While OT's are busy discussing our prowess as UE experts, the "other"
profession is moving in to our true expertise.
The April '09 issue of Rehab Management's article on page 30-32, written
by Gina Bernall is titled: "Aging Awareness; Planning Ahead Improves
Health Care Conditions for the Geriatric Individual".
The article draws heavily on Georgios Voulgairs, PT. Here are a few
comments made by the PT.
"I also look at the bathroom ... in order to get in and out of
the bathtub." p.30
"A senior's needs also are evaluated when a therapist assesses
whether they can stand next to the sink to wash their face,
brush their teeth, and tend to basic grooming requirements" p.
30
"The kitchen is also a crucial consideration" p. 31
On page 32, the article also briefly quotes an OT, Shu-chuan Chen Hsu,
MA, OTR/L, CHT, regarding individuals with Alzheimer's or dementia. The
OT's language is very vague, using terms/sentences like:
"perform daily tasks"
"increase functional independence"
"we can give the patient suggestions regarding in-home care"
Now, let's pretend we are a patient, caregiver, discharge planner, MD,
etc reading this article. On one hand, we have a PT giving concrete
examples of what they do. Then we have an OT making vague references to
"functional independence". Tell me, which one seems more tangible? Which
one seems more patient specific?' Which one seems to be more of what you
need?
To me, this article highlights how OT's working in adult phys-dys are
giving away the ONE thing that makes us unique. We are literally passing
the torch to PT. Either that, or we are letting them take it right from
under our noses. At this rate, our little profession is doomed to become
practitioners of the UE, while the PT profession takes over our
traditional domain.
Isn't this similar to what happened in the mental health? Albeit for
different reasons, didn't mental health practitioners abandon their
field as it was being replaced by other professions? Isn't the same
thing happening in adult physical dysfunction? Are we abandoning the
broad spectrum of occupation in order to focus on the narrowly defined
upper extremity? Isn't AOTA contributing to this "problem" by allowing
PT to expand it's scope of practice to contain language involving ADL's?
Shouldn't PT's scope of practice be limited to remediation of physical
dysfunction and OT's scope of practice be limited to occupational
dysfunction? Doesn't this make sense and sound right? It does to me!
Thanks,
Ron
~~~
Ron Carson MHS, OT
www.OTnow.com
--
Options?
www.otnow.com/mailman/options/otlist_otnow.com
Archive?
www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
