From: "David Leslie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi Ron and all, no Ron not having a go at you at all. Your posting was the last in the line which prompted my contribution. I thought the answers were solid enough. It may be a bit of chicken or egg, which came first, registration or accountability. I see both as being complimentary. The issue may be somewhat legal, but without a registration process, then accountability and independance cannot be had.
Under current law, radiation licences can only control use of radiation. They cannot be accounting for issues involving ethics, liability, or braoder professional conduct. They only cover use of ionising radiation, so are not even a prerequisite for practicing U.S. or MRI. That's a significant legal reason why our professional control cannot rely on radiation licencing alone. If registration does more harm than good, then I do not hear this from the other "Registered medical professionals" which I listed. Each state has it's Medical Board, Nurses Board, etc which regulates the professions to ensure protection of public and ensure levels of competency. In the Australian Constitution health is a matter for State jurisdiction, not Federal,so unfortunately I see National registration as a legal furfy for now, unless the Constitution is changed. We are in the same boat as any other profession and will have to live with the legal anomalies of our Constitution. I do not know what standing the national registration of sonographers, which contributors have referred to, means. If it is simply a list of people who hold a qualification in ultrasound which the ASUM or AIR deem as appropriate, then the so called national registration may have no legal standing what so ever. More feedback please from those involved. Until we are a registered and accountable profession then our actions will always be deemed to be supervised by some one else, exactly your point about compromising our position under the direction of an employer. I don�t see that this compromises us legally at all because we are not in a position to hold an independant professional opinion about the management of patients. We can give as many opinions or "reports� to junior, senior doctors or nursing staff as we like, but at the moment it is up to THEM not us what they do with the information. Why? Because it is them, not us who, as the registered professional, is responsible for the management of that case. Sure, I know of radiographers who have been prosecuted for things like fraud, or assault, or even the wrong examination i.e. not following direction, but I don�t know of any radiographer who has been sued for damages because of their independant patient management or interpretation of results. This brings me to the nursing profession which I think offers a good analogy to our own development as a profession. Nursing is a registered profession which has undergone large changes in the last twenty years, from a supporting arm of the medical profession working under the direction of doctors, to an independent profession with its own legal standing, independence and growing expertise eg Nurse Practitioners. Opposition to this role development seems at odds with our own aspirations in e.g. providing radiographic reporting. I was involved in the development of the Nurse Practitioner role in SA and saw then how being a registered profession gave "clout" to the role development in the face of medical opposition. Also how having a Nurses Registration Board, who could give legal standing to new roles and responsibilities, could facilitate the role development process whilst safeguarding the expectations of patients. There was immediate control of the professional boundaries and consequential action could be taken by the Board to ensure standards of practice. I would therefore argue that we will have no legal right to perform limited reporting or other independant, unsupervised activities where our opinion as professionals counts, until we have the legal standing and professional control that is provided by being a registered profession. Thank you for persevering with the long contribution. Regards, David Leslie. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, 30 November 2002 2:27 AM To: AIRNEWS Subject: RE: [AIRNEWS] Costs of state registration From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] David I take it that the comment is directed to me. A solid answer to my questions would better. Nice to see someone who cares about the profession. Teresa knows my position on promoting radiation science as a profession, which hasn't changed. The reason I am against registration is because we are not ready for it. Registration for registration's sake is pointless & is guaranteed to do more harm than good. I am, however open to hear any reasonable justification for it at this point in history. The greatest opportunity we ever had was lost on the ultrasound issue. Now look at the mess sonography is in and the general lack of participation and control by medical imaging practitioners. We are already accountable for our actions under law. As things stand now, that position is compromised every day when a medical imaging practitioner who is employed is forced to compromise his legal position under the direction of a superior or employer. There is no political outcome or benefit to registration for the sake of registration. Until we establish political & professional autonomy first, then registration is just another brick in the wall. Registration cannot give you professional independance, political clout, self determination, provider numbers or professional respect. Who says that radiation scientists are not competent? Who are these unprofessional incompetent people & who is judging them? Just where do these ideas that medical radiation scientists are incompetent come from? Why is it being promoted here as a justification for "registration? I personally do not know any of the people you describe. I do know, however, a lot of production workers who have no professional freedom or standing. My bottom line is that the single most important issue that we should be promoting is the legally recognised right & responsibility to report plain films at the level of a non-specialist doctor. When we have that, we will have the right to self determination, professional autonomy, registration and a cheap rebate provider number. As an aside, I note that in NSW, the NSWH refers only to Medical Radiation Scientists. However in hospitals, staff, public & MRS' themselves only use the term "radiographer" or "X-Ray guy". You are also specifically prohibited from offering an opinion, yet nurses & junior doctors routinely do so. But if you work with specialists & are respected, they invariably ask your opinion. This is the culture that we ourselves are unwilling to change. Registration won't fix this. By the way I am 100% against the establishment of clinical nurse practitioners. Ron > From: Teresa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Well said David, now instead of the nurse practitioner deciding what x > rays a patient needs, how about a radiographer consultant or practitioner > triaging the patient and telling the nurse what he/she needs. then do the x > ray, give an opinion and we are on our way to be truly equal professionals > in our own right. > > Teresa Ong. > > > At 11:40 AM 11/29/02 +1100, you wrote: > > From: "David Leslie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Time to respond, > >I suppose we have had it very easy and very cheap for too long. But if we > >wish to remain as technical people with no , with > >no , with no , and of course the luxury of > >no public accountability then we can continue to remain an unregistered > >group of health fringe dwellers. > > > >If on the other hand we wish to persue self determination, accountability, > >the possibility of our own , the we > >deserve from fellow health professionals and have a political voice in our > >own right then we should persue professional registration. Unfortunately > >there are some costs that go with that. > >Who are we keeping out? Those who do not act responsibly, those who are not > >adequately qualified to perform their duties competently, those who may > >bring our profession into disrepute by irresponsible/incompetant practice or > >those who may exploit or abuse clients. > > > >Yes their are legal ramifications, legal requirements to be met and > >responsibilities and costs incurred but welcome to the big league of health > >professionals who are registered in their own right i.e. nurses, doctors, > >physios, podiatrists, most of whome can put their own brass plate on street > >door and deliver services to patients with public accountability without > >hiding behind a senior professional group. > > > >Just who is the rural dishwasher: is it the well respected nurse > >practitioner who knows how to deliver unsupervised emergency cardiac care > >including drug therapy to the beleaguered retiree caravaner travelling the > >outback, who may as the consequence of their condition also benefit from an > >X-ray. Perhaps until we can do more than just take the X-ray and think > >we're shit hot for doing that!, then we deserve to stay on the same level as > >skilled production workers. > > > >Stop whinging!!! > > > >Regards, > >David Leslie > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Friday, 29 November 2002 12:47 AM > >To: AIRNEWS > >Subject: Re: [AIRNEWS] Costs of state registration > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >I have yet to see the reason or value of the existence of the concept of > >registration for medical imaging practitioners. > >Can some one enlighten me? > >Does the rural dishwasher who does a 5 day course also apply for and receive > >the "registration"? > >I do not see any benefit in registration especially in the promotion of > >radiation scientists as professionals in their own right. Exactly who is it > >that we want to "keep out"? > >My personal view is that the EPA license is more than adequate. > > > >Am I missing something here? Who dreams up these ideas? Whats the point? > >Whats > >their motive? Where's the benefit? > > > >Ron > > +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= This message is being broadcast by AIRNEWS, the Australian Institute of Radiography list Server Send messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For assistance send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Commands should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Opinions expressed on this list are not necessarily those of the moderator, his assistants or those of the A.I.R. +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= This message is being broadcast by AIRNEWS, the Australian Institute of Radiography list Server Send messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For assistance send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Commands should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Opinions expressed on this list are not necessarily those of the moderator, his assistants or those of the A.I.R.
