Ron,
Just remember that facilities are in business to make money. Don't be picky. PT is not picky. If it comes down to budget cuts and the value of rehab services, because you turn down requests for service, OT will be the first to go. Then, PT will the only rehab profession at this facility doing their work and OT also. Yes, the referral might have been for UE tightnes, which effects occupation. Accepting this referral would have been a perfect opportunity to demonstrate the value of OT and the use of occupation in physical rehab.
Irene
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Carson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 10:15 AM
To: Dana Levinson
Subject: Re[2]: Dichotomy of teaching OT
Hello Dana:
I don't necessarily disagree with all you say but I do NOT think that as a
professional organization, we market ourselves as being UE experts. AOTA's
web site, state practice acts, etc talk about meaningful activity, function,
ADL's, etc, they don't talk about neurological and musculoskeletal
impairments as the primary focus of our concern. And yet, on the practice
front, we practice as if we are UE experts in physical medicine.
I am not a social occupational therapist, I am an occupational therapist. I
try to do what it is the professional organization says we do. I don't
exclude biophysical from my practice area, but it's not the reason for my
treatment. I think we can spend many e-mail discussing what it is we do, but
let me ask you a question; "When you receive a client referral, how do you
know if that client is appropriate for OT treatment?"
With regard to focusing on both ends of the continuum, I don't think
that's a viable option. I believe that as a profession, we must
identify which end from which we want to operate. As far as I can tell,
we will NEVER be seen as orthopedic experts because that market is
already full. However, the market for expertise in occupation is wide
open and all we need do is step through the door.
Yesterday, I received a hospice referral for a woman with bilateral
upper extremity tightness. The therapy director told me that she
thought of me first but that either an OT or PT could go. I told the
director that if the primary complaint is upper extremity tightness
then she should send a PT. Now, some OT's think I'm crazy, but I think
it's the right choice. I don't want to receive referrals because of UE
problems, I want referrals because of occupational problems.
Ron
============================================
On 10/1/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
DL> Ron,
DL> You're what I call a "Social Occupational Therapist," the OT version of
DL> a Social Psychologist. The other type of psychologist is the
DL> BioPsychologist. In my opinion, there is a tremendous lack of "Bio
DL> Occupational Therapists." In essense, the difference is studying the
DL> field at a Macro vs. Micro Level. This has been a deep debate in the
DL> Philosophy of Science. Which is better? Which is necessary? The answer
DL> is both.
DL> Imagine what psychology would be if purists took over. The entire field
DL> would be doing psychoanalysis. What made Psychology such a booming field
DL> is that they expanded their scope of research and practice... So much so
DL> that there is an entire medical specialty (Psychiatry, obviously) based
DL> on Biopsychology.
DL> Here's what it comes down to... You want to focus on Occupation
DL> (Macrolevel)... But occupation is accomplished through micro-level
DL> processes (e.g., UE strength). IMHO, if OT wants to grow, it will need
DL> to be thoroughly knowledgeable at both micro and macro levels. What will
DL> distinguish us from PT is that we can (and will hopefully) focus our
DL> efforts at both levels while PT focuses on only the micro level.
DL> Just my opinion.
DL> Dana
DL> On Tue, 1 Oct 2002 11:03:52 -0400, Ron Carson wrote:
>>Today, �in �my �human occupation class, I spent a solid hour
>>discussing
>>occupational �performance as it relates to role competence. The
>>theory,
>>as � written � in �Christiansen �and �Baum's, �"Enabling �Function
>>and
>>Well-being", �is �that �humans �engage �in �occupation �in �order to
>>be
>>competent �at �their �roles. �And that role competence is a
>>fundamental
>>drive �of �healthy humans. The point of the lecture is to help
>>students
>>begin �to �gather �some �understanding of the necessity, complexity
>>and
>>depth of enabling occupation in their future clients.
>>
>>At �the �completion �of �class, �a �student �held �up a poster that
>>was
>>requesting �volunteers �or �announcing a presentation or something.
>>The
>>research and poster were about UE Muscle Strength. I asked the
>>students
>>if �they �were �confused by this dichotomy that we had just had a
>>class
>>about �human �occupation �and �why �OT �should �not �be �practiced
>>like
>>upper-extremity PT and then to be doing research on UE function.
>>
>>One �student �responded �that �it �was �confusing and the other
>>student
>>seemed �confused. �And �frankly, I'm confused!! It seems like some
>>OT's
>>see �UE function as our trademark practice pattern while other OT's
>>see
>>occupation �as �our �trademark. �I �am �confused by this situation,
>>can
>>anyone help??????
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Ron
>>
>>*********��***********
>>
>>Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
>>
>>** List messages are archived at:
>>
>>http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
>>
>>*********��***********
>>
>>
DL> Dana Levinson
DL> Rehab Science, Inc.
DL> http://www.rehabscience.com/
DL> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DL> *********��***********
DL> Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
DL> In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
DL> ** List messages are archived at:
DL> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
DL> *********��***********
*********��***********
Unsubscribe? Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the message's *body*, put the following text: unsubscribe OTlist
** List messages are archived at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
*********��***********
