Re: Acrimony on the List Serve and Job Dissatisfaction

[Guest guest]

ph, I don’t know who you are and I don’t participate in this list serve perhaps as often as I should however, on this one I cannot resist. You couldn’t have stated it better, awesome thoughts provoked by your beloved companions, isn’t it always the case. I’m “semi” retired now after spending nearly 40 years in the wonderful field of physical therapy. I started way back “in the day” with animals starting in California and migrating to the great State of Nevada. We’re still in the wild and wooly west you know; however, Beth a close friend and colleague of mine, with so much help from both Boards and a very fortunate collaborative environment as many of you know were successful in helping to get I believe one of the first set of regulations in place for animal physical therapy, something I will always be very proud. I absolutely love the DVMs and Veterinary Nurses whom I’ve had the privilege of working with for many years and the field has been very good to me. I must say in terms of disappointments it has been my own field, starting “back in the day” with the lack of enthusiasm and many other negative factors with our own professional association as well as many PTs who continue to contact me asking how they might enter the field. At least we didn’t have to go outside of our national association as the Canadians did thanks to people like Levine and of course the wonderful Lin McGonagle (hope I spelled your name correctly, never did get that one down, sorry). I’m so very disappointed that these discussions have come to this, the elephant in the room as someone said and the utter stupidity of some of the statements by my colleagues. Actually way back in 1998, sitting in a classroom with a small handful of us, we actually predicted some of this mess would occur and sure as hell it has, too bad. But I guess that’s what occurs as a profession grows, expands so all of you younger folks get it out of your system, get into really good, get beat up a bit, I guess that’s what we do out her in the great State of Nevada, I guess we’re not quite as polite as those easterners. I guess my message is the same as it has always been people, we’re a guests in the wonderful world of veterinary medicine as dictated by the various practice acts, well said ph, we will always be invited guests and welcomed (or not) in that world. If I have one regret, that would be I wish I would have been so well defined much earlier in life and if I had been blessed with that vision, I surely would have been double credentialed as my hero Dr. Janet Steiss and gotten not only a DPT but a DVM, but now I’m busily operating our non-profit and watching the field that I was at one time so much a part of as you all duke it out, I think the end result will be good. Oh yes, ph, I too am on my way hiking in our beautiful high desert hills with my Neapolitan Mastiffs. As Laurie always ends, “Cheers”Robyn From: VetRehab [mailto:VetRehab ] On Behalf Of dogedocSent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 6:53 AMTo: VetRehab Subject: Acrimony on the List Serve and Job Dissatisfaction As I watch my Collie and a Great Pyrenees romp without a care in the world in my back yard on a sunny, crisp, peaceful Sunday morning, some thoughts:1.) In the final analysis, the state boards decide what people can and can not legally do for the public. Changes on that level are fraught with major political risk as well as medico-legal and ethical implications. They should not be taken lightly.2.) Modern human physical therapy is a great contributor to the expansion of knowledge for the veterinary practitioner. An historical perspective though: we overlook that human PT's are in realty late comers to the party of veterinary rehabilitation. The earliest indication of veterinary rehabilitation can be traced to 4000 BC in China on horses. Scientific methods of horse training and rehabilitation were recorded in western cultures as far back as the 11th century. The oldest veterinary school in the Western world is Lyon which was founded in 1761. The University of Bologna, the oldest University in the world, founded their veterinary school in 1805. As horses were of inestimable value to society back then, courses on training them and rehabilitation of their injuries were an essential part of the curriculums of the veterinary doctor in training. 3.) There is an irony to the discussion on compensation. I see a litany of letters and accomplishments after some of the names of the people that sign their posts. I am sure these accomplishments represent a great deal of time, education and money in order to achieve them. On the other hand, I am reading that people are expecting $35 per hour in compensation for their service. The mechanic at the Ford dealership I take my F150 to, with 2 years of trade school after high school, earns $55 per hour with benefits. Is there something wrong with that picture?4.) I hope cooler heads eventually prevail. Otherwise the deterioration of these discussions may lead to separation of the various professions to their respective list serves and that would be a shame. I think it's time to go outside and romp with the dogs.ph

[Guest guest]

ph,

My friend you paint a very pretty picture of enjoying an infrequent day off! I

hope you further enjoyed your day.

<<<<<”In the final analysis, the state boards decide what people can and can not

legally do for the public. Changes on that level are fraught with major

political risk as well as medico-legal and ethical implications. They should not

be taken lightly.”>>>>>>>>>>>

While I cannot definitively speak about operations of boards of examiners in

other states I am very familiar with the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical

Examiners. I also once considered the BOE as a final authority but in most

states their powers are limited, dictated and sometimes changed by legislation.

BOE’s main power is the ability to discipline the individual licensed through

their board while maintaining very little power over those that wish to practice

veterinary medicine without a license.

If a group does not agree with a state’s BOE or the veterinary practice act they

can pursue changes in legislation by either employing lobbyist or better,

finding a sympathetic legislator to sponsor legislative changes. Such is the

case in Texas where a powerful state representative that is no friend of our

profession has befriended a powerful group of lay equine tooth floaters.

Fortunately, we have a strong veterinary medical association and have been able

to stop these efforts, for the time being. The legislator has already

threatened repeat attacks during the next legislative session.

Robyn,

It is apparent your comments come from a knowledge gained from experience and

care for your profession. I sincerely respect that knowledge and hope that you

offer your insight more often in the future.

I am aware of the excellent work in Nevada! Two licensing boards and

professionals (DVMs and PTs) worked together to provide the veterinary client

and patient with the opportunity to benefit from animal physical therapy. This

collaborative effort seems far different than the legislative changes in

Colorado, removing language from the PT practice act that limited their practice

to “human-beings” and placing physical therapy on animals under the supervision

of the PT BOE and not to be considered the practice of veterinary medicine.

I applaud the efforts in your state and your probable involvement in the

collaborative effort!

Rick Wall, DVM

[Guest guest]

Rick,This collaborative effort seems far different than the legislative changes in Colorado, removing language from the PT practice act that limited their practice to “human-beings” and placing physical therapy on animals under the supervision of the PT BOE and not to be considered the practice of veterinary medicine. As I stated in an earlier post, the Colorado legislative change was done through collaboration between the CO VMB, CO VMA, and the CO PT Board. This is very similar to the process that took place in Nevada, which you applaud. Animal rehabilitation is still considered the practice of veterinary medicine, but in this forward thinking state, the two license groups worked diligently over three years to find a collaborative agreement that has benefited both groups as well as many, many patients. This same collaborative spirit has been instrumental in creating open lines of communication in many states as well as all of the Canadian provinces. Laurie Edge- recently sent us this update from Canada:The Canadian Horse and Animal Physical Therapist Association formed in 1994.At the time, we were the 3rd such association in the world (behind England- 1984 and the Netherlands- 1989).We became a Division of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association in 2004 and changed our name to The Animal Rehabilitation Division.We have approximately 150 members and are the fastest growing Division of the CPA.In regards to collaboration with Veterinary Associations. The CPA has continually included the CVMA (Canadian Veterinary Medical Association) in all task groups, and to provide feedback on position statements in regards to Animal Rehab. The College of Veterinarians of Ontario (CVO) has, on 3 different occasions, requested feedback from the Animal Rehab Division as well as the CPA on their position statements on The Practice of Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine. We continue to provide information and updates to all Canadian Veterinary Medical associations/colleges/boards, and request inclusion in any meetings, discussions, task groups that might pertain to animal rehab and the working relationship between vets and PTs. As well, The CVMA invited me to lecture on "Animal Physiotherapy" at their national conference in 2010. Warmest regards,JanJanet Van Dyke, DVMDipl. American College Veterinary Sports Medicine and RehabilitationCEO and FounderCanine Rehabilitation Institute, Inc.www.CanineRehabInstitute.comAffiliate FacultyColorado State UniversityCollege of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical SciencesJanet.van_dyke@...Director, International Veterinary Academy of Pain Management (IVAPM)www.ivapm.orgTreasurer, American Association of Rehabilitation Veterinarians (AARV)www.rehabvets.orgChair, Residency and Credentials CommitteeAmerican College of Veterinary Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation (ACVSMR)www.vsmr.orgOn Jan 30, 2012, at 7:42 AM, Rick Wall, DVM wrote:ph,My friend you paint a very pretty picture of enjoying an infrequent day off! I hope you further enjoyed your day.<<<<<”In the final analysis, the state boards decide what people can and can not legally do for the public. Changes on that level are fraught with major political risk as well as medico-legal and ethical implications. They should not be taken lightly.”>>>>>>>>>>>While I cannot definitively speak about operations of boards of examiners in other states I am very familiar with the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners. I also once considered the BOE as a final authority but in most states their powers are limited, dictated and sometimes changed by legislation. BOE’s main power is the ability to discipline the individual licensed through their board while maintaining very little power over those that wish to practice veterinary medicine without a license. If a group does not agree with a state’s BOE or the veterinary practice act they can pursue changes in legislation by either employing lobbyist or better, finding a sympathetic legislator to sponsor legislative changes. Such is the case in Texas where a powerful state representative that is no friend of our profession has befriended a powerful group of lay equine tooth floaters. Fortunately, we have a strong veterinary medical association and have been able to stop these efforts, for the time being. The legislator has already threatened repeat attacks during the next legislative session. Robyn,It is apparent your comments come from a knowledge gained from experience and care for your profession. I sincerely respect that knowledge and hope that you offer your insight more often in the future. I am aware of the excellent work in Nevada! Two licensing boards and professionals (DVMs and PTs) worked together to provide the veterinary client and patient with the opportunity to benefit from animal physical therapy. This collaborative effort seems far different than the legislative changes in Colorado, removing language from the PT practice act that limited their practice to “human-beings” and placing physical therapy on animals under the supervision of the PT BOE and not to be considered the practice of veterinary medicine. I applaud the efforts in your state and your probable involvement in the collaborative effort! Rick Wall, DVM------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Jan,

I have so much respect for all that you do for veterinary medicine, you are

truly an innovator and leader! I read your previous post but decided not to

reply, I have now changed my mind.

Your comments in both posts:

<<<<<<<<< " As I stated in an earlier post, the Colorado legislative change was

done through collaboration between the CO VMB, CO VMA, and the CO PT Board. This

is very similar to the process that took place in Nevada, which you

applaud. " >>>>>>>>>>

The Colorado legislation did not involve participation of the Colorado DVMs or

Colorado VMA until after their opposition was voiced in Senate hearings, (see

Testimony at Senate hearings in 2007, attachments below). Additionally, in

Nevada, the veterinary BOE maintains control over animal physical therapy rather

than the PT board. The Nevada program is very detailed and specific regarding

" animal physical therapy " , Colorado is rather vague.

Colorado DVMs and their VMA did not support the legislation without suggested

changes in the original writing, it does not seem that they were originally

asked by Representative McGihon to participate in original draft. Not all

requests by DVMs were adopted!

From: Testimony before the House Health and Human Services Committee In regard

to HB 07-1126 - Colorado VMA - Executive Director - Ralph - February

2007 (attached below)

February 5, 2007<<<<<<<< " In order to protect the health of the animal, it is

necessary to establish some kind of collaborative relationship between a

veterinarian and the physical therapist who provides therapy to the animal. We

believe that a requirement that the physical therapist obtain a “veterinary

medical clearance” prior to treating the animal is in the best interest of

protecting the animal from inappropriate or contraindicated care, and in

safeguarding public health from the transmission of zoonotic disease. Input from

the Colorado Board of Veterinary Medicine in setting up necessary education and

clinical experience requirements, as well as the handling of complaints against

physical therapists who treat animals, will relieve much of our concern about

this expansion of the scope of practice of physical therapists. Veterinarians

are also concerned that by granting this special authority to physical

therapists that no limitation is placed on the veterinarian’s licensed authority

to provide physical therapy for animals. " >>>>>>>>>>>>

Also at this same time another House Bill - 07-1296 was before the Colorado

legislator " Animal Owner Choice of Care " that was opposed by Colorado DVMs, VMA

and Colorado State Faculty. This bill ultimately died in the Senate, however if

it had passed DVMs would have been bypassed altogether for chiropractic care,

acupuncture and many other integrative therapies. In my opinion this would have

completely opened the door for direct access of the veterinary patient to a

number of service providers, including physical therapists. (Attached below)

I sincerely want a collaborative effort involving all of the professions

involved in veterinary rehabilitation and the veterinary patient will gain

greatly from this professional cooperation. The tremendous number of off-list

responses I have received to these ongoing discussion tells me that many others

wish the same!

Rick Wall, DVM

3 of 3 File(s)

Colorado Animal rights.pdf

Colorado VMA Senate Testimony.pdf

Senate Testimony - CVMA Exec. Dir.pdf

[Guest guest]

Jan,

Both Mr. 's and Dr. Towell's testimonies, I attached to the previous

post, February 2007 and March 2007 respectively indicate the Colorado VMA would

only be in favor of the bill if amended as it appears to have been not before

February 2007 but prior to the Senate hearings in March 2007 meeting.

1. I must plead my ignorance however, I have not read the original draft but

why after two years of collaboration did the Colorado VMA still require

amendments to the bill as it was written?

2. Why do both testimonies address how the importance of the need for

" veterinary medical clearance " prior to a PT providing physical therapy services

to the veterinary patient? Did the original draft not require this? Perhaps

Mr. could elaborate.

Rick Wall, DVM