Hello Evan:
Like me, you are entitled to your opinion and thanks for sharing. That's
what this mailing list is about!
Ron
----------
On 2/24/2001, Evan Kay Said:
EK> on 2/23/01 5:29 PM, Ron Carson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Hello John and Thanks for Responding:
>>
>> I want to offer the proverbial olive branch to John and others who may be
>> offended, mad or anything else because of my comments. Based on previous
>> experience, I know it is easy for these professional debates to digress or
>> be misconstrued as personal attacks.
>>
>> Please understand that my comments are NOT directed to any person and are
>> not meant to be an attack on the person's worth or dignity. Instead, I hope
>> to discuss issues relating to the practice of OT. It is however, difficult
>> to talk about OT practice without occasional reference to individuals doing
>> the treatment.
>>
>> All this being said, I have interspersed my comments with John's original
>> message.
EK> Ron,
EK> I find your recent behavior on the list troubling in many ways. You seem to
EK> have appointed yourself as the current guardian of the OT profession as a
EK> whole, and appear to feel that you alone should decide what OT is and is
EK> not.
EK> I your recent posting of conversations from other sources should serve as a
EK> warning to others to be very careful about how you word something because
EK> you may find yourself accused of breaking the law.
EK> If I were you, I would be exceedingly uncomfortable with some of my
EK> statements. If I read you correctly, you have just told the world (yes
EK> entire world) that John should have his license pulled. If I were you, I
EK> would re read the Occupational Therapy code of ethics. Particularly the
EK> part about treating others professionals with respect and honesty. If John
EK> were to be the vindictive type, he might take what you said as professional
EK> slander and seek civil monetary damages.
EK> The other thing that bothers me is that as a fairly strict occupational
EK> performance practicioner (you are in practice aren't you), your postion is
EK> simply one of many current theories that make up our profession. I would be
EK> interested to see if your own practice could stand up to the rigors of your
EK> occupational science model.
EK> I respect Johns position becuase he has been able to adapt to a practice
EK> setting that apparently divides the body up into two areas. I understand
EK> your discomfort with it, Just I am uncomfortable with the current SNF system
EK> which seems to define OT a dressing, eating, bathing, John and others who
EK> are out in the real world of OT are often faced with difficult choices.
EK> These choices often mean the difference between staying in your practice
EK> setting and doing some good or having your service become irrelevant becuase
EK> it does not fit into the payors models.
EK> I have been critical in the past of academic practicioners becuase I dont
EK> think that academia has always been the cutting edge of OT. If you look at
EK> other professions, the heros of those professions are often the people who
EK> are in practice. In our profession that would be people such as Lorna Jean
EK> King. I think there is a lot of good OT happening at the community level.
EK> But I digress. My point is that the occupational theories are a refreshing
EK> return to the earlier practice of OT and we should continue. But as someone
EK> recently said, we cannot hang our hat on occupation alone. We must also
EK> consider the occupational performance areas (Dunn Model) and address those
EK> as needed. To simply say that I am an occupational performance practicioner
EK> ignors the components behind occupational performance, and makes OT less
EK> viable for the future, not more viable. Being strict occupational
EK> performace practicioner who ignors the functional component areas is sort
EK> of like the bibilcal story of building ones house on sandy ground as opposed
EK> to solid ground.
EK> I realize that in the past, you have not let the facts or the vote get in
EK> the way of you having your opinion, but I hope you will be more respectful
EK> of your colleagues on the list.
EK> With Respect,
EK> Evan Kay
EK> ---------
EK> Send commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Put commands in the messages BODY not in
the SUBJECT
EK> unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EK> [unsubscribe from the list]
EK> subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EK> [subscribe to the list]
EK> subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EK> [subscribe to the digested version of the list]
EK> help
EK> [receive help on sending commands]
EK> ---------
---------
You can send the following commands to [EMAIL PROTECTED] [put command in the
message body]
unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
help
---------
