic trainers have something, or if the massage therapists have something, or if the personal trainers have something)? I don't think logic was followed in this court case.
And... there is research out there that indicates that a "pop" doesn't mean a darn thing - results of the technique can be achieved with or without a pop. That logically indicates that the technique really isn't "mobilizing the bones." So, if it isn't mobilizing the bones, then technically it isn't manipulating the bones. With this particular scenario, Barrett's screaming for mechanism would have helped Teston out - no one knows how the technique works, so poor Teston is being judged based on an assumption that the bones are being mobilized, when that may not even be the truth.
And then the final screwy thing... that second "patient." Was that second "patient" really a "patient?" Did that person actually really and truly have something wrong OR was that person a pseudo patient coming in to set the therapist up? If that "patient" had an agenda... that right there should be punishable. Because if that issue isn't addressed or wasn't addressed, I believe it sets the tone that anyone can "spy" if you want to call it that and come up with some case and put it through and make some money. That is NOT the role of our court system.
|
|
|
|