While OT's are busy discussing our prowess as UE experts, the "other" profession is moving in to our true expertise.
The April '09 issue of Rehab Management's article on page 30-32, written by Gina Bernall is titled: "Aging Awareness; Planning Ahead Improves Health Care Conditions for the Geriatric Individual". The article draws heavily on Georgios Voulgairs, PT. Here are a few comments made by the PT. "I also look at the bathroom ... in order to get in and out of the bathtub." p.30 "A senior's needs also are evaluated when a therapist assesses whether they can stand next to the sink to wash their face, brush their teeth, and tend to basic grooming requirements" p. 30 "The kitchen is also a crucial consideration" p. 31 On page 32, the article also briefly quotes an OT, Shu-chuan Chen Hsu, MA, OTR/L, CHT, regarding individuals with Alzheimer's or dementia. The OT's language is very vague, using terms/sentences like: "perform daily tasks" "increase functional independence" "we can give the patient suggestions regarding in-home care" Now, let's pretend we are a patient, caregiver, discharge planner, MD, etc reading this article. On one hand, we have a PT giving concrete examples of what they do. Then we have an OT making vague references to "functional independence". Tell me, which one seems more tangible? Which one seems more patient specific?' Which one seems to be more of what you need? To me, this article highlights how OT's working in adult phys-dys are giving away the ONE thing that makes us unique. We are literally passing the torch to PT. Either that, or we are letting them take it right from under our noses. At this rate, our little profession is doomed to become practitioners of the UE, while the PT profession takes over our traditional domain. Isn't this similar to what happened in the mental health? Albeit for different reasons, didn't mental health practitioners abandon their field as it was being replaced by other professions? Isn't the same thing happening in adult physical dysfunction? Are we abandoning the broad spectrum of occupation in order to focus on the narrowly defined upper extremity? Isn't AOTA contributing to this "problem" by allowing PT to expand it's scope of practice to contain language involving ADL's? Shouldn't PT's scope of practice be limited to remediation of physical dysfunction and OT's scope of practice be limited to occupational dysfunction? Doesn't this make sense and sound right? It does to me! Thanks, Ron ~~~ Ron Carson MHS, OT www.OTnow.com -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/otlist@otnow.com