Ok - I understand what you're saying, but let's just say that it was not possible that this person receive a lens replacement and everything did not get better and the problem could not be fixed. In this case, occupation and compensation WOULD come to the forefront, no?
----- Original Message ----- From: Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 7:34 am Subject: [OTlist] Occupation To: [email protected] > Hello All: > > Recently Biraj pointed out that I: > > > always championed and advocated, very strongly I might > add,> occupation-based practice but now it seems [I am] > extremely> disappointed of anything the term has to do with in the > OT profession. > > Biraj is correct about my past vocalizations but today I don't > feel that > I am disappointed about occupation. I still feel the same > aboutoccupation but I think that I am becoming a bit jaded > at trying to > integrate occupation into my private practice. You see, > occupation is > important, it's important to ALL of us, but what I am > discovering is > that treating occupational deficits does not fit well with my > clientsbecause clients don't consider occupational deficits to be > the problem. > Here's a non-OT story to make my point. > > Recently, someone I know was diagnosed with cataracts. The > cataractsaffected his vision to the point that modifications were > needed to read, > work and play. Now, what do you think this person saw as the > problem;cataracts or occupations. Obviously, the impact on his > occupation is > what brought the cataracts to the forefront and motivated him to > seek a > lens replacement, but cataracts are the problem, not the > loss of > occupation. So, the person received a lens replacement and > everything is > getting better. Well, how does this 'story' apply to OT. > > Simple, our clients are seeking answers to problems. They want > theseproblems fixed. But the problems are not occupation, the > problems are > things like weakness, loss of balance, developmental delay, > depression,etc. Clients see these 'components' as the problem and > this is what they > expect their therapist to address. This is the way the entire > world of > medicine works and for OT to be any different just doesn't work. > > What I think needs to be done is for our patients to recognize > loss of > occupation as the primary problem. Then, they recognize the need > for an > occupational therapist. And as far as I can tell, the ONLY way > that this > is going to happen on a large scale is for AOTA to put > together a > NATIONAL ad campaign directed at educating people about > occupation and > thus occupational therapy. > > Finally, there are settings were occupation is the concern but > about the > only one that I know of is long-term mental health. And > given that > therapeutic occupation is rooted in mental health, this makes > perfectsense. But for the majority of OT's working in the US, > I think that > trying to integrate occupation as our main form and outcome is > a lost > battle, unless patients are EDUCATED, INTEGRATE and > EXPERIENCEoccupation-based therapy. > > Ron > > > > > -- > Unsubscribe? > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Change options? > www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com > > Archive? > www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] > > Help? > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Unsubscribe? [EMAIL PROTECTED] Change options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] Help? [EMAIL PROTECTED]
