|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 10:05:00 AM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
LIZ355,
This sounds like a political issue in your state. It is not uncommon for different practice acts to have conflicting information. In my state the chirorpactic practice act prohibits PT's from performing manipulation.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 10:06:00 AM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
According to what Lizz 355 stated,
[QUOTE]In this case, the language is clearly stated, and it is a class 1-misdemeanor. Professionals cannot claim ignorance to issues like this--a bit of common sense says, to me at least, this doesn't sound right.
If you walk up to 10 people on the street, tell them you are a DC, and you have your "board certification in physiotherapy, or in physical therapy", how would the public interpret this?[/QUOTE]...it appears to not make the slightest bit of difference. Your profession's boundary violation, not my profession's. Back to the issue of chiro schools not teaching proper respect for professional boundaries. I don't think you can argue that away.
[QUOTE]In my state the chirorpactic practice act prohibits PT's from performing manipulation.[/QUOTE]This is just one more surreal thing that maintains a big professional chasm.. what presumption, to claim ownership of a modality. That's what I mean about chiropractic and the mental fusion it has with manipulation, even though one is a name and the other a modality, two mutally exclusive ideas. PTs do manipulation research and chiro doesn't mind "borrowing" it to promote itself as a profession, the other twisty fused idea that only serves to widen the chasm.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 11:49:00 AM
|
|
|
cej7
Posts: 33
Joined: August 22, 2004
Status: offline
|
So, UTDC.. In your state, if manipulation was not explicitly prohibited in the PT practice act, I would not just go ahead and do my own thing. What is the point of having a practice act if people act like vigilantes.
~liz
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 12:12:00 PM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
Hi Liz,
Just to be clear, are you saying that if the PT practice act did not forbid spinal manipulation, you would not perform it?
Thanks.
Diane,
Please. You tend to pretend that your profession is innocent of such behavior...The PT political lobby has been involved in the limitation of other professions scope and abilities. While I am able to criticize my profession, you seem to lack this ability to be objective.
Oh and by the way...PT's also borrow chiropractic research to validate what they do, it works both ways and frankly I see nothing wrong with it.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 12:41:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
Jeff,
Please. Don't try to [URL=http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/fallacies.htm]tu quoque[/URL] this thread away.
[QUOTE] In a tu quoque argument, the arguer points out that the opponent has actually done the thing he or she is arguing against, and so the opponent's argument shouldn't be listened to. [/QUOTE]
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 12:50:00 PM
|
|
|
cej7
Posts: 33
Joined: August 22, 2004
Status: offline
|
Thank you, Diane.
Jeff, before I repeat my answer, what point are you trying to make.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 1:13:00 PM
|
|
|
Jon Newman
Posts: 1709
Joined: April 24, 2004
From: Amherst, WI
Status: offline
|
It might be helpful to understand what is taught in the 120 hour certification course. Does anyone know what the curriculum is?
I performed a search for certification programs but came up with zippo.
A list of learning objectives would be nice.
jon
_____________________________
[URL=http://www.sonymusic.com/clips/selection/30/064887/064887_03_03_30.wav]Evidence[/URL]
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 1:43:00 PM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
Liz,
I was not trying to make a point, I was just unsure as to what you meant by going off and doing your own thing, etc. Before I responded, I simply wanted to clarify what you were saying.
Thanks again,
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 1:51:00 PM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
Diane,
I was not engaging in a fallacy (I see you have learned a lot from Allen). I am not saying that your "argument should not be listened to." I am pointing out the obvious fact that political maneuvering between healthcare professions is the norm. Chiros try to keep others from manipulation just as PT's attempt to limit other professions. This is not fallacy, but reality. Try not to read too much into it.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 1:58:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]Chiros try to keep others from manipulation just as PT's attempt to limit other professions. [/QUOTE]I disagree.
1. PT does not do manipulation then tell people on its websites and in its schools that it is able to provide "chiropractic."
2. Chiropractic schools tell students they are learning "physiotherapy", that they can be "physiotherapy providers", and chiropractors feel no hestitation whatsoever in claiming on their websites and in ads that they are also "physiotherapists."
Jeff, what is there here that you just don't get?
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 3:37:00 PM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
Diane,
This is what I don't get:
If you read your last post, your 2 points do not address my statement that you quoted. I am speaking about politics between healthcare providers, period. As I said chiro's have been trying to limit the types of manipulation providers, much as PT's have attempted to limit the practices of others (on a legislative level). It is common behavior, I don't see how:
[QUOTE]1. PT does not do manipulation then tell people on its websites and in its schools that it is able to provide "chiropractic."
2. Chiropractic schools tell students they are learning "physiotherapy", that they can be "physiotherapy providers", and chiropractors feel no hestitation whatsoever in claiming on their websites and in ads that they are also "physiotherapists." [/QUOTE]refutes this, or even addresses this issue.
In any case you have taken a thread on scope and legislation and gone on your usual tirade regarding the chiropractic profession: Our "schools" as you say are irresponsible, we are obtuse, no paragons of virtue/ethics, disrespectful, etc. etc. That's fine, however I feel that I presented several reasonable points which you have not addressed.
In any case, I'm sure this exercise has grown as tiresome for rehabedge readers as it has for me, so I will simply put this aspect of my contributions on hold.
Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 3:45:00 PM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
Jeff,
[QUOTE]I need assistance comprehending the Use of Titles regulation relative to AZ, and how chiropractors can advertise themselves to be "Board Certified in Physiotherapy"?[/QUOTE]My understanding was that this small excerpt from Lizz 355 in her first post was what the thread was about. I don't think it was me who strayed from the point, skirted the issue, tried to wiggle the conversation off this point, or attempted a tu quoque to see if it would deflect the thread away from the topic... In any case, bye bye, I hope you enjoy your weekend too.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 4:31:00 PM
|
|
|
Jon Newman
Posts: 1709
Joined: April 24, 2004
From: Amherst, WI
Status: offline
|
Wait! Jeff, don't go. What's on the curriculum?
jon
_____________________________
[URL=http://www.sonymusic.com/clips/selection/30/064887/064887_03_03_30.wav]Evidence[/URL]
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 5:00:00 PM
|
|
|
chiroortho
Posts: 655
Joined: February 18, 2004
Status: offline
|
Guys I've been watching this thread and staying out of it but I think I'd like to offer a couple of thoughts.
First of all, it's my impression that when most chiros advertise or otherwise state that they offer 'PT', they are thinking in terms of physical therapy (lower case 'p' and 't'), as opposed to Physical Therapy the profession. To DCs this doesn't mean chest thumping for respiratory issues, stroke rehab, balance training, etc. I'd venture to say that 99% of the time it means use of modalities and rehab exercises.
As to the angst expressed here about the use of the proprietary term 'Physical Therapy', I completely understand your desire to keep this particular title to yourselves, I'd probably feel the same way. But consider that PTs advertise that they do 'Rehabilitation' of this or that (which of course they're trained to do and perfectly qualified to do), but what if the medical Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Board complained that PTs shouldn't be able to advertise that they do 'Rehab' because 'Rehabilitation' is part of the proprietary title of PM&R physicians? Wouldn't PTs strenuously object to that? Of course they would, and they would be absolutely right in doing so. The term 'Rehab' (capital 'R') isn't proprietary any more than 'physical therapy' is proprietary, in the sense that the term physical therapy includes certain procedures in the common domain.
I mean this issue could get to the point where battles are launched even over the use of 'Physical Medicine' CPT codes. What if PTs and chiros were forbidden to use these codes because someone said that 'Medicine' is proprietary and only those that have a medical degree should be able to use these codes.
Again, I empathize with the sentiments expressed here. I'm just not sure it's as clear as you think it is. Someone here might say 'but some poor Arkansas PT is being persecuted for doing something he's trained to do just because the Arkansas chiro board says it's chiropractic'. This is slightly different IMO because the fight seems to be over a PROCEDURE, not the use of a title. And oddly enough, I'll bet that part of the Arkansas PTs defense is that the type of manipulation that he used is a common domain procedure, thus he can't be accused of giving a 'chiropractic' manipulation. As far as I'm concerned, he's right. If he's properly trained to use manipulation, he should be able to use manipulation. Would chiropractic benefit if nobody else on the face of the earth could do manipulations but DCs, sure it would. But that doesn't make it right.
Not trying to inflame things here, use this or that fallacy, etc. I'm simply trying to offer a little bit of a different perspective for your consideration.
_____________________________
Greg Priest, DC, DABCO
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 5:40:00 PM
|
|
|
Jon Newman
Posts: 1709
Joined: April 24, 2004
From: Amherst, WI
Status: offline
|
Hi Greg,
I think you are suggesting that the physiotherapy certification is essentially a certification to do modalities. Is that correct?
I think the business side of caring is unglamorous on both sides of the aisle. Both have a bit of a Borg mentality but without the hyper-rationality of a cosmic superpower.
That said, 'rehabilitation' is quite close to the truth of what it is PT's are doing and, as you postulated, would like draw a strong objection from us for that reason.
On the other hand, I'm not sure that modality use is captured by the term physiotherapy. And since physiotherapy does carry other meanings (physiotherapy = physical therapy just about any other country one goes to) and there is a professional group upset by it, changing the name of that aspect doesn't seem like it would turn the chiropractic profession on its head. They can still keep doing what they're doing. No one is looking to limit that as far as I can tell. I may be wrong about that though.
Here I'm assuming modality use is the lion's share of what a certificate in physiotherapy means. That has yet to be confirmed by anyone. These are some questions I ask myself: If it is the case (that it is essentially modality use), how did that term get chosen? What would be the disadvantage of changing the term? What advantages are there to keeping the term?
As far as coding. If it got that silly, once again name changes would likely be the result versus changing the substance of what the professions do.
jon
_____________________________
[URL=http://www.sonymusic.com/clips/selection/30/064887/064887_03_03_30.wav]Evidence[/URL]
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 6:18:00 PM
|
|
|
vt2c1ms
Posts: 74
Joined: May 9, 2005
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
I'm having fun reading the posts. Interesting, chiropractic versus Chiropractic. Physical Therapy versus physical therapy. It's amazing how a capital letter changes things. I'm learning alot, keep it going people, just remember that 50 million people lost their lives in the last world war. Keep this "small stuff" in perspective and don't lose your cool.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 6, 2005 7:50:00 PM
|
|
|
UTDC
Posts: 222
Joined: December 21, 2003
Status: offline
|
Hi Jon,
I'm sorry, but not having a license in AZ, I don't know what the particulars of the 120 program are.
Diane,
I think I did a fair job of demonstrating where you went way off topic. Since you are accusing me of doing the same, maybe you could give an example. Honestly, sometimes I wonder if you even read other's posterior before plunging ahead in your monologue.
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 7, 2005 4:24:00 AM
|
|
|
chiroortho
Posts: 655
Joined: February 18, 2004
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]I think you are suggesting that the physiotherapy certification is essentially a certification to do modalities. Is that correct?[/QUOTE]Exactly right Jon.
I'm virtually certain that DCs refer to modality use as physiotherapy because (1) modalities are generally considered to be part of physiotherapy proper and every DC knows exactly what is meant when another DC says 'I use PT in my practice' (this may sound odd to you, but 'straight' DCs abhor the use of adjunctive modalities because 'it's not chiropractic'), and (2) advertising that one offers 'modalities' is kind of awkward.
As for me, in our office all of this (modalities, etc.) falls under the heading of 'physical medicine', which is our preferred terminology anyway. I won't lie to you and say that the term 'physical therapy' is never used (as in a staff member asking me if I want them to use 'PT' [meaning modalities] on this or that patient), but when it is, it's just out of force of habit and rolls off the tongue easier than 'modalities' and 'physical medicine'. Kind of like when you guys often refer to each other as 'PTs' instead of 'Physical Therapists'. So for DCs it's really nothing more than convention and convenience. It would make absolutely no difference to me if we (DCs) couldn't use the term PT to describe modalities. None whatsoever.
_____________________________
Greg Priest, DC, DABCO
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 7, 2005 6:55:00 AM
|
|
|
Diane
Posts: 1507
Joined: March 9, 2001
From: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Status: offline
|
Here's an idea, chiros; in order to avoid stomping all over our PT toes by using our professional designation for your modalities, you could call such treatment "PEM", which is short, sweet, and stands for "physical/electrical modalities". It might take a few years to catch on but could lead to a lasting detente.
PTs who provide manipulation could call it... well, they'll probably continue to call it manipulation, because that's all it is. It's not chiropractic. (Jeff, I will continue to link these two issues because they are inseparable in my mind as examples of uneven legislating; apologies to anyone who thinks it's off track.)
Greg, Jeff, buddy, there are still questions lingering about what exactly you learn to do in those 120 hours of instruction in "PEM".
|
|
|
|
|
Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles - August 7, 2005 11:00:00 AM
|
|
|
dosrinc
Posts: 335
Joined: December 9, 2004
From: Bonita Springs
Status: offline
|
Anyone who doesn't honestly agree that Chrio's in the US utilize the terms Physical Therapy, Physiotherapy and so on in their advertisements as a way to take advantage of the good name that Physical Therapy has in this country and to mislead their patients into believing that what they are recieving is the same care that they would get at a true PT's office has got their head burried in the sand.
No fear in PT's advertising that they do "chiropractic" or in any other way attempting to associate themselves with the chiropractic profession because, and I am sorry if this is harsh, it carries a negative perception with a good percentage of the population and with our referring physicians, sorry to insert a bit of truth into this argument but we all know this to be the case.
Rick
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
0.094
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> [RehabEdge Forum] >> Open Forum >> Re: State Practice Act & Use of Titles 
