Yes,  we  see a dentist because of the toothache, not so we can eat corn
on the cob! We call the electrician because we have an electrical short,
not  so  we  can  watch  TV. We take our care to a mechanic because it's
broken, not so we can drive to a movie.

We call an OT because because we can't wash our feet....

Now, who thinks of OT like that?? NO ONE, well almost no one!

About  the only time that I hear mention of OT (keep in mind that I work
in  an  outpatient  private practice setting) is for fine motor, UE, and
cognition.  Once,  I  had  a  referral  from a chiropractor to do a home
safety  assessment  for  his Dad, also a chiropractor. But by far, OT is
normally  referred  to  for anything OTHER than occupation. And that's a
problem!

In my opinion, we MUST:

1. Change our message

2. Change our delivery

3. Or a combination of the two

----- Original Message -----
From: Carmen Aguirre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006
To:   [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subj: [OTlist] Occupation

CA> Ron...
CA> When we get sick, have a tooth ache, bleeding, etc we seek a
CA> doctor to stop/cure/remediate the cause in order to restore "normal"
CA> life (occupation). Why would it be different for patients who need
CA> our services...I truly don't see the dis-articulation. Help?
CA> Carmen
CA>   ----- Original Message ----- 
CA>   From: Ron Carson<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
CA>   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
CA>   Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 11:17 AM
CA>   Subject: Re: [OTlist] Occupation


CA>   Yes,  I agree 100% with your statement. BUT most patients that I see are
CA>   not  at  the  point  of  compensation.  And  besides, I don't think that
CA>   compensation is really a big part of medicine. I just can't see me going
CA>   to a doctor and saying;

CA>         " If you have any patients who can't use their arms, hands, legs,
CA>         etc. then send them to me so I can teach them how to compensate"

CA>   Maybe  this  SHOULD  be  the  role  of  OT but it is one role that in my
CA>   opinion  is  not highly promoted, practiced or warranted for many of our
CA>   patients.

CA>   Ron

CA>   ----- Original Message -----
CA>   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CA> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
CA>   Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006
CA>   To:   [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
CA> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
CA>   Subj: [OTlist] Occupation

CA>   Enrc> Ok - I understand what you're saying, but let's just say that it was
CA>   Enrc> not possible that this person receive a lens replacement and 
everything
CA>   Enrc> did not get better and the problem could not be fixed.  In this 
case,
CA>   Enrc> occupation and compensation WOULD come to the forefront, no?

CA>   Enrc> ----- Original Message -----
CA>   Enrc> From: Ron Carson
CA> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
CA>   Enrc> Date: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 7:34 am
CA>   Enrc> Subject: [OTlist] Occupation
CA>   Enrc> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

CA>   >> Hello All:
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Recently Biraj pointed out that I:
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> > always   championed   and   advocated,  very  strongly I might
CA>   >> add,> occupation-based   practice  but  now  it  seems  [I am]
CA>   >> extremely> disappointed of anything the term has to do with in the
CA>   >> OT profession.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Biraj is correct about my past vocalizations but today I don't 
CA>   >> feel that
CA>   >> I  am  disappointed  about  occupation.  I  still  feel  the  same
CA>   >> aboutoccupation  but  I  think  that  I  am becoming a bit jaded
CA>   >> at trying to
CA>   >> integrate  occupation  into  my private practice. You see, 
CA>   >> occupation is
CA>   >> important,  it's  important  to  ALL of us, but what I am 
CA>   >> discovering is
CA>   >> that  treating  occupational  deficits does not fit well with my
CA>   >> clientsbecause  clients don't consider occupational deficits to be
CA>   >> the problem.
CA>   >> Here's  a  non-OT  story  to  make my point.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Recently,  someone  I  know  was diagnosed with cataracts. The 
CA>   >> cataractsaffected his vision to the point that modifications were
CA>   >> needed to read,
CA>   >> work  and  play.  Now, what do you think this person saw as the
CA>   >> problem;cataracts  or  occupations.  Obviously,  the impact on his
CA>   >> occupation is
CA>   >> what  brought the cataracts to the forefront and motivated him to
CA>   >> seek a
CA>   >> lens  replacement,  but  cataracts  are  the  problem,  not  the
CA>   >> loss of
CA>   >> occupation. So, the person received a lens replacement and 
CA>   >> everything is
CA>   >> getting better. Well, how does this 'story' apply to OT.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Simple,  our  clients  are  seeking answers to problems. They want
CA>   >> theseproblems  fixed.  But  the problems are not occupation, the
CA>   >> problems are
CA>   >> things  like weakness, loss of balance, developmental delay, 
CA>   >> depression,etc. Clients see these 'components' as the problem and
CA>   >> this is what they
CA>   >> expect  their  therapist to address. This is the way the entire
CA>   >> world of
CA>   >> medicine works and for OT to be any different just doesn't work.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> What  I  think needs to be done is for our patients to recognize
CA>   >> loss of
CA>   >> occupation  as the primary problem. Then, they recognize the need
CA>   >> for an
CA>   >> occupational therapist. And as far as I can tell, the ONLY way 
CA>   >> that this
CA>   >> is  going  to  happen  on  a  large  scale is for AOTA to put 
CA>   >> together a
CA>   >> NATIONAL  ad  campaign directed at educating people about 
CA>   >> occupation and
CA>   >> thus occupational therapy.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Finally, there are settings were occupation is the concern but 
CA>   >> about the
CA>   >> only  one  that  I  know  of  is long-term mental health. And 
CA>   >> given that
CA>   >> therapeutic  occupation  is  rooted in mental health, this makes
CA>   >> perfectsense.  But  for  the  majority  of OT's working in the US,
CA>   >> I think that
CA>   >> trying  to  integrate  occupation as our main form and outcome is
CA>   >> a lost
CA>   >> battle,   unless   patients   are  EDUCATED,  INTEGRATE  and  
CA>   >> EXPERIENCEoccupation-based therapy.
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Ron
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> -- 
CA>   >> Unsubscribe?
CA>   >> 
CA> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Change options?
CA>   >> 
CA> 
www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com<http://www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com>
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Archive?
CA>   >> 
CA> 
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
CA>   >> 
CA>   >> Help?
CA>   >>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CA>   >> 



CA>   -- 
CA>   Unsubscribe?
CA>    
CA> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

CA>   Change options?
CA>    
CA> 
www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com<http://www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com>

CA>   Archive?
CA>    
CA> 
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>

CA>   Help?
CA>     [EMAIL PROTECTED]<mailto:[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]

Reply via email to