From: Scott Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is an interesting debate for me personally at the moment. I now work in job which does not involve direct involvement with radiography except through research - however I do still very much consider myself a radiographer. I like the term radiographer. To me it demonstrates both the uniqueness of the role the patient care and the technical side. I dislike technologist and technician. These concentrate to much on the technical side.
Radiography education sets one up for all kinds of work including that that does not involve radiography! It is a great base for many career paths. Just because you do not do radiography does not mean you are not a radiographer! Just thought I would give my views as someone who is giving some thought to what being a radiographer is all about. Regards Scott Professor Scott Bowman Dean: Whyalla Campus University of South Australia Ph: 08 8647 6005 Fax: 08 8647 6088 Mobile: 0438 822 997 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Scott & Kim Duffy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 27 March 2003 9:56 AM Subject: Re: [AIRNEWS] definition From: Scott & Kim Duffy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Tony I am proud to be a Radiographer and a member of The Australian Institute of Radiography. When asked what I do for a living I reply "I am a Radiographer". I often then am asked for more information which I do not hesitate to provide. Our's is a wonderful profession offering great opportunities. I offerred my last comment in the spirit of the discussion as a 'title' which would be all encompassing for all the modalities of our diverse profession. I do not consider myself as an elitist nor as a person with 'tickets on myself' and regret that my remarks were misinterpreted as such. Regards Kim From: Tony Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: AIRNEWS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:01:19 +1100 (EST) To: undisclosed-recipients: ; Subject: RE: [AIRNEWS] definition From: Tony Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dear Dieter, You may not be aware but this topic has been vigorously discussed (to death) over many years. At an AGM a about 3 years ago the AIR voted to stick with the terms radiographer and radiation therapist, even though we are called something different under various awards. I thin that the AIR waqs right and personally I can't see anything wrong with those titles. I'm happy to be called a radiographer, as I believe are the majority of radiographers. The only objection I have is when people get radiographers and radiologists mixed up (although I would mind if the pay office did that). I think that ultimately 'you are what you are' no matter what you're called. Stop worrying about nomenclature and get on doing what you do really, really well. Be proud to be a radiographer. Tony Tony Smith Senior Lecturer in Medical Radiation Science University Department of Rural Health - Nrthn NSW Ph: (02) 6761 9510 {Int:+61+2+6761 9510} [EMAIL PROTECTED] #####snipped manually by Moderator######### +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= 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.
