I just love this place. We have such diversity; around the world and each end of the treatment perspective!
I think you make excellent points. I hope some students will jump in here!!! Thanks, Ron -- Ron Carson MHS, OT www.OTnow.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Sue Doyle <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subj: [OTlist] Philosophy ~vs~ treatment in the "real world"? SD> Ron, SD> As someone with as unique an experience as yours or more so. 30 yrs SD> OT, clinical practice in multiple areas, academia, researcher and SD> back in the clinic full time, in a few different countries I want to SD> add a couple of interesting thoughts. SD> 1. We know that people do not generalize new information well until SD> they have experienced putting it in practice in a variety of SD> situations. Hence if we really work on functionally, occupationally SD> based OT we need to address learning in a variety of real life SD> settings. The same applies to therapists and how they learn. I think SD> we rely on this experience being provided in the clinical SD> affiliations but frequently the focus is on the basic survival skills. SD> 2. Often those teaching students are unable to integrate the SD> practices themselves or are not able to place them in real life SD> clinical situations. On going continuing education needs to include SD> providing those opportunities for our clinical educators as well. SD> Educators and theorists need to be able to model and provide clear SD> application examples that are relevant to today's clinical SD> situations. We need to break down the learning for therapists. SD> Believe me I think therapists are "hungry" to learn where they can follow the steps. SD> OK just a couple of early morning thoughts. Need to get back to the SD> research before heading off to the clinic SD> Sue D >> Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 06:11:00 -0800 >> From: [email protected] >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OTlist] Philosophy ~vs~ treatment in the "real world"? >> >> I believe that taking time to listen to our patient/clients is what enables >> us to employ the soft theories. I find that I feel that I've usually served >> my patient/client well when I listen to them and develop the plan of care >> based upon what he or she is telling me is important to him or her. Think >> about the "thank you" notes we receive: the greatest compliment is when I >> read that I really listened to my patient; I "took the time" that was >> needed, etc. >> >> I think that when someone says, "he or she is a really good therapist," that >> therapist has probably consistently applied both hard and soft theory in >> their practice. >> >> Different treatment settings will either allow or preclude this from >> occurring and that is why I enjoy home health. The treatment session pace >> is a little slower, the treatment is one-on-one. I know when I am feeling >> frustrated in my work, it is often due to being overwhelmed with too many >> visits scheduled in a day and I am rushed. I may start to feel an imbalance >> in my employment of hard and soft theory. >> >> I find home health to be one of the optimal venues for OT and wish other >> treatment settings afforded the same opportunity. >> >> Susan >> >> --- On Mon, 2/16/09, Ron Carson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> From: Ron Carson <[email protected]> >> Subject: [OTlist] Philosophy ~vs~ treatment in the "real world"? >> To: [email protected] >> Date: Monday, February 16, 2009, 9:09 PM >> >> I fancy myself as being in a rather unique position to address this >> question. In the twelve years since graduating from OT school, I've gone >> from full-time clinician, to full-time academician back to full-time >> clinician. >> >> The "real" world of OT is generally considered to be the clinic. In >> this >> setting, theory and philosophy often take a back seat to rigors and >> demands of for-profit health care. Theory is not totally void in >> practice, but it certainly is not part of everyday discussion and in my >> experience it often does not drive practice. While there are many >> possible explanation for this, I offer only one. >> >> A theory is not a part of practice because it is not seen as having >> DIRECT application. These types of theory are abstract and difficult to >> 'pin down' in the real world. Clinician's minds are overwhelmed >> with >> practical clinical decisions and taking time to access abstract thought >> is not part of the time sensitive equation of daily treatment. Thus, >> well thought out theories are often left in the classroom or in >> clinician's notebooks. >> >> In my experience, clinician's cling to theories such as NDT, Bobath, >> constraint-induced treatment, etc. These "hard" theories all have >> an >> application and hands-on component lacking in "soft" theories such >> as >> Enabling Occupation, therapeutic relationship, Practice Framework, etc. >> But, I believe these soft theories are equally important and perhaps >> even more important to our profession. >> >> As clinician's we *MUST* integrate "soft" theory into our >> daily >> practice. We *MUST* develop a sense of who we are as both as a >> profession and individuals and this comes from "soft" theory. While >> are >> most easily grasped, developed and recognized, they tend to not define >> who and what we are. >> >> Obviously, I offer no solutions to the age-old debate of theory ~vs~ >> practice but I felt compelled to write something!! >> >> Ron >> >> -- >> Ron Carson MHS, OT >> www.OTnow.com >> >> >> >> -- >> Options? >> www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com >> >> Archive? >> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Options? >> www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com >> >> Archive? >> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] SD> -- SD> Options? SD> www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com SD> Archive? SD> www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] -- Options? www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com Archive? www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
