I find this to be an interesting thread post, as has been noted the use of
the "R", "L" or "R/L" varies widely by state and country and indeed has no
universal requirements.  In an age when higher and continuing education is a
hard sell, I find the lay public looks at the extra letters as somehow
'more' qualified or schooled because they really haven't any idea what the
acronyms mean. Simply put the more after a name must = more qualified or
specialized.  I think this is gleaned from the medical profession that lauds
specializations and the indication of such ranks by additional letters
tacked on at the end of a name.  My husband is an MD, and this is rampant;
we muse over it frequently. So, in a day and age when there are further
certifications and specializations that only add to the lettering behind
one's name, I think it would be prudent for OT to decide universal acronyms
that help quantify knowledge levels versus the attainment of simply
licensure or registration; which seem primarily monetarily based. 
Deann 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 3:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: OTlist Digest, Vol 43, Issue 39

Send OTlist mailing list submissions to
        [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://otnow.com/mailman/listinfo/otlist_otnow.com
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of OTlist digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L" (Ron Carson)
   2. Re: Welcome to Our Newest Member(s) (pat)
   3. Re: Big Laugh (pat)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:05:51 -0400
From: Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OTlist] Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L"
To: Chuck Willmarth <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Thanks  Chuck.  You  sort of "hit" on what I was thinking as to why OT
uses the "L" and "R" in their credentials. You said:

        "I  think as state OT laws were enacted, language was included
        to highlight the licensure status of OTs."

With  the  VAST  majority  of  States now having OT licensure and with
registration  being  an  option, does anyone think it's time for OT to
"move on" and stop using the "L" and "R"?

Frankly,  I  see  the  continuing use of these letters as a sign of an
immature profession, rather than one that as obtained status. As Chuck
pointed out, there may be state laws requiring the use of "L", but I'm
not sure about that.

On  an interesting side note, I see many Florida OT's sign their name,
"OTR/L". However, this is not listed as an "approved" credential.

Ron
--
Ron Carson MHS, OT

----- Original Message -----
From: Chuck Willmarth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008
To:   [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subj: [OTlist] Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L"

CW> Ron,

CW> State OT practice act address the use of
CW> titles/credentials/initials.  Some states authorize the use of
CW> "OT" "OT/L" or other initials to indicate that someone is a
CW> licensed occupational therapist.   Depending on the state,
CW> therapists have more or less flexibility in the initials they can use.

CW> For example this is the language from the FL OT practice act:

CW> http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/occupational/info_laws.pdf

CW> 468.215 Issuance of license.-
CW> (1)The board shall issue a license to any person who meets the
CW> requirements of this act upon payment of the license fee prescribed.
CW> (2)Any person who is issued a license as an occupational
CW> therapist under the terms of this act may use the words
CW> "occupational therapist," "licensed occupational therapist," or
CW> "occupational therapist registered," or he or she may use the
CW> letters "O.T.," "L.O.T.," or "O.T.R.," in connection with his or
CW> her name or place of business to denote his or her registration
hereunder.
CW> (3)Any person who is issued a license as an occupational therapy
CW> assistant under the terms of this act may use the words
CW> "occupational therapy assistant," "licensed occupational therapy
CW> assistant," or "certified occupational therapy assistant," or he
CW> or she may use the letters, "O.T.A.," "L.O.T.A.," or "C.O.T.A.,"
CW> in connection with his or her name or place of business to denote
CW> his or her registration hereunder.

CW> In terms of "why," I think as state OT laws were enacted,
CW> language was included to highlight the licensure status of OTs.  

CW> Chuck Willmarth
CW> Director, State Affairs
CW> AOTA

CW> -----Original Message-----
CW> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ron Carson
CW> Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 1:47 PM
CW> To: Audra Ray
CW> Subject: Re: [OTlist] Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L"

CW> Hello All:

CW> Thanks for everyone's reply.

CW> I  think  there  is  some confusion about my original inquiry.
CW> I'm not questioning if OT should be a licensed profession, I'm
CW> questioning the use of "L" in our credential. Other licensed
CW> professions don't include an "L", so why does OT?

CW> Thanks,

CW> Ron
CW> --
CW> Ron Carson MHS, OT

CW> ----- Original Message -----
CW> From: Audra Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CW> Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008
CW> To:   [email protected] <[email protected]>
CW> Subj: [OTlist] Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L"

AR>> We don't have the option here whether or not to use L. If we want to 
AR>> practice as an OT, we have to have a license.
AR>> ?
AR>> Audra Ray

AR>> --- On Sat, 10/25/08, Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

AR>> From: Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AR>> Subject: [OTlist] Discontinuing The "R/L" in "OTR/L"
AR>> To: [email protected]
AR>> Date: Saturday, October 25, 2008, 3:12 AM

AR>> When  I  decided to not renenw my NBCOT registration I lost the "R" 
AR>> in my  credential. For professional reasons I also stopped using the 
AR>> "L".
AR>> Now,  I  just  sign "Ron Carson MHS, OT". While not all states 
AR>> require licensure, I still don't understand the need or even the 
AR>> desire to put the  "L"  in  our  signature.  Maybe years ago when 
AR>> the profession was first  getting  licensed, but surely there is no 
AR>> good reason today. To me,  it's  confusing and detracts from our 
AR>> title of "OT". So, why does our  profession  put "R/L", "R", or "L" 
AR>> in our credential? Does anyone else not use the "L"?

AR>> Ron



CW> --
CW> Options?
CW> www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com

CW> Archive?
CW> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

CW> --
CW> Options?
CW> www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com

CW> Archive?
CW> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]





------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:06:51 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
From: pat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OTlist] Welcome to Our Newest Member(s)
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
        
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Welcome to the list, Whitney.  It's wonderful to see the group growing, 
and I hope you will become an active member!  Please don't hesitate to
jump in on any existing threads and/or start new threads.

Pat

-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Oct 27, 2008 5:33 AM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [OTlist] Welcome to Our Newest Member(s)
>
>Welcome to our newest member(s):
>
>   Whitney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>=================================
>
>
>If  you've  recently  joined the OTlist and have not been "officially"
>welcomed, please accept my apology....
>
>Thanks to EVERYONE for making this a GREAT place to share and learn
>
>Ron
>
>--
>Ron Carson MHS, OT
>www.OTnow.com
>
>
>--
>Options?
>www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com
>
>Archive?
>www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 12:10:46 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
From: pat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OTlist] Big Laugh
To: [email protected]
Message-ID:
        
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
        
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

LMAO... that is tooooo funny!!  Did you click on the link???

Pat

-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Carson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Oct 26, 2008 3:10 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [OTlist] Big Laugh
>
>While  doing  a Google search on Mary Reilly's "man through the use of
>his hands..." quote, I came across a link to the OTlist.
>
>The  search  term I used is:
>
>        "mary reilly" "man through the use of his hands"
>
>The 4th result listed on Google is titled:
>
>        "Re: Ron is driving me crazy"
>
>All I could do was laugh...
>
>Ron
>-- 
>Ron Carson MHS, OT
>
>
>--
>Options?
>www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com
>
>Archive?
>www.mail-archive.com/[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]



End of OTlist Digest, Vol 43, Issue 39
**************************************


--
Options?
www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com

Archive?
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Reply via email to